16600 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:37pm Subject: PERFECTIONS Dear group, (esp. Azita), I have typed a listing of the postings Nina has made of her translations of "Perfections" by A. Sujin, with hyperlinks, in case anyone joined in on the series late and would like an easy reference for reading. Hope there are no errors. The Links for Chapters 1 to 5 so far covering four Perfections of Generosity, Morality, Renunciation, and Wisdom are below. Azita - I may have misunderstood, but I think Nina's translations are a 'Work in Progress' at the moment - very happy to be corrected though if they are available elsewhere. metta, Christine —------------------------------------------------- 13977 Ch.1 No. 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13977 13992 Ch. 1 No.2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13992 14004 Ch. 1 No.3 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14004 —------------------------- "The Perfection of Generosity" 14094 Ch. 2 No. 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14094 14114 Ch. 2 No. 2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14114 14137 Ch. 2 No. 3 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14137 14157 Ch. 2 No. 4 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14157 14210 Ch. 2 No. 5 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14210 14226 Ch. 2 No. 6 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14226 14237 Ch. 2.No. 7 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14237 14252 Ch. 2 No. 8 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14252 14265 Ch. 2 No. 9 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14265 14320 Ch. 2 No.10 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14320 14345 Ch. 2 No.11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14345 —------------------------- "The Perfection of Morality" 14395 Ch. 3 No. 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14395 14429 Ch. 3 No. 2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14429 14483 Ch. 3 No. 3 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14483 14511 Ch. 3 No. 4 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14511 14551 Ch. 3 No. 5 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14551 14569 Ch. 3 No. 6 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14569 14593 Ch. 3 No. 7 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14593 14646 Ch. 3 No. 8 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14646 14713 Ch. 3 No. 9 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14713 —------------------------- "The Perfection of Renunciation" 14766 Ch. 4 No. 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14766 14876 Ch. 4 No. 2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14876 14979 Ch. 4 No. 3 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14979 15013 Ch. 4 No. 4 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15013 15055 Ch. 4 No. 5 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15055 15082 Ch. 4 No. 6 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15082 15207 Ch. 4 No. 7 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15207 —------------------------ "The Perfection of Wisdom" 15259 Ch. 5 No. 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15259 15332 Ch. 5 No. 2 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15332 15368 Ch. 5 No. 3 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15368 15429 Ch. 5 No. 4 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15429 15470 Ch. 5 No. 5 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15470 15549 Ch. 5 No. 6 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15549 15636 Ch. 5 No. 7 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15636 15731 Ch. 5 No. 8 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15731 15787 Ch. 5 No. 9 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15787 15805 Ch. 5 No.10 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15805 15848 Ch. 5 No.11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15848 15909 Ch. 5 No.12 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15909 15942 Ch. 5 No.13 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15942 16601 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 11:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, Rahula - This post confuses me. I don't recall giving any reference. (I don't know why you mention my name.) Also, when I try to access your url, I get a msg saying that there is no msg 82804. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/1/02 7:26:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, rahula_80@y... writes: > > Hi, > > From > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/82804. > > Howard: > > Could you please be more detailed in this reference? From "SN 4" I > have no > idea of where to look. > > Anders: > > I'm pretty sure it's the Samyutta Nikaya I 4. > > ------ > > > This is Samyutta Nikaya I. 4 > > Accentisutta.m > > 4. Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m thitaa kho saa devataa bhagavato > santike ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi– > "Accenti kaalaa tarayanti rattiyo, > vayogu.naa anupubba.m jahanti; > eta.m bhaya.m mara.ne pekkham±no, > puññaani kayiraatha sukhaavahaanii"ti. > "Accenti kaalaa tarayanti rattiyo, > vayogu.naa anupubba.m jahanti; > eta.m bhaya.m mara.ne pekkham±no, > lokaamisa.m pajahe santipekkho"ti. > > > /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) 16602 From: Antony Woods Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:01pm Subject: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Dear Sarah and all, to appreciate the Buddhist goal of parinibbana (was "paramis are not lost through parinibbana") I would like to appreciate and form skillful beliefs about the Buddhist goal of parinibbana in order to feel inspired and arouse interest in practising the path. I would like to believe that parinibbana is full of love and compassion like the path is rather than just an undifferentiated peace. I was reassured by Thanissaro's article on Nibbana which explains that in ancient India the blowing out of a fire was not considered to be annihilation but that the fire became dormant and diffused throughout the cosmos. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/nibbana.html I would like to believe that the Buddha is still with us in some way. Nibbana is not defined as non-existence. I believe that Nibbana cannot be described with language but it is the goal of Buddhism and gives the practice its sense of direction and purpose. Thanks / Antony. 16603 From: Antony Woods Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:02pm Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Dear Howard and all, In contemplating the parts of the body I don't believe the Buddha intended us to have a "mood .... of revulsion or gloom but of unruffled calm .... from sober, analytical observation" (to use the words of Nyanaponika). To quote the Buddha from the Satipatthana Sutta: "Just as if, O bhikkhus, there were a bag having two openings, full of grain differing in kind, namely, hill-paddy, paddy, green-gram, cow-pea, sesamum, rice; and a man with seeing eyes, having loosened it, should reflect thinking thus: 'This is hill paddy; this is paddy, this is green-gram; this is cow-pea; this is sesamum; this is rice.' In the same way, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu reflects on just this body hemmed in by the skin and full of manifold impurity from the soles up, and from the top of the hair down, thinking thus: 'There are in this body: hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, fibrous threads (veins, nerves, sinews, tendons), bones, marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, contents of the stomach, intestines, mesentery, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, solid fat, tears, fat dissolved, saliva, mucus, synovic fluid, urine.' I admit I've only tried the first five visible parts "hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, teeth, skin" with metta / Antony. 16604 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi James, I think anything within a Theravada context is on topic. "Fear" seems like a good one to me. What's on your mind? Larry 16605 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:11pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 4:08 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > Hi, Kom (and anyone else interested) - > > My point is that concepts/pa~n~natti are mind made, not just > nature-given (as are rupas, vedana, etc). My question is what > cetasikas, what > basic mental functions other than vi~n~nana, are involved in the > constructing > of pa~n~natti, and how are pa~n~natti maintained and passed on (as > templates). When I look outside and see "a tree", what is occurring is a > complex juxtaposition of processes, some of which involve the > pa~n~natti of > 'tree'. How was that pa~n~natti constructed (by means of what > cetasikas), how > does it get applied to a series of processes of paramattha > dhammas, and how > is it passed along from mind-state to mind-state? This is a very > important > topic, because our entire world as we normally experience it, > that is - the > conventional world, is virtually all concept. Abhidhamma surely > must give a > complete account of concept formation. > > Aha. This is a very interesting question, but it is beyond what I have studied so far. The abhidhamma gives very detailed descriptions of how the mind works. Understanding it is another matter altogether. It is obviously not possible to understand everything that the Buddha has taught: it depends on one's accumulation to get it. The functions of cetasikas, as we have discussed so far, are functions that applies to a single moment of the citta. When the citta (vinnana) cognizes a concept, sanna (memory) marks that concept, and vitakka brought the nama to "touch" that concept. To study relations, one must study Patthana (conditions), something mostly beyond my grasp. Otherwise, as I have mentioned in the previous message, the tikas (commentaries to the commentaries!) describe the stages of the conceptualization. Unfortunately, I don't think it is at the level of details you are looking for. kom ps: I am appreciative of your keen observation that most of what we experience in our daily life are conceptual. We spend so much time thinking about the realities that we experience that we are not truly aware of the realities. We spend so much time being attached and being aversed to things that don't even exist in nature! 16606 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:22pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Kom, Is rupa a group of elements? Does citta always arise in a group of cetasikas? That is what I meant. We think of these realities as single (whole) things, but we don't experience them that way. They are anatta, fragments. Larry 16607 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" James, Thank you for your answer. I guess as I am not a full arahant, so my struggle is only natural because our mirrors have been so dirty coming from generations of dusts. I'm beginning to understand what the elders have been saying: - never to speak with conviction - keep an open mind - wisdom by hearing, wisdom by thinking, wisdom by direct experience, but ultimately one has to be freed from hearing and thinking and direct experience. metta, WL 16608 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 5:49pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 5:22 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > Hi Kom, > > Is rupa a group of elements? Does citta always arise in a group of > cetasikas? That is what I meant. We think of these realities as single > (whole) things, but we don't experience them that way. They are anatta, > fragments. > > Larry Ah. Thanks for the clarification. Then, I think we are on the same page. When the citta cognizes a reality, only one specific characteristic is appearing. Citta is not cognized at the same time as cetasikas. >From my perspective, a rupa is not a group of elements, but is used to refer to: 1) a specific element, e.g., hardness, which is not nama 2) a category of elements, e.g., all the elements that are rupa Citta is harder. It is used to refer to: 1) a specific element, e.g., cognition (which is chief in all cognitive dhamma). 2) a classification of elements, e.g., all the 89 cittas 3) a collective set of both citta and cetasikas (as in rupa conditioned by citta, which really means rupa conditioned by citta and the con-ascent cetasikas) When I refer to an object that is a reality, the object is the characteristic of the reality: there is nothing beyond the characteristic of the reality. I think we are very close on the understandings of realities and concepts, but somehow, when I read what you write, I always thought you are saying something different... kom 16609 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 8:07pm Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 --- Dear Anthony, Thanks for bringing up your honest feelings about this. "Antony Woods" wrote: > Dear Sarah and all, I would like to appreciate and form skillful beliefs > about the Buddhist goal of parinibbana in order to feel > inspired and arouse interest in practising the path. > I would like to believe that parinibbana is full of love > and compassion like the path is rather than just an > undifferentiated peace. > I was reassured by Thanissaro's article on Nibbana which > explains that in ancient India the blowing out of a fire > was not considered to be annihilation but that the fire > became dormant and diffused throughout the cosmos. I would like to believe that the Buddha is still with us > in some way. Nibbana is not defined as non-existence. >> > ___________________ I think it is so natural that we all have different ideas about what nibbana is and what (read who) it is who gets there. Some of 'us' might hope that our suffering 'self' is anihilated at khandha parinibbana. Others hope that there will be in some non-manisfestative consciousness that carries on.. The differences in views are numerous: Mulpariyaya sutta(MN1) buddha says "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- He perceives Nibbana as Nibbana .Perceiving Nibbana as Nibbana , he conceives things about Nibbana , he conceives things in Nibbana , he conceives things coming out of Nibbana , *he conceives Nibbana as 'mine,' * he delights in Nibbana . Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.""ENDquote All this -whether of the anilhilationist end or eternalist end of the self view spectrum - comes about because self view is still anusaya(latent). Once self view is eradicated there are no more such views. Your mention of that the Buddha meant by the blowing out of the fire that it "was not considered to be annihilation but that the fire > became dormant and diffused throughout the cosmos" is creative but does not agree with the ancient commentaries - passed from India to Sri lanka. Perhaps you would be open to considering this way of understanding the simile of the fire The fuel is craving and ignorance. The fire is nama and rupa (ie the khandas). Once that fuel is no longer being added (upon attainment of arahant) the fire will soon die out(khandha parinibbana Arahant is a term useful to designate a stream of nama and rupa (past, present or future) that no longer has avijja (and hence no other defilements). Before cuti citta(death moment) arises this stream is like a fire where no more fuel is added; at cuti citta the fire is finally extinguished. It is different for a non-arahant. The term non-arahant helps to designate a stream of nama and rupa where avijja and other defilements keep arising. These are the fuel and it is continually being added to (moments of insight excepted). When cuti citta arise for this stream the fire is simply passed to another place and the process continues. robert 16610 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 8:18pm Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Antony Woods" > I would like to believe that parinibbana is full of love > and compassion like the path is rather than just an > undifferentiated peace. > I would like to believe that the Buddha is still with us > in some way. Nibbana is not defined as non-existence. ___________________________ Dear Anthony, I add some more: I think sometimes we tend to think life is good , somehow, somewhere- if not now then in the future. But life is a concept and what there is is only the five khandhas - and they are dukkha. They arise and pass away, and oppress continually because there is no one who can stop them arising again and again, never ceasing even for an instant. In the 'Kindred Sayings' (V, Maha-vagga, Book XII, Kindred Sayings about the Truths, Ch. V, part 6, Gross darkness) that the Buddha explained to the monks about the most fearful and terrible thing: There is indeed, monk, another darkness, greater and more fearsome. And what is that other darkness? Monk, whatsoever recluses or brahmins understand not, as it really is, the meaning of: This is dukkha, this is the arising of dukkha, this is the ceasing of dukkha, this is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha, such take delight in the activities which conduce to rebirth. Thus taking delight they compose a compound of activities which conduce to rebirth. Thus composing a compound of activities they fall down into the darkness of rebirth...and despair. They are not released from birth, and death...and despair. They are not released from dukkha, I declare. But, monk, those recluses or brahmins who do understand as it really is, the meaning of : This is dukkha, this is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha, such take not delight in the activities which conduce to rebirth...They are released from dukkha, I declare. Wherefore, monk, an effort must be made to realize: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha.' "endquote Thus perhaps rather than hoping for some pleasant state of love and compasion a motivation for the path to parinibbana is seeing it as the gradual elimination of avijja (ignorance) -as James said- and thus the breaking up of the Paticcasamuppada - the wheel of birth and death. A. III. 32 This, truly, is Peace, this is the Highest, namely the end of all Karma formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving. detachment, extinction, Nibbaana. A. I. 15 And it is impossible that a being possessed of right understanding should regard anything as the Self. S. XXII. 30 Hence the annihilation, cessation and overcoming of corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness: this is the extinction of suffering, the end of disease, the overcoming of old age and death. (endsutta) From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and thus have I heard: there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element with the groups of existence still remainin (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining. And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining. End Quote Robert 16611 From: antony272b2 Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 2:30am Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 Dear Robert (Robert K?), Thanks for your detailed responses. I can now appreciate that Nibbana is not aesthetically pleasing and I've read that it seems painful to the ordinary worldling. Maybe grieving the disappearance of the Buddha is just grieving suffering phenomena. Maybe the Buddha was not just a "nice" teacher but really demanded his disciples put their lives on the line. There were no smiley faces in your posts which remind me of the late Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw in their seriousness (I have his photo on my wall and formatted his comprehensive work on paticcasamuppada: ftp://ftp.buddhanet.net/therabud/mahasipt.zip I'm rather shocked and will close this post for now. with respect / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Anthony, > I add some more: > I think sometimes we tend to think life is good , somehow, somewhere- > if not now then in the future. > But life is a concept and what there is is only the five khandhas - and > they are dukkha. They arise and pass away, and oppress continually > because there is no one who can stop them arising again and again, > never ceasing even for an instant. > In the 'Kindred Sayings' (V, Maha-vagga, Book XII, Kindred > Sayings about the Truths, Ch. V, part 6, Gross darkness) that the > Buddha explained to the monks about the most fearful and terrible thing: 16612 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 5:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi James, > > I think anything within a Theravada context is on topic. "Fear" seems > like a good one to me. What's on your mind? > > Larry Larry, Related to this topic of concepts and how they shape our world; I am thinking more and more that most of the suffering and stress (dukkha) in our modern world is caused by fear and terror rather than craving and desire. These are my initial thoughts, not fully formed, but I wouldn't mind sharing. Before I delve into the reasons I am thinking this, let me quote one of my favorite sections from the suttas, the: Bhaya-bherava Sutta; Fear & Terror "The thought occurred to me: 'When priests or contemplatives who are drooling idiots, resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings, it's the fault of their drooling idiocy that they give rise to unskillful fear & terror. But it's not the case that I am a drooling idiot, when I resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings. I am consummate in discernment." This part delights me for two reasons: 1. The Buddha uses the term `drooling idiots' to describe some holy men/contemplatives/monks. Hmmm…very telling about his outlook concerning the sacrosanct, a time for harsh speech, etc., but I won't comment further 2. The Buddha gives the very simple and straightforward solution/cure to fear and terror (but not so easy to follow): Discernment. I am very interested in the Evolutionary Psychology theories of emotions and believe that fear is one emotion that, in our ever- changing, complicated society, is in overdrive. Fear, from an evolutionary perspective, served a very valuable purpose: it saved your neck! Fear allowed a person to respond quickly to dangerous situations, unfamiliar situations, and unexpected situations. And this response of fear is hardwired into us to activate whenever we feel threatened, unsure, confronted, unsafe, etc. Unfortunately, the level of fear in today's world, in my estimation, is higher than during the Buddha's time...and usually unnecessary fear. What is the difference between our modern society and the society of the Buddha? Just a few examples, in ancient India they did not have: cars, airplanes, telephones, computers, television, atomic bombs, credit cards, guns, public education, national debt, HMOs, serial killers, toxic waste, pollution, high divorce rate, neglected elderly, suicidal terrorists, etc, etc, etc,….get the picture? Our world is a LOT more stressful and unsure than the Buddha's was. The result is that we live with a lot of fear and insecurity. Additionally, something interesting happens when we do finally get ourselves into a secure job, house, minimal debt, nice family etc.; we usually create problems where there are none so that we can be afraid of them. We get so accustomed to feeling fear that we cannot seem to be `content' unless it is constantly running in the background of our minds. This `fear factor' is so strong in people that I don't know a single person, other than myself, who can easily go to sleep at night. Fear, terror, and anxiety will keep running even when the day is finished. Lately, I have been observing my own fear throughout the day and the fear I believe I see in others due to their actions, words, facial expressions, body language, etc. (purely subjective I know). It seems that `fear' is a way of life in this modern world and occurs much more frequently than desire or craving. After all, a lot of our modern conveniences have met a lot of our daily needs and desires…all except our need to feel safe and secure. As the Buddha said, we should use the faculty of `Discernment' to reduce this escalating fear (not tranquilizers, anti-anxiety medication, booze, or drugs; as are most often used nowadays). We should closely examine ourselves throughout the day, observe the emotions and reactions we have to our daily lives, and note the number of times we feel fear. Then, with discernment, determine if the fear is worth having. And most of the time, fear is not worth having unless a person is being attacked or threatened, or is in physical danger somehow. If the fear is not worth having, we should drop it! Rationally tell the mind not to be afraid, why there is no fear present/no danger around so there is no 'need' for the fear response, and the fear will usually go away (of course it may be back again in a few minutes, but it will take practice to keep taming it). This is one thing that we all can do, which doesn't require meditation practice, and will greatly enrich the quality and fullness of our lives. Metta, James ps. I know this is not as 'scholarly' as most of the posts here. My apologies. But I thought that some might benefit from it, or add a more 'Buddhist Scholarship' to it; or disprove it, which is fine also. 16613 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 5:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa: To KKT Dear KKT You wrote the following. "...since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things." I wonder if you could post those meanings of atta in Pali or Sanskrit when you have spare time. I will like to check them side by side with the meanings of nibbana in that Udaana passage. Thanking in advance. With kind regards Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, Rahula - Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking that position causes me to wonder about that organization. The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be unintentional. With metta, Howard KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. This definition could easily lead one to think that Nibbana is atta since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things. If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> and << independent >> of everything? I raise this question not because I want to defend the atta doctrine but because I want to show that this matter is not easily to clinch. Peace, KKT 16614 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 6:02am Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 --- --- Dear Antony (BTW sorry for mispelling your name last post), I really appreciate your honesty in your letters. I certainly can't compare with the austerity and seriousness of any monks - particularly one like the venerable Mahasi . In fact I met 4 Korean girls at the pool today and we are all going out for dinner (but no wine, at least for me) in a couple of hours. So while I can write about and understand a little of what Dukkha means I am still very much entranced by the pleasant sights, sounds, tastes, smells, touch and mental objects of this world. I know they are dukkha at one level but I also know that it takes time for avijja (ignorance ) to be eliminated. There is so much accumulated tanha(desire) and avijja that to want to get rid of them fast is scary - and not really possible. But the avijja and tanha (as upadana) that arise in conjunction with wrongview are the most dangerous and these types can definitely be attenuated to whatever degree is suitable (to our accumulations) in this life. When you indicate the Dhamma requires us to put our lives on the line I think this is true in the sense that we may come to the day when we really surrender to the Buddha and dhamma and sangha. But it hinges on anatta becuase I think what this surrender means is giving up the idea of self. And that gradually. kind regards Robert K. In dhammastudygroup@y..., "antony272b2" wrote: > Dear Robert (Robert K?), > > Thanks for your detailed responses. > > I can now appreciate that Nibbana is not aesthetically pleasing and > I've read that it seems painful to the ordinary worldling. > > Maybe grieving the disappearance of the Buddha is just grieving > suffering phenomena. > > Maybe the Buddha was not just a "nice" teacher but really demanded > his disciples put their lives on the line. There were no smiley faces > in your posts which remind me of the late Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw in > their seriousness (I have his photo on my wall and formatted his > comprehensive work on paticcasamuppada: > ftp://ftp.buddhanet.net/therabud/mahasipt.zip > > I'm rather shocked and will close this post for now. > with respect / Antony. > 16615 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 6:06am Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 Anthony, If I may comment on this spiritual angst you are so honorably expressing in a truthful way: --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "antony272b2" wrote: > Dear Robert (Robert K?), > > Thanks for your detailed responses. > > I can now appreciate that Nibbana is not aesthetically pleasing and > I've read that it seems painful to the ordinary worldling. (The Buddha said that we are all on fire with dukkha. We are burning, burning, burning, suffering, suffering, suffering...and Nibbana is when the fire is finally put out. I find that very aesthetically pleasing. Nibbana is not painful; it is the opposite of painful. It is pure joy, love, peace, acceptance, wisdom, understanding, etc. It is a light of purity that will fill your heart and mind with everlasting peace. It is the the best there is, nothing higher. Parinibbana is this, even more so! The last fetters, defilements, and karma have been dropped away. Is there 'existence' after Nibbana. The Buddha refused to have a view on this or to answer; he said it wasn't important. But, he very specifically said that it wasn't a complete 'nothing' or 'void'. So it doesn't take much logic to determine that it must be something. What is it? I am not sure of course, but when I think of this, for some reason, I always think of that line from '2001; A Space Oddessey', "It's Full of Stars." > > Maybe grieving the disappearance of the Buddha is just grieving > suffering phenomena. (Some may think I am crazy for saying this; but that wouldn't be a first for me. :-) I believe that the Buddha visited me once during a meditation. I specifically could feel his presence with me, and I could feel that it was pure love and acceptance like I have never felt before. And I could 'hear' his thoughts in my mind to go to Thailand and discover if I wanted to become a monk or not. And he was right. I didn't become one, but I learned a lot in the process. I think the Buddha is still out there, and in there, and everywhere. :-) Smile! :-) You already know this! Trust your feelings. Love, James > Maybe the Buddha was not just a "nice" teacher but really demanded > his disciples put their lives on the line. There were no smiley faces > in your posts which remind me of the late Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw in > their seriousness (I have his photo on my wall and formatted his > comprehensive work on paticcasamuppada: > ftp://ftp.buddhanet.net/therabud/mahasipt.zip > > I'm rather shocked and will close this post for now. > with respect / Antony. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > Dear Anthony, > > I add some more: > > I think sometimes we tend to think life is good , somehow, > somewhere- > > if not now then in the future. > > But life is a concept and what there is is only the five khandhas - > and > > they are dukkha. They arise and pass away, and oppress continually > > because there is no one who can stop them arising again and again, > > never ceasing even for an instant. > > In the 'Kindred Sayings' (V, Maha-vagga, Book XII, Kindred > > Sayings about the Truths, Ch. V, part 6, Gross darkness) that the > > Buddha explained to the monks about the most fearful and terrible > thing: > 16616 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 1:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/1/02 11:08:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > > The fuel is craving > and ignorance. The fire is nama and rupa (ie the khandas). Once > that fuel is no longer being added (upon attainment of arahant) > the fire will soon die out(khandha parinibbana > Arahant is a term useful to designate a stream of nama and rupa > (past, present or future) that no longer has avijja (and hence > no other defilements). > Before cuti citta(death moment) arises this stream is like a > fire where no > more fuel is added; at cuti citta the fire is finally > extinguished. > ============================ How, please, is that different from the atheist/materialist annihilationist picture of death? [Unless, of course, the cessation of namarupa is not the cessation of awareness in *every* possible sense, but only of a particular, dualistic sort of defiled awareness flowing out of unexpired kamma.] Some people will answer that this would be an annihilationist view only if to begin with there is a self which is annihilated at death. But I find that response to be inadequate, because a complete cessation of awareness in every possible sense, even a non-samsaric sense, is annihilationist enough for me. It seems to me that the passages in the Udana and elsewhere suggest a meaning for nibbana that is something else, something that is neither the becoming of the worlding nor the nothingness of absolute death. And, in fact, throughout the Sutta Pitaka, the most common characterizations of nibbana are that it is the end of dukkha and the end of the three poisons. Also, it seems to me that if the death-simile for nibbana had been the core understanding presented by the Buddha, it would have led to words other than 'Buddha' and 'bodhi' - it would have led to words which instead of denoting an awakened one and the awakened state would signify nothingness and annihilation. 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) 16617 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 2:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear Hi, James - In a message dated 11/2/02 8:44:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Bhaya-bherava Sutta; > Fear &Terror > > "The thought occurred to me: 'When priests or contemplatives who are > drooling idiots, resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings, > it's the fault of their drooling idiocy that they give rise to > unskillful fear &terror. But it's not the case that I am a drooling > idiot, when I resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings. I am > consummate in discernment." > > This part delights me for two reasons: 1. The Buddha uses the > term `drooling idiots' to describe some holy > men/contemplatives/monks. Hmmm…very telling about his outlook > concerning the sacrosanct, a time for harsh speech, etc., but I won't > comment further ======================== That is a buddha speaking. When we are buddhas/arahants, and the circumstances are suitable, perhaps we will speak that way as well. 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) 16618 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 7:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear Howard, Oops...I was hoping you wouldn't notice that! hehehe... I am not sure if I agree with your perspective; after all, would it matter to those being referred to as 'drooling idiots' if a Buddha said it or not? Probably not, after all, they are drooling idiots! hehehe... Smile, it was not sour grapes. I was just making a general comment about our society and world. Ever since going to Thailand, my eyes have been opened to the abuses of religious power, everywhere. I believe the sacrosanct is becoming a strong hinderance to following the Buddhist path in today's Buddhism, but that may be the Zen in me. However, I am entitled to my opinion. What did you think of the rest of the post? I would value your input. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 11/2/02 8:44:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > Bhaya-bherava Sutta; > > Fear &Terror > > > > "The thought occurred to me: 'When priests or contemplatives who are > > drooling idiots, resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings, > > it's the fault of their drooling idiocy that they give rise to > > unskillful fear &terror. But it's not the case that I am a drooling > > idiot, when I resort to isolated forest or wilderness dwellings. I am > > consummate in discernment." > > > > This part delights me for two reasons: 1. The Buddha uses the > > term `drooling idiots' to describe some holy > > men/contemplatives/monks. Hmmm…very telling about his outlook > > concerning the sacrosanct, a time for harsh speech, etc., but I won't > > comment further > ======================== > That is a buddha speaking. When we are buddhas/arahants, and the > circumstances are suitable, perhaps we will speak that way as well. > > 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) > > > > > 16619 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear Hi, James - In a message dated 11/2/02 10:48:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Howard, > Oops...I was hoping you wouldn't notice that! hehehe... I am not > sure if I agree with your perspective; after all, would it matter to > those being referred to as 'drooling idiots' if a Buddha said it or > not? Probably not, after all, they are drooling idiots! hehehe... > > Smile, it was not sour grapes. I was just making a general comment > about our society and world. Ever since going to Thailand, my eyes > have been opened to the abuses of religious power, everywhere. I > believe the sacrosanct is becoming a strong hinderance to following > the Buddhist path in today's Buddhism, but that may be the Zen in > me. However, I am entitled to my opinion. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. As far as bhikkhus are concerned, it is obviously true that becoming a bhikkhu does not automatically make one "holy". Not all bhikkhus are admirable, but all should be accorded respect out of respect for the position, out of respect for the institution of the sangha. ----------------------------------------------- > What did you think of the > rest of the post? I would value your input. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that aversion, with fear, anger, hatred etc as special cases, is a more harmful category of defilement than craving. (Of course, aversion is a kind of craving - craving for absence/cessation.) More generally, there has been much in your recent posts that appeals to me, especially the "sense of life" it reflects. [Just my opinion.] ------------------------------------------------ > > Metta, James ========================== 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) 16620 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:59am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 11/2/02 10:48:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > Howard, > > Oops...I was hoping you wouldn't notice that! hehehe... I am not > > sure if I agree with your perspective; after all, would it matter to > > those being referred to as 'drooling idiots' if a Buddha said it or > > not? Probably not, after all, they are drooling idiots! hehehe... > > > > Smile, it was not sour grapes. I was just making a general comment > > about our society and world. Ever since going to Thailand, my eyes > > have been opened to the abuses of religious power, everywhere. I > > believe the sacrosanct is becoming a strong hinderance to following > > the Buddhist path in today's Buddhism, but that may be the Zen in > > me. However, I am entitled to my opinion. > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Certainly. As far as bhikkhus are concerned, it is obviously true that > becoming a bhikkhu does not automatically make one "holy". Not all bhikkhus > are admirable, but all should be accorded respect out of respect for the > position, out of respect for the institution of the sangha. James: Hmmmm...I think I understand your position a bit more clear now. Not sure if I completely agree; but it is definitely admirable. Those who follow pure principles are becoming more and more rare nowadays. However, my thinking is that this position can lead to a 'slippery slope' of religious corruption. I believe more in the Buddha's system of 'Checks and Balances'. He supported that the behavior and practice of a monk should determine if he is affored 'respect' and should be 'worthy of gifts', not his position in the Sangha. Tough issue, but the future of Buddhism depends on it. > ----------------------------------------------- > > > What did you think of the > > rest of the post? I would value your input. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree that aversion, with fear, anger, hatred etc as special cases, > is a more harmful category of defilement than craving. (Of course, aversion > is a kind of craving - craving for absence/cessation.) More generally, there > has been much in your recent posts that appeals to me, especially the "sense > of life" it reflects. [Just my opinion.] James: *Blush, Blush* Thank you for the kind words. Yes, of course fear is a form of aversion, which is actually craving. But most don't see it that way. I was suggesting a new way to look at the original teachings. Nothing new here really, still all goes back to the Buddha. Thankfully, the Buddha's teachings are timeless and complete as they are. As I study the Abihdhamma more and ponder it more, I am starting to view it as an over-intellectualization of the Buddha's profound, yet simple, teachings. But I could be biased. The jury is still not in with me. :-) Metta, James > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Metta, James > ========================== > 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) > > > 16621 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 9:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, . Pali texts co and subco. Dear Larry, you quoted: In the commentary it is said that by way of remembering and of meeting in one thing, the Arousing of Mindfulness is only one; and that it is fourfold when regarded as a subject of meditation. [Tika} "By way of remembering": by way of the reflection of actions of skill, and so forth, of body, speech, and thought. [T] "Meeting in one thing" = union in the one-natured Nibbana. Nina: Pali of Co: a.t.thakathaaya.m pana sara.navasena (because of remembering) ceva ekattasamosara.navasena (because meeting, associating in unity) ca ekameva satipa.t.thaana.m (satip is one) aaramma.navasena (because of the objects) cattaaroti etadeva vutta.m (it is said to be fourfold). subcommentary: sara.navasenaati kaayaadiina.m kusalaadidhammaana~nca upadhaara.navasena. N: because of remembrance, it is said. And because of consideration of kusala dhammas through the body, etc. saranti gacchanti nibbaana.m etaayaati satiiti N:They recollect, they go to nibbana, by means of this, namely, sati. imasmi.m atthe ekatte ekasabhaave nibbaane samosara.na.m samaagamo ekattasamosara.na.m. N: as to this meaning there is a coming together, in unity, in nibbana with one nature, an assembling in unity. (this is coarse. I am grateful you press me on the Pali texts Jim took so much trouble to give to me.) You remember the post before about recollecting by sati: I quoted the Co to the Sekha-sutta (M. 53): the Papa~ncasuudanii. > The words: discrimination, remembering, recollecting what he has done and said long > ago.> .... the words done long ago (carikata.mpi): the > development of > the practice, namely, the eighty religious duties (vatta), such as the > duties of the shrine terrace, which someone does himself or which others > do > long ago, through bodily action the words said long ago (caribhaasita.mpi): words which someone > himself has spoken or others have spoken long ago.> The Co gives > examples of > extending merit, anumodana, meetings, teaching, etc. > The words remembering and recollecting are explained in English in my > PTs > edition: saritaa, remembering once, and anusaritaa, remembering again > and > again. > The Co speaks again about kamma through body and speech, explaining that > kamma through the body done long ago, means, through body-intimation ( > the > rupa which is kayavi~n~natti) and kamma through speech, done long ago, > means, through speech-intimation (the rupa which is vaci-vi~n~natti). It > explains that there are ruupa, citta and cetasika, thus, rupa dhammas > and > arupa dhammas: there should be awareness of them as: they arise thus, > they > fall away thus. Here sati as factor of enlightenment has been explained, > according to the co. It states that by this kind of sati the ariyan > disciple > knows: because > there can be awareness often.>End quote of Co. I have a question to Rob K: Rob, you said that this kind of remembrance is a wholesome accumulation which can condition the arising of sati now. I like to hear more, could you take it up with A. Sujin? I understand that the accumulation of the inclination to kusala is a support, but what is the role of this kind of remembrance? We may not remember at all the kusala we did. Larry, you asked about meditation subjects: did people ask the Buddha? Yes. We see in the Co about the daily routine of the Buddha: they came to ask him kammatthanas. We have to understand this in the right way. The Buddha, before his enlightenment, was taught meditation subjects leading to rupajhana and arupajhana, but he found out: this is not the way. Would he after his enlightenmennt merely teach in the same way as his teachers taught him before his enlightenment? No. He taught that even jhanacitta should not be taken for self, that there must be awareness of one nama or rupa at a time as it appears now through one of the six dooways. Insight must be developed, otherwise no way leading to the end of the cycle. Thus he taught to Rahula: how can mindfulness of breathing be of great benefit? He taught Rahula first mindfulness of breathing and then about the elements. Also the Co (as I quoted before): what is the kammatthana leading to arahatship: the khandhas, the dhatus (elements), the ayatanas. Eventually all namas and rupas which appear now have to be thoroughly known as they are. Thus, when reading in the satipatthana sutta about the different meditation subjects, we should understand this in the right way. The Buddha gave these subjects a totally new dimension, a different, a higher meaning. The Buddha would not omit teaching the four noble Truths he had penetrated when he became the Sammasambuddha. He continued to teach the one way, the best way. I read in the subco. a passage about the many aspects of the one way, and now we can understand this in the right sense: naanaamukhabhaavanaanayappavattoti kaayaanupassanaadimukhena tatthaapi aanaapaanaadimukhena bhaavanaanayena pavatto. ekaayananti ekagaamina.m, nibbaanagaaminanti attho. nibbaana~nhi adutiyattaa se.t.thattaa ca ``eka''nti vuccati. N: naanaamukhabhaavanaanayappavattoti: mukha: face or aspect. the method of precedure has many aspects of development, a procedure of methods with the aspect of mindfulness of body etc., and also mindfulness of breathing, etc. One way, one course, meaning, it goes to nibbana. Nibbana is not two, and it is the best (settho), it is said that it is one. This is a coarse translation, I wellcome corrections. With appreciation for your study and all the considering of what you are reading, Nina. op 01-11-2002 01:33 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > In the commentary it is said that by way of remembering and of meeting > in one thing, the Arousing of Mindfulness is only one; and that it is > fourfold when regarded as a subject of meditation. > > [Tika} "By way of remembering": by way of the reflection of actions of > skill, and so forth, of body, speech, and thought. > Does anyone have the pali version of this? I was wondering if "skill" is > a translation of kusala. If so it would reinforce previous research that > indicates "sati" is the recollection of ethical considerations. 16622 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation"...include fear Hi James, I agree "fear" is an important topic and I can say from experience it is the cause of many a sleepless night. It came up in the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary and we have been discussing it in this thread: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16375 A related essay by Bhikkhu Bodhi can be found at Access To Insight if you search for "Subrahma". Both hope and fear are based on the concept that there is something to gain or loose. best wishes, Larry 16623 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 10:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, . Pali texts co and subco. Hi Nina, Thanks very much for the detailed reply concerning sati as recollection of kusala. I am still uneasy about my understanding of this. I've been calling it recollection of ethical considerations but I don't think "ethical" is quite the right word. "Ethical" is too narrowly concerned with interpersonal relations, while "kusala" is very broadly, as you translate, "wholesome". I guess for now I will be satisfied with simply saying sati is recollection of kusala and satipatthana is directing that kusala toward nibbana, unless you have some qualms about this. best wishes, Larry 16624 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 10:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 Hi Antony, I've been trying to find something to cheer you up. This (below) was in my mailbox. It's from another (semiVedanta) group, but it may do the trick. Larry ---------------- On that day, I truly realized how ordinary I was in every way and it filled my heart with gladness and joy. And knowing my own Heart, and realizing that it was the One Heart, all the scriptures made sense, and all the teachings lost their hold. Over time, it seemed like my heart was some leaky faucet that could no longer be contained with love seeping out in drips.... little drops, little drops, big drops...... If we see clearly with the mind, the nature of the mind, we see that the ordinary mind is the Buddha Mind. So there is not much to do but to breathe in and breathe out in gratitude, love, and awareness and go about your daily life. Love to all Harsha 16625 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 11:35am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear James, Welcome to DSG. I don't agree on everything you say, but I am appreciative of your interests. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: James [mailto:buddhatrue@y...] > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 8:34 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > Larry and Kom, > 16626 From: James Mitchell Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 0:44pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" --- Kom Tukovinit <kom@a...> wrote: > Dear James, > > Welcome to DSG. I don't agree on everything you > say, but I > am appreciative of your interests. > > kom Kom, Thank you for the welcome and accepting my participation in your discussion. I especially appreciate this type of disagreement. It is less nit-picky, showy, and gentler than most. Take care. Metta, James ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16627 From: James Mitchell Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 0:45pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear James, > > Welcome to DSG. I don't agree on everything you > say, but I > am appreciative of your interests. > > kom Hi Kom, Thank you for the welcome and accepting my participation in your discussion. I especially appreciate this type of disagreement. It is less nit-picky, showy, and gentler than most. Take care. Metta, James ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16628 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 2:35pm Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana2 Hi Antony, and All, Possibly, I'm feeling a little more samvega than usual today, so forgive me if I say that I'm glad you are shocked. :) Being shocked is very good - It makes you think - even if only to try to understand what shocks you and why, and refute it. Hopefully, eventually, you'll thank RobK for being the condition for your shock. Shock can wake us up. I've been shocked on and off by various posts ever since finding out that Buddhism wasn't a sweet and gentle, warm and fuzzy, touchy/feely, way to worldly happiness, with a ticket to heaven-by-another-name attached. Buddhism is a sure and certain way out of Samsara, the relentless Round of Becoming. But only if you find the true Path and then only if you walk on it. That is all the Blessed One came to teach - Impermanence, Unsatisfactoriness, No-self - and the Pathway out. It is up to us whether we realise our incredible good fortune at being born as a human while the Dhamma still exists in the world. It is up to us to follow the true Teachings and make it to the Exit, or swirl away in the stream for uncountable suffering lives in various forms again. There is no everloving Buddha/God/Brahma/Ground of All Being who will personally rescue us. The Buddha left his Teachings for us. Each of us could die tomorrow, and who knows when we would find this Dhamma again. There is no guaranteed step by step progression in each life. Meaning well is not enough. There is no special protection for a good bloke like you or a great shiela like me :), it is just as possible for us to tumble way, way back as it has been for anyone anywhere in the world throughout beginningless time. The extinguishing of the defilements and the accumulation of wisdom and insight is difficult, wasting time on what we 'wish' or 'would like to believe' the Buddha meant is dangerous, there are no guarantees about protection from harm or length of life - hence the Buddha urged us to practice 'as if our hair was on fire'. I find it easy to see impermanence, easy to see suffering - but the hardest of all is Anatta. Most of this post is really me talking to myself, and I hope I haven't offended. Thank you for being the condition for my reflections. much metta and karuna, Antony Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "antony272b2" wrote: > Dear Robert (Robert K?), > > Thanks for your detailed responses. > > I can now appreciate that Nibbana is not aesthetically pleasing and > I've read that it seems painful to the ordinary worldling. > > Maybe grieving the disappearance of the Buddha is just grieving > suffering phenomena. > > Maybe the Buddha was not just a "nice" teacher but really demanded > his disciples put their lives on the line. There were no smiley faces > in your posts which remind me of the late Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw in > their seriousness (I have his photo on my wall and formatted his > comprehensive work on paticcasamuppada: > ftp://ftp.buddhanet.net/therabud/mahasipt.zip > > I'm rather shocked and will close this post for now. > with respect / Antony. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > Dear Anthony, > > I add some more: > > I think sometimes we tend to think life is good , somehow, > somewhere- > > if not now then in the future. > > But life is a concept and what there is is only the five khandhas - > and > > they are dukkha. They arise and pass away, and oppress continually > > because there is no one who can stop them arising again and again, > > never ceasing even for an instant. > > In the 'Kindred Sayings' (V, Maha-vagga, Book XII, Kindred > > Sayings about the Truths, Ch. V, part 6, Gross darkness) that the > > Buddha explained to the monks about the most fearful and terrible > thing: > 16629 From: Antony Woods Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 5:36pm Subject: Buddha's gradual instruction Dear Christine, Robert K and all, Our experience of the Buddha's teachings is very different to that of the Buddha's time. We can read volumes of the Buddha's words but cannot talk to him in person. In Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary I found the Buddha's gradual instruction i.e. dana, sila, heaven, drawback of sensual pleasures, renunciation; and then when (and maybe only when) "the Blessed One perceived that the listener's mind was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted teaching particular to the Buddhas, that is: suffering, its cause, its ceasing, and the path." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_a.htm http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma.html So for people at a stage which is far from elevated and lucid the Buddha may not have even mentioned the word dukkha at all, maybe because it could be misunderstood as saying that they have a self that is suffering, that they are a failure etc. etc. Thanks for listening, Antony. anupubbi-katha: 'gradual instruction', progressive sermon; given by the Buddha when it was necessary to prepare first the listener's mind before speaking to him on the advanced teaching of the Four Noble Truths. The stock passage (e.g. D. 3; D 14; M. 56) runs as follows: "Then the Blessed One gave him a gradual instruction - that is to say, he spoke on liberality ('giving', dana, q.v.), on moral conduct (sila) and on the heaven (sagga); he explained the peril, the vanity and the depravity of sensual pleasures, and the advantage of renunciation. When the Blessed One perceived that the listener's mind was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted teaching particular to the Buddhas (buddhanam samukkamsika desana), that is: suffering, its cause, its ceasing, and the path." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_a.htm 16630 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 6:39pm Subject: Re: Buddha's gradual instruction --- Dear Anthony, Yes this is a good point. In the Netti-pakarana it says (from memory) that the Buddha at times taught reward, at times danger and at other times both reward and danger (I forget the exact words)depending on the needs of the listener. One of the advantages of studying broadly is that one will find passages that seem to speak directly to us. Other passages may seem redundant or unhelpful so we need to learn how to pass those by without feeling daunted or annoyed by them. And who knows whether they might be useful in future times. I think the heart of the Dhamma points to the direct insight into the characteristics of the presently arising dhamma, so it isn't strictly necessary to study so many details. And yet if there isn't sufficient wisom to insight dhammas then how can it develop without some study to attentuate the avijja and clinging to wrongview that blocks insight. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Antony Woods" wrote: > Dear Christine, Robert K and all, > > Our experience of the Buddha's teachings is very different > to that of the Buddha's time. We can read volumes of the > Buddha's words but cannot talk to him in person. In > Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary I found the Buddha's > gradual instruction i.e. dana, sila, heaven, drawback of > sensual pleasures, renunciation; and then when (and maybe > only when) "the Blessed One perceived that the listener's > mind was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated > and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted teaching > particular to the Buddhas, that is: suffering, its cause, > its ceasing, and the path." > plans/2monthsfree.asp 16631 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 7:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18, Comm. [Tika] Drawing distinctions, it is said: Body and feeling are the cause of zest [assadassa karana]. Hi all, What does assadassa mean? Is it the same as piti ('joyful interest')? thanks, Larry 16632 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 7:38pm Subject: Parenthetical Citations Hello Friends, I have a question for this group of scholars. I am quite confused about the uniform way to cite Buddhist scripture in parenthetical citations. For example, I went to the Buddhist Dictionary Antony hyperlinked and I found this type of parenthetical cite: (See A. VI, 102; A. VII, 48; Ud. IV, 1; S. XXII, 102) I don't know how to read this to find these references. I checked my MLA Handbook and it doesn't give examples for Buddhist scripture, only the Bible; and the above example isn't comparable to those examples. Of course my copy of the MLA Handbook isn't one of the newest ones. Is the standard for Buddhist scripture in the newest Handbook? Can anyone tell me a resource for how to read these parenthetical citations? Thank you in advance for any help offered. Metta, James 16633 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 7:57pm Subject: Re: Parenthetical Citations Hi James, I get equally confused at times. Most hard copy Texts have a list in the front citing which edition, translation, and publisher they are using. It differs from author to author. For instance, recently I was feeling frustrated at reading "An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics" because Peter Harvey has used different translations of the Nikayas to the ones I have at home or can access on the Net. (It would have been SO much easier if he had 'named' the Suttas instead of using the page numbers of his editions...) An example of the system of abbreviations that one respected on-line dictionary uses can be found at: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/abbreviations.html metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Hello Friends, > > I have a question for this group of scholars. I am quite confused > about the uniform way to cite Buddhist scripture in parenthetical > citations. For example, I went to the Buddhist Dictionary Antony > hyperlinked and I found this type of parenthetical cite: > (See A. VI, 102; A. VII, 48; Ud. IV, 1; S. XXII, 102) > > I don't know how to read this to find these references. I checked > my MLA Handbook and it doesn't give examples for Buddhist scripture, > only the Bible; and the above example isn't comparable to those > examples. Of course my copy of the MLA Handbook isn't one of the > newest ones. Is the standard for Buddhist scripture in the newest > Handbook? Can anyone tell me a resource for how to read these > parenthetical citations? Thank you in advance for any help offered. > > Metta, James 16634 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, Comm. Further these Four Arousings of Mindfulness were taught not only for the purpose of casting out the four illusions, but for getting rid of the four floods, bonds, outflowings, knots, clingings, wrong courses, and the penetration of fourfold nutriment, too. This is according to the method of exegesis in the Nettipakarana. Hi all, Here is something from Visuddhimagga XIV par. 226: And in particular, one who sees internal materiality as foul (ugly) fully understands nutriment consisting of physical nutriment. He abandons the perversion [of perceiving] beauty in the foul (ugly), he crosses the flood of sense desire, he is loosed from the bond of sense desire, he becomes canker free as regards the canker of sense desire, he breaks the bodily tie of covetousness. He does not cling with sense-desire clinging. One who sees feeling as pain fully understands nutriment consisting of contact. He abandons the perversion of perceiving pleasure in the painful. He crosses the flood of becoming. He is loosed from the bond of becoming. He becomes caker free as regards the canker of becoming. He breaks the bodily tie of ill-will. He does not cling with rites-and-ritual clinging. One who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands nutriment consisting of mental volition. He abandons the perversion of perceiving self in the not-self. He crosses the flood of views. He is loosed from the bond of views. He breaks the bodiy tie of interpretations (insistence) that 'This is the truth'. He does not cling with self-theory clinging. One who sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands nutriment consisting of consciousness. He abandons the perversion of perceiving permanence in the impermanent. He crosses the flood of ignorance. He is loosed from the bond of ignorance. He breaks the bodily tie of holding to rites and rituals. He does not [cling with false-] view clinging. -----------------end quote L: So seeing consciousness as impermanent, perception and formation as not self, feeling as pain, and internal materiality as foul is, in brief, the sum total of the vipassana aspect of satipatthana. Correct? Larry note: the above listing of the 4 satipatthanas is slightly out of order, i.e., body, feeling, dhamma, consciousness. 16635 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:05pm Subject: Re: Buddha's gradual instruction Hi Antony, Thanks for your reply - I came to Buddhism accidently via a short meditation course, heard the Dhamma and stayed because it talked about Dukkha, and had an explanation of Dukkha. Afterwards, kamma and rebirth seemed naturally to fit, and I can accept anatta, so far only intellectually. But from the foundation of the Teachings on Dukkha all else flows. Dukkha seemed the most obvious, unavoidable, and up until then, inexplicable fact in the world. I feel the Buddha would have had to have taught on that topic at all levels - Suffering, from all sorts of causes, would have been so extremely apparent. Then, as now, Suffering and Impermanence would have been the major cause for people to think beyond a life of hedonism. I was a Christian prior to needing to find a solution to Suffering - plenty of agape (love), morality, compassion, and community with the Christians. I was happy there, and found no need to change, until I couldn't buy their explanation for Suffering. I remember the answer a respected meditation/Dhamma teacher gave when asked why there weren't very many teenagers in the Dhamma class - "They haven't suffered enough yet. They still believe they're ten foot tall and bullet proof." A good point though not to judge others experience by ones own. Nice 'reading' you, Antony. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Antony Woods" wrote: > Dear Christine, Robert K and all, > > Our experience of the Buddha's teachings is very different > to that of the Buddha's time. We can read volumes of the > Buddha's words but cannot talk to him in person. In > Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary I found the Buddha's > gradual instruction i.e. dana, sila, heaven, drawback of > sensual pleasures, renunciation; and then when (and maybe > only when) "the Blessed One perceived that the listener's > mind was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated > and lucid; then he explained to him that exalted teaching > particular to the Buddhas, that is: suffering, its cause, > its ceasing, and the path." > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_a.htm > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma.html > > So for people at a stage which is far from elevated and > lucid the Buddha may not have even mentioned the word > dukkha at all, maybe because it could be misunderstood as > saying that they have a self that is suffering, that they > are a failure etc. etc. > > Thanks for listening, > Antony. > > > anupubbi-katha: 'gradual instruction', progressive sermon; given by the > Buddha when it was necessary to prepare first the listener's mind > before speaking to him on the advanced teaching of the Four Noble > Truths. The stock passage (e.g. D. 3; D 14; M. 56) runs as follows: > "Then the Blessed One gave him a gradual instruction - that is to say, > he spoke on liberality ('giving', dana, q.v.), on moral conduct (sila) > and on the heaven (sagga); he explained the peril, the vanity and the > depravity of sensual pleasures, and the advantage of renunciation. When > the Blessed One perceived that the listener's mind was prepared, > pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and lucid; then he explained to > him that exalted teaching particular to the Buddhas (buddhanam > samukkamsika desana), that is: suffering, its cause, its ceasing, and > the path." > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_a.htm 16636 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:16pm Subject: Re: PERFECTIONS Thank you Christine, you really are a helpful person. I now have all those posts pasted into one document. (Thanks also to Nina, by the way.) Just one mistake: For Ch 3 No 8, you have given message 14646 where it should be 14644. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear group, (esp. Azita), > > I have typed a listing of the postings Nina has made of her > translations of "Perfections" by A. Sujin, with hyperlinks, in case > anyone joined in on the series late and would like an easy reference > for reading. Hope there are no errors. The Links for Chapters 1 to > 5 16637 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:27pm Subject: Re: PERFECTIONS Thanks for letting me know KenH - I've fixed my copy and will make a note when I post the next installment. metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "kenhowardau" wrote: > Thank you Christine, you really are a helpful person. I > now have all those posts pasted into one document. > (Thanks also to Nina, by the way.) > > Just one mistake: For Ch 3 No 8, you have given message > 14646 where it should be 14644. > > Ken H 16638 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 8:36pm Subject: Buddhism message ****************************************************** Hi everyone, My name is Jan Chearavanont and I am 11 years old.I live in Hong Kong but my dad is Thai and my mom is Korean. My first languge is English and Thai and my second languge is Chinese but im not so good at speaking or writing in chinese. Unfotunatly I dont speak Korean so I might learn that is the future. Last year I was learning about different types of religons such as Buddhism and so Mrs Abbott,my english tutor said that mabye I can write a small message to everyone who is intrested in the descussion group. Recently one of my teachers past away from the Bali Bomb , his name was Mr Wash-till...i was quite upset about it. I always belived in recarnation and so i always think that Mr. Wash-till would recarnate and i might even get to see him in his future life. I hope to hear from you. Jan De Liver De Letter De Sooner De Better De Later De Letter De Madder I Getter Thx ------------------------------------------------------ 16639 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 3:38pm Subject: Buddha's Parinibbana: "Like a flame's unbinding was the liberation of awareness" Hi, all - A liberated awareness is still awareness. It is well described as vi~n~nanam anidassanam anantam sabbato paham (translated as "discernment, non-manifestive, infinite, accessible from all round"), and this in answer to the question of where the four great elements stop without remainder. [The preceding is taken from the Kevaddha Sutta of the Digha Nikaya as translated by Peter Harvey. Maurice Walshe translates it as "Where consciousness is signless, boundless, all luminous"] The following is the ending of the Parinibbana Sutta (taken from ATI), translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: ************************** When the Blessed One was totally Unbound, simultaneously with the total Unbinding, Ven. Anuruddha uttered this verse:
wrote: > passing on any replies. Sarah> > ****************************************************** > > Hi everyone, > > My name is Jan Chearavanont and I am 11 years old.I > live in Hong Kong but my dad is Thai and my mom is > Korean. My first languge is > English and Thai and my second languge is Chinese but > im not so good at speaking or writing in > chinese. Unfotunatly I dont speak Korean so I might > learn that is the future. > > Last year I was learning about different types of > religons such as Buddhism and so Mrs Abbott,my english > tutor said that mabye I can write a small message to > everyone who is intrested in the descussion group. > > Recently one of my teachers past away from the Bali > Bomb , his name was Mr Wash-till...i was quite upset > about it. > > I always belived in recarnation and so i always think > that Mr. Wash-till would recarnate and i might even > get to see him in his future life. > > I hope to hear from you. > Jan > > De Liver > > De Letter > > De Sooner > > De Better > > De Later > > De Letter > > De Madder > > I Getter > > Thx 16642 From: Ven. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 10:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism message Correction: He will be reborn. There is no "reincarnation" as such for there is no soul to reincarnate. Reincarnation is a Hindu concept/notion. Rebirth is quite different from the Dhamma perspective. Here is what will make clarification: patisandhi: lit. 'reunion, relinking', i.e. rebirth, is one of the 14 functions of consciousness (viññána-kicca, q.v.). It is a karma-resultant type of consciousness and arises at the moment of conception i.e. with the forming of new life in the mother's womb. Immediately afterwards it sinks into the subconscious stream of existence (bhavangasota, q.v.), and conditioned thereby ever and ever again corresponding states of subconsciousness arise. Thus it is really rebirth-consciousness that determines the latent character of a person. "Neither has this (rebirth-) consciousness transmigrated from the previous existence to this present existence, nor did it arise without such conditions, as karma, karma-formations, propensity, object, etc. That this consciousness has not come from the previous existence to this present existence, yet that it has come into existence by means of conditions included in the previous existence, such as karma (q.v.), etc., this fact may be illustrated by various things, such as the echo, the light of a lamp, the impression of a seal, or the image produced by a mirror. For just as the resounding of the echo is conditioned by a sound, etc., and nowhere a transmigration of sound has taken place, just so it is with this consciousness. Further it is said: 'In this continuous process, no sameness and no otherness can be found.' For if there were full identity (between the different stages), then also milk never could turn into curd. And if there were a complete otherness, then curd could never come from milk.... If in a continuity of existence any karma-result takes place, then this karma-result neither belongs to any other being, nor does it come from any other (kamma), because absolute sameness and otherness are excluded here" (Vis, XVII 164ff). In Mil. it is said: "Now, Venerable Nágasena, the one who is reborn, is he the same as the one who has died, or is he another?" "Neither the same, nor another" (na ca so na ca añño). "Give me an example." "What do you think, o King: are you now, as a grown-up person, the same that you had been as a little, young and tender babe? " "No, Venerable Sir. Another person was the little, young and tender babe, but quite a different person am I now as a grown-up man . " . . . "... Is perhaps in the first watch of the night one lamp burning, another one in the middle watch, and again another one in the last watch?" "No, Venerable Sir. The light during the whole night depends on one and the same lamp.'' "Just so, o King, is the chain of phenomena linked together. One phenomenon arises, another vanishes, yet all are linked together, one after the other, without interruption. In this way one reaches the final state of consciousnes neither as the same person. nor as another person.'' According to the nature of their rebirth consciousness, beings divide into the following 3 groups: 1. ahetu-patisandhika: a 'being reborn without rootconditions', is a being whose consciousness at the moment of rebirth was not accompanied by any of the 3 noble rootconditions, viz. greedlessness, hatelessness, undeludedness (s. múla), i.e. selflessness, kindness, intelligence. Such beings are found in the 4 lower worlds (apáya, q.v.), in which case the function of rebirth is exercised by the class of consciousness listed in Tab. I as No. 56. But if such beings are born in the sensuous sphere as humans, they will be crippled, blind, deaf, mentally deficient, etc. (Rebirth-consciousness = Tab. I, No. 41) 2. dvihetu (or duhetu)-patisandhika: a 'being reborn with only 2 (noble) root-conditions', i.e. greedlessness and hatelessness. (Rebirth-consciousness = Tab. I, Nos. 44, 45, 48 or 49.) 3. tihetu-patisandhika: a 'being reborn with 3 (noble) rootconditions'. Such a being can be found only among men. (Rebirth-consciousness = Tab. 1, Nos. 42, 43, 46, or 47) and higher heavenly beings. On these 3 types of rebirth, See Atthasálini Tr. 11, 354 - 379. (App.: patisandhika). In the suttas, the terms for rebirth are chiefly punabbhava (q.v.), 'renewed existence', and abhinibbatti 'arising'; or both combined as punabbhavábhinibbatti. - (App.: patisandhi). Literature Vis.M. XVII, 133f, 164f, 189f, 289f; Vis.M. XIX, 22f. - Karma and Rebirth, by Nyanatiloka Thera (WHEEL 9). - The Case for Rebirth, by Francis Story (WHEEL 12/13). - Survival and Karma in Buddhist Perspective, by K. N. Jayatilleke (WHEEL 141/143). - Rebirth Explained, by V. F. Gunaratna (WHEEL 167/169). ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 1:01 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism message > Hi Jan, > > I'm sure Mr. Wash-til will reincarnate but you won't know who he is. So > it's a good idea to be kind to everyone. > > I'm 56 years old and live in the middle of the US, Boulder Colorado. It > is very cold and wintery here right now. About 16 inches of snow on the > ground and more expected tomorrow. Brrrr > > Larry > > > 16643 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 10:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Tom Hi, and welcome to the list from me. Good to see you here. Sorry to be so slow in coming in on your thread (if you haven't noticed already, I usually run a long way behind with my posting). I think what prompted your original post was the general issue of consideration for other beings/creatures, rather than taking life in particular. This is a theme that has interested me a lot over the years. In a sense, it seems as though much of our life is lived 'selfishly', i.e. for our own benefit and without much regard to the concerns of others. This becomes particularly apparent in certain instances such as the one you gave about sweeping away spider webs, with possible loss of life. I would just like to add 1 or 2 random thoughts to the many excellent comments already posted. As far as selfish motives are concerned, these are an inherent aspect of our lives. Like it or not, the intrinsic nature of us all is 'unwholesome' and tending to become more so, and this is something we have to come to terms with before there can be any progress in the other direction. Consequently, deciding to refrain from doing any act that was motivated by self-interest, would simply mean we'd end up doing nothing (and even then it's unlikely there'd be any less 'selfishness' than if we had just gone on with our lives normally). However, at moments when there is true concern for the welfare of others ('wholesome' moments), this will be reflected in the act being done at that time (including sweeping away spider webs). The difference in terms of outward appearance/immediate results may not be readily apparent, but the 'quality' of the act will be different. There is another aspect to this that's also worth bearing in mind. Even if we studiously avoided doing any act that seemed likely to bring suffering to another, this would not necessarily mean that the quality of the (non-)act was any more wholesome/less unwholesome than if we had done the act (indeed, it could be less wholesome). Actually, even if a person was completely freed of selfish tendencies, his/her acts would still impact adversely on others. It is an inherent feature of life in this existence that this should be so. Merely by walking down the street, we probably bring about the demise of countless (mostly unseen) creatures. Think of all the creatures whose lives have been lost in the interests of getting the salad into our sandwich/vegetables into our curry! What I am trying to say is that our conduct will be 'purer', less harmful to others, if there is more of the wholesome qualities such as consideration for the welfare of others (i.e., it is the wholesome mental states that, if developed, will lead to improvement in the quality of our conduct, not the other way around). Finally, a couple of brief observations on the topics of taking life and its consequences, that have been discussed in this thread. First, the precept against taking life applies as much to the life of an ant as it does to the life of a person. At the same time, however, it is made clear it that this is a rule of training rather than an 'absolute rule', and this reflects the fact that it is not something we should expect of be perfect at. Second, we need to understand that there is a qualitative difference between doing something with the intention of causing the death of a sentient being, and doing something when that intention is absent but there is the knowledge that what we are doing is going to result in the death of sentient beings. Life is a lot easier if we don't confuse 1 with the other (this of course is not to say that while one is 'bad' the other is 'OK'). So while there are certain kinds of conduct (the precepts) that we are strongly urged to avoid as far as possible in all circumstances, we need to be clear about exactly what these kinds of conduct are and how they are distinguished from look-alike acts that are much less severe in their moral impact. Jon --- proctermail wrote: > Hi Christine and group, > > Thanks for your comments - you have elaborated the question well > and > given me more to think about. Your problem of ants is similar to > another I have - slugs. It is very wet here and even my carpet gets > > wet when it rains so slugs are encouraged to come inside. I agree > that prevention in is probably an acceptable way forward - I > removed > as many slugs as I could find and then placed salt in the likely > places where they got in - hopefully I have discouraged them not > killed them and have had less of a problem since. There is prob > some > negative kamma invilved but it could be worse - perhaps leave a > bowl > of water outside for the ants (though this may encourage!). > > I guess I realise that the garden has to be cut back but i once > killed a frog inadvertantly whilst strimming. > > It is also interesting what you say about sentient beings as we > think > of plants as living and dying and returning to the earth to be > reborn > in another format but I guess thats a whole different discussion > topic! > > tp 16644 From: James Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 11:27pm Subject: Re: Buddhism message Hi Star Kid! (AKA Jan): Thanks for writing. I really liked your letter. I'm impressed that you know so many languages for being so young! You must be really smart and study really hard. You are one STAR KID alright! :-) I am also glad that you are learning about Buddhism. It is a very happy way to live and view life :-). You sound like a very nice girl and I wish you well in your religion and language studies. I am sorry to hear about the death of your teacher. I am also sorry to hear that it upset you. Yes, Mr. Wash-till will be reborn and you may just meet him again one day. How will you know it is him when you do? Well, you won't know for sure but there are some things you can look for: As he was kind, so he will be reborn as kind. As he was generous, so he will be reborn as generous. As he was wise, so he will be reborn as wise. As he taught others, so he will be reborn to teach others. As he was loved, so he will be reborn to be loved. Jan, whatever good things he was before he died, he will be those things again when he is reborn. Just like they say, "You are what you eat", it is also true that "You are what you do and think." So, Mr. Wash-till, since he was someone who people loved and cared about (like you did), will be reborn as someone who people love and care about again. He will be just fine and very happy. Please don't be too sad for him. Think good thoughts and his new, happy life. I liked your poem also. Let me give you this little poem written by Shel Silverstein to make you smile, since you may be still sad about your teacher; and to remind you again about rebirth/reincarnation. It is also about a boy who became exactly what he thought about and did all the time. I hope you aren't like this boy…but I am sure you aren't :-). Love, James Jimmy Jet and His TV Set I'll tell you the story of Jimmy Jet - And you know what I tell you is true. He loved to watch his TV set Almost as much as you. He watched all day, he watched all night Till he grew pale and lean, From "The Early Show" to "The Late Late Show" And all the shows between. He watched till his eyes were frozen wide, And his bottom grew into his chair. And his chin turned into a tuning dial, And antennae grew out of his hair. And his brains turned into TV tubes, And his face to a TV screen. And two knobs saying "vert" and "horiz." Grew where his ears had been. And he grew a plug that looked like a tail So we plugged in little Jim. And now instead of him watching TV, We all sit around and watch him. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > passing on any replies. Sarah> > ****************************************************** > > Hi everyone, > > My name is Jan Chearavanont and I am 11 years old.I > live in Hong Kong but my dad is Thai and my mom is > Korean. My first languge is > English and Thai and my second languge is Chinese but > im not so good at speaking or writing in > chinese. Unfotunatly I dont speak Korean so I might > learn that is the future. > > Last year I was learning about different types of > religons such as Buddhism and so Mrs Abbott,my english > tutor said that mabye I can write a small message to > everyone who is intrested in the descussion group. > > Recently one of my teachers past away from the Bali > Bomb , his name was Mr Wash-till...i was quite upset > about it. > > I always belived in recarnation and so i always think > that Mr. Wash-till would recarnate and i might even > get to see him in his future life. > > I hope to hear from you. > Jan > > De Liver > > De Letter > > De Sooner > > De Better > > De Later > > De Letter > > De Madder > > I Getter > > Thx > ------------------------------------------------------ > 16645 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 0:44am Subject: request to members Dear Group, I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat hair ... Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved over time - as all good buddhists should. :) http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst metta, Christine 16646 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 0:59am Subject: RE: [dsg] request to members Dear Christina, I am the one in monks robes.Ven. Yanatharo -----Mensaje original----- De: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Enviado el: Domingo, Noviembre 03, 2002 07:44 p.m. Para: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Asunto: [dsg] request to members Dear Group, I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat hair ... Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved over time - as all good buddhists should. :) http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst metta, Christine 16647 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 1:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] request to members Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Yanatharo, Sir, I think it would be a lovely idea if all the Venerables on the list put their photos in the Album. (Ven. Kumara is in the Files section of Dhamma-List.) I'm not sure how many Bhikkhus there are on dsg, as Members listing is not public - but Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo and Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Yanatharo spring to mind. :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Christina, I am the one in monks robes.Ven. Yanatharo > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > Enviado el: Domingo, Noviembre 03, 2002 07:44 p.m. > Para: dhammastudygroup@y... > Asunto: [dsg] request to members > > > Dear Group, > > I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album > might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on > view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with > the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the > long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the > comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat > hair ... > > Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved > over time - as all good buddhists should. :) > > http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst > > metta, > Christine 16648 From: antony272b2 Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 2:48am Subject: Re: Buddha's gradual instruction Hi Christine, Robert K and all, My attempt to focus on mundane happiness instead of sankhara dukkha was incomplete. Thanks for sharing this journey with me. with respect / Antony. 16649 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 2:56am Subject: Star Kids Hi Larry, Chris, James & All, Jon & I both really liked your replies to Jan - kind, very helpful and funny (esp. James' poem;-)) I won't see her til next Sat, but will f/w them and any further ones in the meantime. I'll also print them out to use in class. She didn't put it in her message, but she told me she'd been at camp with her teacher during most the week, returned with him on Friday afternoon. The next day he flew to Bali and that evening the bomb went off. Actually, she wanted to join DSG using her own email account, but after chatting about it, we decided to open the starkidsclub@y... for any kids to send messages to first, so as to avoid their own email addresses being shown (as a precaution and in case of parental concerns). This way we can also just check the messages are suitable before f/w to the list, but don't intend to edit in anyway and they'll be treated just like regular members in any other respects. So, if any of you have kids, grandkids, students, friends' kids or street kids who you can encourage to send Buddhist or 'life' questions to our helpful panel (Larry, Chris & James so far), then it's a condition for us all to learn more about teaching Buddhism to kids too. I'm sure the kids'll be teaching us plenty too - like Jan's sign-off;-) Chris, I'll also try to help Jan post a photo (actually that's a joke, b.c she and all my other students are far more internet savvy than I am - maybe she can help me to do this). Many thanks Sarah p.s We live in Star Street, so all kids who come here are Star Kids;-) ======================================================================= 16650 From: ajahn_paul Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] request to members Hi Chris, i'd uploaded mine! ^^ Paul 16651 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 3:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] request to members Thanks Paul - Lovely to see your friendly face! - I find that it does make a difference when writing to people if you can 'visualise' them. Somehow you feel you know them better. :) metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ajahn_paul" wrote: > Hi Chris, > > i'd uploaded mine! ^^ > > Paul 16652 From: Date: Sat Nov 2, 2002 11:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhism message Dear Jan - There isn't much anyone can add to the loving messages you have received from folks on this list. Please do know we do feel love for you even though we don't know you first hand. We can easily understand that what has happened has surprised you and made you unhappy. It isn't easy to lose somebody we care about. I don't believe that when we die we are gone for good. We just have new experiences, and we probably even meet people we knew and loved before. I am sure that the good things we do now lead to good things for the furure, and that after all is said and done, there really isn't anything we need to be afraid of. We are safe. Really. With much love, 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) 16653 From: rahula_80 Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 5:39am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi Howard, You wrote: > This post confuses me. I don't recall giving any reference. < I apologise. The confusion is really my error. > (I don't know why you mention my name.) Also, when I try to access your url, I get a msg saying that there is no msg 82804.< First, there is no message of 82804. Therefore, it is my error. Secondly, I was not mentioning your name. I was quoting from the url Sarah gave. The url is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8280 I am not sure whether Howard in the message is you or not as I have not joing at that time. I am sorry for all these. With apology, Rahula 16654 From: Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, Rahula - Ahhh. I see. No apology needed. And, yes, I was the "Howard" Anders quoted. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/3/02 8:39:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, rahula_80@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > You wrote: > > >This post confuses me. I don't recall giving any reference. < > > I apologise. The confusion is really my error. > > >(I don't know why you mention my name.) Also, when I try to access > your url, I get a msg saying that there is no msg 82804.< > > First, there is no message of 82804. Therefore, it is my error. > Secondly, I was not mentioning your name. I was quoting from the url > Sarah gave. The url is: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8280 > > I am not sure whether Howard in the message is you or not as I have > not joing at that time. I am sorry for all these. > > With apology, > Rahula > /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) 16655 From: rahula_80 Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 5:54am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, I would like to check whether Samyutta Nikaya I 4. contains the phrase "sabbe dhammaa aniccaa". I found this it is Accentisutta.m and it does not contain the phrase. I am using http://www.tipitaka.org/tipitaka/booklistframe2.html So, I was thinking if someone has other other Tipitaka text to verify it. The same thing goes for Samyutta Nikaya III 132 quoted by PTS Dictionary as containing the phrase. But I check with that url but found that it is Channa Sutta. And the phrase according to that website is " Sabbe sa"nkhaaraa aniccaa; sabbe dhammaa anattaa"ti" Rahula 16656 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 6:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] third insight knowledge Nina --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 26-10-2002 14:29 schreef Jonothan Abbott op > Jon: > I, too, find this interesting. The key seems to be that it is associated > with panna that is weak. My guess is that what is being referred to here > is the fact that, even when there is the direct experience of a dhamma, if > the general level of awareness is weak (as we know it in fact is), there > is still the idea of a person at such moments. <> As we all know, there appear to be several different phenomena (dhammas) continuously present at any one time (and we are told that the reason for this is the rapidity with which these phenomena arise and fall away). But awareness if it arises will have only one of those dhammas as its object. So even though there will be no idea of person in relation to that particular dhamma, it seems to me that there could still be the idea of person in connection with any of the other dhammas arising at the same time, since these would in fact be different mind-moments. > Jon: > In terms of paramattha dhammas, this I suppose means that there are > moments of awareness (kusala) and moments of 'ordinary' (akusala) > perception of the world arising alternately, with the latter > predominating. > > This may be why it is said that when awareness is weak it can be difficult > to see it for what it is, since it may manifest as moments of just a > glimmer of direct experience of a dhamma, hardly distinguishable from > moments when awareness is totally absent. <> I agree that at moments with sati there would be no thought of a person, but I'm not so sure that the difference between moment with sati and moment without must always be so clear. Even though there have been moments of strong insight, this doesn't mean all subsequent moments of insight/awarenes will be so strong and clear. There are still accumulations of all the usual defilements, and so there may still be doubt about the true nature of any moment, including a moment of (weak) awareness or understanding. Just my thoughts. Jon 16657 From: ajahn_paul Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] request to members Totally agree with u! ^_~ --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Thanks Paul - Lovely to see your friendly face! - I find that it does > make a difference when writing to people if you can 'visualise' them. > Somehow you feel you know them better. :) > metta, > Chris > 16658 From: abhidhammika Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 6:33am Subject: Re: request to members: To Sarah And Christine Dear Sarah and Christine I do not forget Sarah's e-mail regarding an electronic image of mine for DSG photo files. Now, Christine's reminder. I agree with you, Christine, that it is good to be able to visualize the people we communicate with. The reason I still haven't sent my electronic image to DSG photo files is a technical one. I do not have a digital camera. However, for those who would like to visualize how I would look, the following are some hints. I have fair skin color for an Asian, thick lips, medium height, long hair. If you have watched Samurai movies, Toshiro Mifune could remind you of my face. Visualize very hairy Mifune, though! But, smiley and sweet mountain man. :) As soon as technical problems are solved, I would send an electronic image of mine to DSG photo files. For now, visualization of (hairy) Toshiro Mifune in his Samurai movies would do the trick. Happy visualization! With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: Dear Group, I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat hair ... Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved over time - as all good buddhists should. :) http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst metta, Christine 16659 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 7:13am Subject: Perfections, Ch 6, Energy, no. 13 Perfections, Ch 6, Energy, no. 13 The Buddha, after he had finished the discourse, spoke the following words: ³Monk, long ago you followed the instruction, but why do you not now strive?² The Buddha declared the Truths and at the conclusion that monk was established in the fruition of streamwinning. The Buddha identified the persons in that former life: ³That monk was prince Samvara who became the King at that time, Såriputta was prince Uposatha, the Elders and secondary Elders were the other princes, the buddhist followers were their followers, and I myself was the courtier who advised the King.² The Buddha¹s followers in the past were the buddhist assembly at the time of the Buddha Gotama. We can see that it is not difficult for a result to materialize, but that the development of the right conditions leading to such a result is difficult. If at this moment there is not yet the cause that can bring its appropriate result, the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy with the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipatthåna. Satipatthåna is developed when sampajañña (paññå) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. Paññå develops gradually, time and again, so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the cause, and it will arise without difficulty. However, we should continue to be patient and to have energy and endeavour to develop understanding. We read in ³Ardent Energy² (Gradual Sayings, Ch V, § 49) that the Buddha said: Monks, on three occasions ardent energy is to be exerted. What three? To prevent the arising of evil, unprofitable states not yet arisen; to cause the arising of good, profitable states not yet arisen; to endure the bodily feelings that have arisen, feelings which are painful, sharp, bitter, acute, distressing and unwelcome, which drain the life away. These are the three occasions... Now, when a monk exerts himself on these three occasions, he is called ³strenuous, wise and mindful so that he makes an end of dukkha². Even a very short text can remind us of the endeavour we should make on three occasions, so that patience and endurance can further develop. ******* End of chapter. The next one, on patience, will be presented after my stay in Thailand, after medio Dec. Yes Christine and Azita, it is a work in progress. After a long time, when finished, it will be put on Web. Thanks for your kind words. Nina. 16660 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 8:29am Subject: Re: Reincarnation and connections Dear Jan, Am so glad that you have written in to the Dhamma Study Group. Somehow, I feel connected to you, because Ms. Abbott is also a dear friend of mine and because one of your relatives, Marissa Chearavanont, was my student at ISB (International School Bangkok) many years ago. Her mother is American, her father is, of course, Thai, and she is still working in Paris, I think. Should you have her contact information, please tell her Mrs. Yugala says hello. And speaking of connections, as you rightly surmised, we are all interconnected through a myriad of lifetimes; that it is not inconceivable that everyone we have ever met in any one lifetime, we probably have met before, in countless other lifetimes and in numerous situations and relationships. You have probably known Mr. Wash-till (sp?) in many previous lives, for this is how all of us have built up our attachments to the various people we know and love, and who have touched our lives, lifetime after lifetime. Thus, it is perfectly natural that when someone we have been attached to is taken from us in death, it brings about a deep sense of sadness and loss. But the beauty of Buddhism is that it teaches us to really understand and see such losses clearly. When we understand what is really going on, we can see such events in their true nature, and thus we can learn to detach from such losses and the pain that they bring. But this kind of detachment does not mean ignoring the loss or trying to convince ourselves that it doesn't affect us, or denying it. It means accepting the loss with a sense of inner peace, and deeply understanding what is meant when the Buddha taught that all reality has 3 characteristics. All reality is (1) impermanent, it does not last; (2) that all reality is dukkha, a Pali word meaning unsatisfactory ("things" are not the way "we" want them to be, thereby making us unhappy about them); and the hardest to understand, (3) that all reality is not a self, a being, an "I". However, this last teaching, the most important in Buddhism, is also the hardest to understand, and therefore I will leave it for a later time. But, try and think about the connections between these 3 characteristics of reality and the myriad of things and persons to which you are attached in this lifetime. How does one then develop the depth of understanding in order to detach from persons and things we are attached to? How does Buddhism teach us to go about developing that understanding? These are the central questions of Buddhism that usually take many lifetimes to answer and to understand. You are indeed fortunate to have the opportunity to know Ms. Abbott, for she has a wonderful understanding of these questions and can begin to explain them to you. And yes, you have known Ms. Abbott in many previous lifetimes and it is no accident that you have the good fortune to know her again in this lifetime. Should you wish to write to me, to ask questions, please feel free to do so at the contact information below, or through the Dhamma Study Group. with metta, Mom B. Yugala _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 8:04 PM Subject: [dsg] Digest Number 1124 > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 12:36:18 +0800 (CST) > From: Star Kid > Subject: Buddhism message > > passing on any replies. Sarah> > ****************************************************** > > Hi everyone, > > My name is Jan Chearavanont and I am 11 years old.I > live in Hong Kong but my dad is Thai and my mom is > Korean. My first languge is > English and Thai and my second languge is Chinese but > im not so good at speaking or writing in > chinese. Unfotunatly I dont speak Korean so I might > learn that is the future. > > Last year I was learning about different types of > religons such as Buddhism and so Mrs Abbott,my english > tutor said that mabye I can write a small message to > everyone who is intrested in the descussion group. > > Recently one of my teachers past away from the Bali > Bomb , his name was Mr Wash-till...i was quite upset > about it. > > I always belived in recarnation and so i always think > that Mr. Wash-till would recarnate and i might even > get to see him in his future life. > > I hope to hear from you. > Jan > > De Liver > > De Letter > > De Sooner > > De Better > > De Later > > De Letter > > De Madder > > I Getter > > Thx > 16661 From: James Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 9:00am Subject: Re: request to members Christine, Thanks for the citation information. Now I know it isn't just me! I have also uploaded a recent picture of myself (July, 2002). It was taken at my temple during a personal meditation retreat (thus I am in all white). Little girl, whose mother cooked for the monks, liked to play with me while the monks ate. This is after the monk's one meal and we are receiving the blessings. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album > might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on > view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with > the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the > long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the > comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat > hair ... > > Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved > over time - as all good buddhists should. :) > > http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst > > metta, > Christine 16662 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 11:34am Subject: Re: request to members: Suan Hi Suan, Now Suan, we are slowly backing you into a corner! :) You don't have to have a digital camera ... You don't even have to have the negative of a favourite photo. All you need is either the print or a negative. Go to a place that you usually put your film in for processing. Ask them to prepare the chosen photo for emailing. They will put it on a disk. Some people get all their photos developed onto a disk - some get them put onto a CD - but I take too many of 'backs of heads' 'inside of handbag' type photos to justify the small extra cost. Insert disk in computer at home, then either send an ordinary email to one of us at home with selected photo/s as the attachment - or fiddle about yourself and upload it to the Photos section. The person uploading the photo is the only one who can 'delete' it when they wish. (which is easy to do at any time.) This offer applies to anyone less computer literate than I(!?) Anyone knowing of a simpler way, your instruction/correction would be welcome. And, by the way, it is perfectly O.K. for anyone NOT to want their photo in the album - no need for people to feel any pressure - I simply remind members every so often that we'd all love to see them, and then drop the matter (for a while:))... .... not another word ... Well, maybe, just a few - You will notice I haven't mentioned people like Antony, Rahula, WL, KKT, Stephen, Tom, Sarah F, Peter and anyone else who has momentarily slipped my mind. :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > Dear Sarah and Christine > > I do not forget Sarah's e-mail regarding an electronic image of mine > for DSG photo files. > > Now, Christine's reminder. > > I agree with you, Christine, that it is good to be able to visualize > the people we communicate with. > > The reason I still haven't sent my electronic image to DSG photo > files is a technical one. I do not have a digital camera. > > However, for those who would like to visualize how I would look, the > following are some hints. > > I have fair skin color for an Asian, thick lips, medium height, long > hair. > > If you have watched Samurai movies, Toshiro Mifune could remind you > of my face. Visualize very hairy Mifune, though! But, smiley and > sweet mountain man. :) > > As soon as technical problems are solved, I would send an electronic > image of mine to DSG photo files. > > For now, visualization of (hairy) Toshiro Mifune in his Samurai > movies would do the trick. > > Happy visualization! > > With kind regards, > > Suan > > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Group, > > I wonder if some of our members who are not yet in our photo album > might consider adding their faces to the collection? We are all on > view there - All are welcome and wanted "whatsoever pulsates with > the breath of life, the frail or strong, without exception - the > long, the large, the medium-sized, the short the thin or 'the > comparatively well fed'." And even an occasional one with flat > hair ... > > Please consider ... Updates are welcome if you feel you've improved > over time - as all good buddhists should. :) > > http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst > > metta, > Christine 16663 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 11:37am Subject: Re: request to members Great photo James - cute little girl and angelic looking James! The camera doesn't lie! :):) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Christine, > Thanks for the citation information. Now I know it isn't just me! > > I have also uploaded a recent picture of myself (July, 2002). It > was taken at my temple during a personal meditation retreat (thus I > am in all white). Little girl, whose mother cooked for the monks, > liked to play with me while the monks ate. This is after the monk's > one meal and we are receiving the blessings. > > Metta, James 16664 From: Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 0:13pm Subject: commentary break Dear Nina and all, I don't want anyone to miss out on the commentary while they are visiting Thailand, so when should we take a break? Larry 16665 From: James Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: request to members Hi Christine, *Blush, Blush*. Thank you. I posted that photo because it is Buddhist themed. Hmmm...I never thought of myself as looking angelic! Thank goodness my horns and forked tail don't show up in photographs! hehehe...just kidding. I think the little girl, Jennifer, looks much more angelic than me. Isn't she a doll?!! (Her mom gave me permission to put the photo on the Internet, btw. Now if her mother isn't scared, I don't see why anyone in this group should be scared of posting a photo. Buddhists are predominately pacifists; and life is too short to live in fear.). This was day 9 of a 10-day, self-guided, meditation retreat...I think I look rode hard and put away wet! :-) I hope the other members post photos also. Your instructions were impecible. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Great photo James - cute little girl and angelic looking James! The > camera doesn't lie! :):) > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Christine, > > Thanks for the citation information. Now I know it isn't just me! > > > > I have also uploaded a recent picture of myself (July, 2002). It > > was taken at my temple during a personal meditation retreat (thus I > > am in all white). Little girl, whose mother cooked for the monks, > > liked to play with me while the monks ate. This is after the > monk's > > one meal and we are receiving the blessings. > > > > Metta, James 16666 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 1:20pm Subject: Fear and Courage Hi James, I'm leaving for work in a moment - it's after 7.00 a.m. Monday morning in Brisbane right now. All of us in the Asia-Pacific Region will be slaving away while you lucky ones in North America are having a lazy Sunday!! I'd to talk a bit about the 'Fear' subject you mentioned. I am not a very brave person and brought this up in September from a different perspective - the other side of the coin, which is 'courage'. Would you have time to have a look at my original letter, and the replies listed at the foot of the post, and see if you would care to continue discussing any part of the thread? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15529 metta, Christine 16667 From: Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 4:55pm Subject: Way 20, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness"by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Continuing the commentary on: "What are the four? Here, Bhikkhus a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Katame cattaro = "What are the four?" This is a question indicating the desire to expound the teaching. Idha = "Here." In this Dispensation. Bhikkhave = "Bhikkhus". This is a term for addressing persons who accept the teaching. Bhikkhu[15] is a term to indicate a person who earnestly endeavors to accomplish the practice of the teaching. Others, gods and men, too, certainly strive earnestly to accomplish the practice of the teaching, but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state by way of practice, the Master said: "Bhikkhu." For amongst those who accept the teaching of the Buddha, the bhikkhu is the highest owing to fitness for receiving manifold instruction. Further, when that highest kind of person, the bhikkhu, is reckoned, the rest too are reckoned, as in regard to a royal procession and the like, when the king is reckoned, by the reckoning of the king, the retinue is reckoned. Also the word "bhikkhu" was used by the Buddha to point out the bhikkhu-state through practice of the teaching in this way: "He who practices this practice of the Arousing of Mindfulness is called a bhikkhu." He who follows the teaching, be he a shining one [deva] or a human, is indeed called a bhikkhu. Accordingly it is said: "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, Tamed, humble, pure, a man who does no harm To aught that lives, that one's a brahman true. An ascetic and mendicant too."[16] Kaye = "In the body." In the corporeal group. The group of big and small corporeal constituents, namely, things like hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, and teeth, in the sense of a collection [samuhatthena] similar to a herd of elephants, a concourse of chariots according to grammatical method [sadda nayena]. From here, the explanation is by way of word-analysis [nirutti nayena]. And as in the sense of a collection, so also in the sense of the focus of what is filthy and therefore of what is disgusting is it "kaya." For the body [kaya] is the birthplace [aya] of the disgusting, the exceedingly repellent. The birthplace [aya] is the place of origin [uppattidesa]. Since these originate from that place [ayanti tato] it is the place of origin [ayo]. What originates? The repulsive things like hair of the head. Therefore, the body is the place of origin of disgusting or contemptible things [kucchitanam ayoti kayo]. 15. An almsman, a mendicant, monk, religious, or recluse. In the Buddhadhamma it indicates generally any person who accepts and follows earnestly the teaching; but technically it refers to one who has received the higher ordination in the Holy Life. 16. Dhammapada verse 142. 16668 From: James Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 7:43pm Subject: Re: Fear and Courage --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi James, > > I'm leaving for work in a moment - it's after 7.00 a.m. Monday > morning in Brisbane right now. All of us in the Asia-Pacific Region > will be slaving away while you lucky ones in North America are having > a lazy Sunday!! > > I'd to talk a bit about the 'Fear' subject you mentioned. I am not a > very brave person and brought this up in September from a different > perspective - the other side of the coin, which is 'courage'. Would > you have time to have a look at my original letter, and the replies > listed at the foot of the post, and see if you would care to continue > discussing any part of the thread? > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15529 > > metta, > Christine Christine, I read your post about courage, and the replies, and I think I have a unique perspective to add. Allow me to give you my input. The post of mine you were referring to was examining `fear' and in this recent post you suggest that courage is the opposite of fear, the `other side of the coin'. I would not completely agree with that. I see the opposite of fear being `equanimity'; I believe the opposite of courage is `doubt'. You were wondering where courage occurred in the teachings of the Buddha, your post was titled, "Searching for `Courage' in the teachings." Now, I really ask this lighthearted and loving, have you heard the saying about, "One who can't see the `forest' through the `trees'"? I believe this is the case here. You aren't going to find much mention of `Courage' in the teachings because ALL of the teachings are about courage. Buddhism = Courage. Those who are not brave are not cut out to be Buddhist. The Buddha's entire life is a testament to courage. And he had this courage, as he explained, because he had conquered his doubt. Courage is not a Buddhist quality for the individual to develop, and isn't explained thus in Buddhist scripture, because `courage' is a quality that is `other' and not `self'. In other words, other people will see a brave person as `courageous', but that `courageous' person typically won't see himself as anything other than ordinary and plain. If a person views him/herself as `courageous', than it is more than likely vanity and not courage. The courageous person simply knows that he/she has no doubt about the right course of action to take. He or she does it, in the face of incredible odds, and then other people label that act as courageous. Sure sounds like the Buddha and all those who choose to follow his teachings, though his teachings run contrary to the mores of predominate society. Actually, paradoxically, the scriptures do talk about courage quite frequently; it just isn't called courage, it is called the `Elimination of Doubt', which is one of the five hindrances to the eightfold path and enlightenment (the other four being: Sensual Desire, Ill-will, Sloth/Torpor, Restlessness/Remorse). I don't want to quote numerous suttas about this subject, but allow me to quote one of my favorite passages about doubt: "If there is a pot of water which is turbid, stirred up and muddy, and this pot is put into a dark place, then a man with a normal faculty of sight could not properly recognize and see the image of his own face. In the same way, when one's mind is possessed by doubt, overpowered by doubt, then one cannot properly see the escape from doubt which has arisen; then one does not properly understand one's own welfare, nor that of another, nor that of both; and also texts memorized a long time ago do not come into one's mind, not to speak of those not memorized." SN 46:55 If the Buddha had not conquered his doubt early on, there would not be any such thing called `Buddhism'. Most people who would like to become monks, like to meditate more often, like to be better people, like to call him/herselves Buddhist, like to lead an ethical life, like to be more generous, etc., etc., etc., but don't do this, usually don't do these things because of doubt. Doubt in ourselves and The Triple Gem is what we all must conquer if we are to achieve true peace. (A good article on the Five Hindrances and how they can be conquered is available here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html#doubt) Allow me to end with one of my favorite Shakespearean lines related to this subject, from 'The Tragedy of Macbeth': MACBETH. If we should fail? LADY MACBETH. We fail! But screw your courage to the sticking-place, And we'll not fail. (Wasn't for a good purpose in this case, but the same idea). Metta, James 16669 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 10:35pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi James & Howard, James, I’m appreciating your contributions very much. Here is one more for this popular thread;-) --- James wrote: > I am not > > > sure if I agree with your perspective; after all, would it matter > to > > > those being referred to as 'drooling idiots' if a Buddha said it > or > > > not? Probably not, after all, they are drooling idiots! > hehehe... ..... On the contrary, I think that we ‘drooling idiots’ (i.e all those of us ‘unpurified’) are likely to be not only overwhelmed by fear and dread whilst seculded in the ‘remote jungle-thicket’, but also very likely to take offence if we were called such by another drooling idiot (B.Bodhi translates ‘devoid of wisdom, drivellers’ btw). ..... > > Howard: > > Certainly. As far as bhikkhus are concerned, it is obviously > true that > > becoming a bhikkhu does not automatically make one "holy". Not all > bhikkhus > > are admirable, but all should be accorded respect out of respect > for the > > position, out of respect for the institution of the sangha. ..... I agree with H’s comments here. When one pays respect to the Sangha - it is respect to those who have followed the Buddha’s teachings and made it possible for us to hear them as represented by the ‘institution of the sangha’. From the latest extract of the Satipatthana Sutta commentary: ***** "Bhikkhave = "Bhikkhus". This is a term for addressing persons who accept the teaching. Bhikkhu[15] is a term to indicate a person who earnestly endeavors to accomplish the practice of the teaching. Others, gods and men, too, certainly strive earnestly to accomplish the practice of the teaching, but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state by way of practice, the Master said: "Bhikkhu." For amongst those who accept the teaching of the Buddha, the bhikkhu is the highest owing to fitness for receiving manifold instruction. Further, when that highest kind of person, the bhikkhu, is reckoned, the rest too are reckoned, as in regard to a royal procession and the like, when the king is reckoned, by the reckoning of the king, the retinue is reckoned. Also the word "bhikkhu" was used by the Buddha to point out the bhikkhu-state through practice of the teaching in this way: "He who practices this practice of the Arousing of Mindfulness is called a bhikkhu." He who follows the teaching, be he a shining one [deva] or a human, is indeed called a bhikkhu. Accordingly it is said: "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, Tamed, humble, pure, a man who does no harm To aught that lives, that one's a brahman true. An ascetic and mendicant too."[16] 15. An almsman, a mendicant, monk, religious, or recluse. In the Buddhadhamma it indicates generally any person who accepts and follows earnestly the teaching; but technically it refers to one who has received the higher ordination in the Holy Life. 16. Dhammapada verse 142." ***** > James: Hmmmm...I think I understand your position a bit more clear > now. Not sure if I completely agree; but it is definitely > admirable. Those who follow pure principles are becoming more and > more rare nowadays. However, my thinking is that this position can > lead to a 'slippery slope' of religious corruption. I believe more > in the Buddha's system of 'Checks and Balances'. ..... I think that those ‘who follow pure principles’ have always been rare. It’s a delicate subject, but surely we need to primarily be concerned with the ‘Checks and Balances’ that apply to our own conduct and mental states? Unless we are asked for assistance or guidance, I’m not at all sure it is appropriate to suggest ‘Checks and Balances’ for others, especially not for members of the Sangha, I think. This week, Jon and I will be providing a little medical dana for a visiting monk in Hong Kong. We will be mindful, according to our knowledge of vinaya, of what is suitable and respectful on our behalf. For example, we would make sure any offer of assistance was clear, appropriately made and wouldn’t involve any expense by the monk or anyone else, I’d make sure, as a woman, I wasn’t travelling alone with the monk, we would make arrangements to make sure his meal was definitely finished before mid-day, I’d walk behind him.....and so on. As to how a monk applies the ‘Checks and Balances’ himself and whether he follows strict vinaya and so on, this will depend on other factors, such as his confidence in the Tipitaka and particularly in the Vinaya.These are not my concern/responsibility and will certainly have their own repercussions. ..... >He supported that > the behavior and practice of a monk should determine if he is > affored 'respect' and should be 'worthy of gifts', not his position > in the Sangha. Tough issue, but the future of Buddhism depends on > it. .... I agree with this and we read many accounts of those who lost the respect and support of followers. We all know about the importance and value of the Sangha and the weighty kamma for abuse of the order. This should be a condition for compassion and equanimity on our part, rather than hostility, I think. ---------------------------------------------- James: > As I study the Abihdhamma more and ponder it > more, I am starting to view it as an over-intellectualization of the > Buddha's profound, yet simple, teachings. But I could be biased. > The jury is still not in with me. :-) .... We hear this quite often on DSG;-) I hope that in time you also come to see the Abhidhamma as ‘this moment’....like, dislike, fear, seeing, hearing, respect, boredom, sounds, feelings....all are abhidhamma and not separate from what is taught in the suttanta and vinaya. You may wish to look at some of the articles on Rob K’s websites as well as reading all the Useful Posts;-)): http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.vipassana.info/ James, you’ve written many posts and raised useful issues. I appreciate the shake-up, colour and life you’ve added here. Please take any ‘nit-picking’ anytime from me as well-intended comments or attempts at clarification from just another ‘drooling idiot’;-) Sarah ===== 16670 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 3, 2002 11:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: request to members: Suan Hi Christine & all, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi Suan, > Now Suan, we are slowly backing you into a corner! :) ... You’re doing a great job....”visualization of (hairy) Toshiro mifune in his Samurai movies” is NOT doing the trick;-) > Anyone knowing of a simpler way, your instruction/correction would be > welcome. .... If the taking-the-photo-from-the-nondigital camera-to-the-photo-shop is still a hassle (read yet another excuse), just post the pic to one of the committee below by asking off-list for a snail mail address. We’re set to handle all excuses (lack of a digital camera is a simple one we’re used to. We can even handle the “no attachments -> no possessions ->no photo” one -ask Frank). .... > And, by the way, it is perfectly O.K. for anyone NOT to want their > photo in the album - no need for people to feel any pressure - .... Now don’t go soft, Chris.... .... >I simply remind members every so often that we'd all love to see them, > and then drop the matter (for a while:))... > .... not another word ... > > Well, maybe, just a few.. .... That’s better....(remember there’s the ‘tough and mean’ example to follow here....;-)) ..... Latest Album Committee: Rob Ep: Was ‘Album Keeper’ Now ‘Initial Brain Waver’ Kom: Was ‘Technical Adviser & Tolerator’ Now...........”........................”......... Sarah: Was ‘Interfering BusyBody’ Always.....”...........” Chris: Was ‘P.R. Extraordinaire’ Now ‘Really Helpful Person’ James (co-opted without permission): ‘Sloth Shaker’ & ‘Punchliner’ J:“Now if her mother isn't scared, I don't see why anyone in this group should be scared of posting a photo. Buddhists are predominately pacifists; and life is too short to live in fear.” Very well put, James.....you have a real skill with words and I needed some dhamma input here. Sarah p.s Paul & James - good to see you both;-)) ============================================ 16671 From: James Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 0:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Sarah, You write, "James, you've written many posts and raised useful issues. I appreciate the shake-up, colour and life you've added here. Please take any `nit-picking' anytime from me as well-intended comments or attempts at clarification from just another `drooling idiot';-)" Hmmmm…I don't think I have done all of this for this group, actually my posts are like baby talk compared to the scholarly input of your key members, but I appreciate the compliment. I am getting accustomed to my posts being dissected for response. I think most of my meaning is lost when that is done, but I can understand why. I don't think either of us are `drooling idiots', but I laughed at the joke. Okay, I was hoping this would not be picked up again; but since it has, I will respond. If you view this response as `hostile', you are mistaken. I am simply giving my opinion and no one has to agree with it. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, just explain my position. First of all, I have A LOT of respect for monks. I visit the monks at my temple practically every week and do many things for them. When I greet monks I wai; I make sure I don't sit higher than they do; I wash their dishes after they eat; I clean the temple for them; and I pay careful attention to what they say even if it bores me to tears sometimes. Goodness gracious, I was going to become a monk at one point! But, and let me state this very clearly and then explain why: I do not overly respect self-identifying monks who participate in Dhamma discussion with lay people on the Internet. Any monk, who self- identifies as a monk, and does this, is not worthy of my high respect afforded to the Sangha because he: 1. Is abusing his position 2. Is cheapening his position 3. Is breaking his monk precepts. Explanation: 1. The Internet is a level-playing field where we are lay people discussing the Dhamma, not seeking instruction. When a member self-identifies as a bhikkhu, tells people how they should be or think about Dhamma, declares that no one should disagree because they aren't a bhikkhu, that is abuse of the position in the Sangha. I don't respect that. 2. When a bhikkhu discusses Dhamma in an Internet group with laypeople, on the same level as lay people, in the same forum as laypeople, that is not right either. That bhikkhu is cheapening his position as a bhikkhu to discuss the Dhamma as if he is a layperson. A bhikkhu will get my respect as a bhikkhu if he acts like one. If he doesn't, he is just another layperson to me. 3. Bhikkhu's participating in Dhamma discussion on the Internet are breaking several Bhikkhu precepts. The Buddha, in his infinite wisdom, foresaw how situations like this might happen and he came up with precepts as to how the Dhamma should be discussed and taught by bhikkhu's. Here are the rules: 57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 58. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 59. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 60. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 61. [62] I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed. 63. I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 64. I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a training to be observed. 65. I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits holding up his knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 66. I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not ill: a training to be observed. 67. I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 68. Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. 69. Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. 70. Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not ill: a training to be observed. 71. Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed. 72. Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking on the path and who is not ill: a training to be observed. Now, how is a monk discussing or teaching Dhamma on the Internet going to be able to follow these precepts? He isn't. He cannot see the person, cannot check for their understanding or if they are of the proper mind to listen to Dhamma, so he is breaking 15 very important precepts. At my temple, the monks do not discuss Dhamma on the Internet, and won't even discuss it on the telephone!! I once forgot this and wrote an e-mail to a monk at my Buddhist temple, asked him a question about Buddhism, and he refused to answer by e-mail! He asked me to come see him. I have discussed this issue with monks of the Thera and Mahayana tradition and they all agree with me, monks should not discuss Dhamma on the Internet. A person who wants Dhamma instruction from a monk, in discussion rather than a book, needs to see that monk face-to-face. Otherwise, the teaching is corrupt. For these reasons, I hold that monks should not teach or discuss Dhamma on the Internet as self-identified monks. If they want to do it as regular laypeople, and not state that they are monks, I don't see a problem with that. This is just my opinion and I could be wrong. I am not trying to create controversy or `stir-things-up', just relating what I feel, think, researched, and discussed with others. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi James & Howard, > > James, I'm appreciating your contributions very much. Here is one more for > this popular thread;-) > > --- James wrote: > > I am not > > > > sure if I agree with your perspective; after all, would it matter > > to > > > > those being referred to as 'drooling idiots' if a Buddha said it > > or > > > > not? Probably not, after all, they are drooling idiots! > > hehehe... > ..... > On the contrary, I think that we `drooling idiots' (i.e all those of us > `unpurified') are likely to be not only overwhelmed by fear and dread > whilst seculded in the `remote jungle-thicket', but also very likely to > take offence if we were called such by another drooling idiot (B.Bodhi > translates `devoid of wisdom, drivellers' btw). > ..... > > > Howard: > > > Certainly. As far as bhikkhus are concerned, it is obviously > > true that > > > becoming a bhikkhu does not automatically make one "holy". Not all > > bhikkhus > > > are admirable, but all should be accorded respect out of respect > > for the > > > position, out of respect for the institution of the sangha. > ..... > I agree with H's comments here. When one pays respect to the Sangha - it > is respect to those who have followed the Buddha's teachings and made it > possible for us to hear them as represented by the `institution of the > sangha'. > > From the latest extract of the Satipatthana Sutta commentary: > ***** > "Bhikkhave = "Bhikkhus". This is a term for addressing persons who accept > the teaching. > > Bhikkhu[15] is a term to indicate a person who earnestly endeavors to > accomplish the practice of the teaching. Others, gods and men, too, > certainly strive earnestly to accomplish the practice of the teaching, > but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state by way of practice, > the Master said: "Bhikkhu." For amongst those who accept the teaching of > the Buddha, the bhikkhu is the highest owing to fitness for receiving > manifold instruction. Further, when that highest kind of person, the > bhikkhu, is reckoned, the rest too are reckoned, as in regard to a royal > procession and the like, when the king is reckoned, by the reckoning of > the king, the retinue is reckoned. Also the word "bhikkhu" was used by > the Buddha to point out the bhikkhu-state through practice of the > teaching in this way: "He who practices this practice of the Arousing of > Mindfulness is called a bhikkhu." He who follows the teaching, be he a > shining one [deva] or a human, is indeed called a bhikkhu. Accordingly > it is said: > > "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, > Tamed, humble, pure, a man who does no harm > To aught that lives, that one's a brahman true. > An ascetic and mendicant too."[16] > > > 15. An almsman, a mendicant, monk, religious, or recluse. In the > Buddhadhamma it indicates generally any person who accepts and follows > earnestly the teaching; but technically it refers to one who has > received the higher ordination in the Holy Life. > > 16. Dhammapada verse 142." > ***** > > James: Hmmmm...I think I understand your position a bit more clear > > now. Not sure if I completely agree; but it is definitely > > admirable. Those who follow pure principles are becoming more and > > more rare nowadays. However, my thinking is that this position can > > lead to a 'slippery slope' of religious corruption. I believe more > > in the Buddha's system of 'Checks and Balances'. > ..... > I think that those `who follow pure principles' have always been rare. > It's a delicate subject, but surely we need to primarily be concerned with > the `Checks and Balances' that apply to our own conduct and mental states? > Unless we are asked for assistance or guidance, I'm not at all sure it is > appropriate to suggest `Checks and Balances' for others, especially not > for members of the Sangha, I think. > > This week, Jon and I will be providing a little medical dana for a > visiting monk in Hong Kong. We will be mindful, according to our knowledge > of vinaya, of what is suitable and respectful on our behalf. For example, > we would make sure any offer of assistance was clear, appropriately made > and wouldn't involve any expense by the monk or anyone else, I'd make > sure, as a woman, I wasn't travelling alone with the monk, we would make > arrangements to make sure his meal was definitely finished before mid-day, > I'd walk behind him.....and so on. > > As to how a monk applies the `Checks and Balances' himself and whether he > follows strict vinaya and so on, this will depend on other factors, such > as his confidence in the Tipitaka and particularly in the Vinaya.These are > not my concern/responsibility and will certainly have their own > repercussions. > ..... > >He supported that > > the behavior and practice of a monk should determine if he is > > affored 'respect' and should be 'worthy of gifts', not his position > > in the Sangha. Tough issue, but the future of Buddhism depends on > > it. > .... > I agree with this and we read many accounts of those who lost the respect > and support of followers. We all know about the importance and value of > the Sangha and the weighty kamma for abuse of the order. This should be a > condition for compassion and equanimity on our part, rather than > hostility, I think. > ---------------------------------------------- > James: > > As I study the Abihdhamma more and ponder it > > more, I am starting to view it as an over-intellectualization of the > > Buddha's profound, yet simple, teachings. But I could be biased. > > The jury is still not in with me. :-) > .... > We hear this quite often on DSG;-) I hope that in time you also come to > see the Abhidhamma as `this moment'....like, dislike, fear, seeing, > hearing, respect, boredom, sounds, feelings....all are abhidhamma and not > separate from what is taught in the suttanta and vinaya. You may wish to > look at some of the articles on Rob K's websites as well as reading all > the Useful Posts;-)): > http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > http://www.vipassana.info/ > > James, you've written many posts and raised useful issues. I appreciate > the shake-up, colour and life you've added here. Please take any > `nit-picking' anytime from me as well-intended comments or attempts at > clarification from just another `drooling idiot';-) > > Sarah > ===== > > > 16672 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Dear Larry (Nina & Jon), Like the section on ekayana (one/only path), I think the section on ‘types’ or temperaments is very important and very easily mis-understood. It’s not at all easy, I find. I've have appreciated all your comments. Larry, I understand all the 4 Arousings are for satipatthana/vipassana, but there can only be one object at a time and at times of insight/realization/enlightenment, it will depend on conditions which object is apparent. There is no need or way to know or think about this, but the Buddha mentions all the possibilities. Whatever we read about in the sutta relates to the development of satipatthana and the objects of satipatthana for all the different accumulations (whether using jhana as a basis or not)as I read it. You also ask a very good question in another post to Jon in which you agree that ‘everyone is attached to body, everyone desires pleasant feeling...’etc. You say ‘the 4 satipatthanas are the solution. What should we do?’. I would suggest that the 4 satipatthanas consist of all the actual phenomena in our lives. If there is an idea of ‘doing’ rather than ‘understanding’ these, then we’re bound to be on the wrong track. That’s why the emphasis is on sati and panna rather than on ‘atta’(self). So, considering very carefully what the actual phenomena are that can be known by insight is essential. Otherwise as others have suggested, there will be no knowing whether there is any understanding or insight.Wrong views and illusions may easily be taken for knowledge. Larry, it’s a bit long for you, but I’d like to just quote from a post I wrote a year ago(8750) after discussions on the same section about ‘types and characters’ with Khun Sujin. (I’ve deleted some names and slightly amended it here. In the orignal I also quoted from a post of Nina's and included the dialogue from the Cambodia talks): ***** “K.Sujin was emphasising that we have an idea that we know about our character or someone else’s character, but this is only thinking. Do we really know what the reality is now? We may think someone is an angry person or a sensuous person, but we all have a lot of dosa and lobha and we never know from moment to moment, according to complex conditions, what the reality will be. Apart from the Buddha, very few arahats were able to know others well enough to even be able to provide the appropriate object for highly developed jhana practice. K.Sujin mentioned the example about the foulness meditation subject. Even Sariputta did not know what was appropriate for that monk at that time.Only when the Buddha gave him the ‘golden lotus’ as an object did he attain jhanas and enlightenment. The point of this discussion was to show that realities are conditioned. Most of us agree that for the development of satipatthana there shouldn’t be any selection of object as this merely indicates an idea of self that can select an object for awareness. K.Sujin was stressing that even for the development of samatha, there shouldn’t be any selection of object either. Again it depends on conditions which object will condition calm and when there will be understanding (at level of samatha) of that object conditioning calm. It’s not a matter of deciding to ‘do anapanasati’ or ‘metta bhavana’ or ‘contemplate on death’. If there is metta to someone now, or wise reflection on death with understanding, these calm cittas will condition more calm cittas in the future by conditions. From time to time, when there has been discussion of the ‘any object without selection’ type, there has been reference to what I would think would be this passage in the Satipatthana Sutta com (p.28) under The Commentary section: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html ***** “In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana] in the practice of meditation, the following is stated: For the dull-witted man of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; for the keen-witted of this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. And for the dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, namely, consciousness [citta]; for the keen-witted of this type, the subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on things of the mind -- mental objects [dhammanupassana].........” ***** Many people again read this as a ‘thing to do’, a prescriptive course of action for different types. As stressed, from the point of view of dhammas, we can only say at any given moment what the reality or ‘type’ is, if there is awareness when that characteristic appears. This pasage, along with the description of carita (types) in the Vism, should be read, as Khun Sujin explained to us, as descriptions of brief moments for those realizing nibbana. Different realities have to be the objects of awareness at even the highest levels of understanding and it will depend on different accumulations and conditions what objects appear at these times. Only the Buddha could describe the objects appearing for all the different people realizing nibbana and the very many complex variations depending on jhana attainments and so many, many other conditions. In other words, even these descriptions which there has been passing reference to on several occasions, need to be understood in the light of anatta and conditioned realities. It’s not a question of certain objects or realities being superior or inferior to others. Sati and panna don’t mind at all what they know. Any idea of one object being preferable for the development of satipatthana shows the clinging again.” ***** Apologies for the length. I’d be grateful if anyone can give me a reference fothe story of the monk given the ‘golden lotus’ by the Buddha. Sarah ======== 16673 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 1:57am Subject: Re: Fear and Courage Hi James, and All, I appreciate your reply very much. Especially the way you feel 'doubt' is the opposite of 'courage'. When I first read it, I disagreed immediately but could not rid myself of a niggling feeling that it 'felt' right, and that I had seen something similar recently. I eventually realised that it was when I was reading about Determination (adhimokkha) and Energy (Viriya) in the chapter on The Particulars in Nina's book 'Cetasikas'. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas11.html ------------------------------- "The Visuddhimagga ( XIV, 151) gives the following definition of adhimokkha: The act of resolving is resolution. It has the characteristic of conviction. Its function is not to grope. It is manifested as decisiveness. Its proximate cause is a thing to be convinced about. It should be regarded as like a boundary-post owing to its immovableness with regard to the object. The "Paramattha Manjusa" (489), the commentary to the Visuddhimagga, states that: " the act of resolving should be understood as the act of being convinced about an object". As well ...<> "We read in the Visuddhimagga that the function of viriya is to consolidate conascent states. Viriya strengthens, supports the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies so that they can carry out their work and do not "collapse"." --------------------------- So Adhimokkha (determination) and Viriya (energy) acting together could be seen as 'courage' in the sense that you mention of persevering with 'a right course of action'. Reading your post I experienced a 'fluctuation' in response - "yes, I agree" "no, I disagree" "that's a good bit" "uh-oh, not sure about that" ... Some bits I liked are: ". You aren't going to find much mention of `Courage' in the teachings because ALL of the teachings are about courage. Buddhism = Courage." "The Buddha's entire life is a testament to courage." One bit I definitely disagree with (and I think you may have written it more casually than I read it) is "Those who are not brave are not cut out to be Buddhist". I don't believe people have permanent characteristics. They are sometimes this, and sometimes that. Often in the same minute. My understanding is informed by an acceptance of time as unimaginably beginingless, rebirth as having occured uncountable times in many forms, kamma. and anatta. I am what I am (i.e. the sum total of my accumulations gathered in the long, long round of rebirths) and I cannot, quickly, be other than what I am, no matter how hard *I* strive. It is a very gradual process. I can be very brave in some situations. That is, I can stand for a principle and face criticism and derision even though I feel miserable, or angry, at the time. Usually I feel fear after the event, particularly if the threat was physical. But I do not think bravery or any emotion or mood is something solid that lasts more than a flickering mind moment before being replaced by many other wholesome (intending to keep the precepts, intending to abstain from breaking a precept) and unwholesome (anger, fear, misery, regret) moments in a neverending process. Interesting post James - I'm still thinking it through ... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Christine, > > I read your post about courage, and the replies, and I think I have > a unique perspective to add. Allow me to give you my input. > > The post of mine you were referring to was examining `fear' and in > this recent post you suggest that courage is the opposite of fear, > the `other side of the coin'. I would not completely agree with > that. I see the opposite of fear being `equanimity'; I believe the > opposite of courage is `doubt'. You were wondering where courage > occurred in the teachings of the Buddha, your post was > titled, "Searching for `Courage' in the teachings." Now, I really > ask this lighthearted and loving, have you heard the saying > about, "One who can't see the `forest' through the `trees'"? I > believe this is the case here. You aren't going to find much > mention of `Courage' in the teachings because ALL of the teachings > are about courage. Buddhism = Courage. Those who are not brave are > not cut out to be Buddhist. > > The Buddha's entire life is a testament to courage. And he had this > courage, as he explained, because he had conquered his doubt. > Courage is not a Buddhist quality for the individual to develop, and > isn't explained thus in Buddhist scripture, because `courage' is a > quality that is `other' and not `self'. In other words, other > people will see a brave person as `courageous', but > that `courageous' person typically won't see himself as anything > other than ordinary and plain. If a person views him/herself > as `courageous', than it is more than likely vanity and not > courage. The courageous person simply knows that he/she has no > doubt about the right course of action to take. He or she does it, > in the face of incredible odds, and then other people label that act > as courageous. Sure sounds like the Buddha and all those who choose > to follow his teachings, though his teachings run contrary to the > mores of predominate society. > > Actually, paradoxically, the scriptures do talk about courage quite > frequently; it just isn't called courage, it is called > the `Elimination of Doubt', which is one of the five hindrances to > the eightfold path and enlightenment (the other four being: Sensual > Desire, Ill-will, Sloth/Torpor, Restlessness/Remorse). I don't want > to quote numerous suttas about this subject, but allow me to quote > one of my favorite passages about doubt: > > "If there is a pot of water which is turbid, stirred up and muddy, > and this pot is put into a dark place, then a man with a normal > faculty of sight could not properly recognize and see the image of > his own face. In the same way, when one's mind is possessed by > doubt, overpowered by doubt, then one cannot properly see the escape > from doubt which has arisen; then one does not properly understand > one's own welfare, nor that of another, nor that of both; and also > texts memorized a long time ago do not come into one's mind, not to > speak of those not memorized." SN 46:55 > > If the Buddha had not conquered his doubt early on, there would not > be any such thing called `Buddhism'. Most people who would like to > become monks, like to meditate more often, like to be better people, > like to call him/herselves Buddhist, like to lead an ethical life, > like to be more generous, etc., etc., etc., but don't do this, > usually don't do these things because of doubt. Doubt in ourselves > and The Triple Gem is what we all must conquer if we are to achieve > true peace. (A good article on the Five Hindrances and how they can > be conquered is available here: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html#doubt) > > Allow me to end with one of my favorite Shakespearean lines related > to this subject, from 'The Tragedy of Macbeth': > > MACBETH. > If we should fail? > > LADY MACBETH. > We fail! > But screw your courage to the sticking-place, > And we'll not fail. > > (Wasn't for a good purpose in this case, but the same idea). > > Metta, James 16674 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 4:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi James. --- James wrote: > Sarah, > Hmmmm…I don't think I have done all of this for this group, actually > my posts are like baby talk compared to the scholarly input of your > key members, but I appreciate the compliment. I am getting > accustomed to my posts being dissected for response. I think most > of my meaning is lost when that is done, but I can understand why. > I don't think either of us are `drooling idiots', but I laughed at > the joke. .... ;-) Of course no one likes to be considered a ‘drooling idiot’ or ‘devoid of wisdom, drivellers’, but according to the definition in the Bhayabherava Sutta you referred to (MN4), I understand it would refer to all us lacking in ‘noble’ wisdom. As for any dissection of your posts, well, as you remind us, it is a discussion list....;-) ..... I’ve read the rest of your message with interest and appreciated the listing of the precepts from the vinaya. I didn’t see it as ‘hostile’ and understand you’ve considered this area carefully. It raises many points and considerations which I’m just going to reflect on for now. ..... >‘First of all, I have A LOT of respect for > monks. I visit the monks at my temple practically every week and do > many things for them. When I greet monks I wai; I make sure I don't > sit higher than they do; I wash their dishes after they eat; I clean > the temple for them; and I pay careful attention to what they say > even if it bores me to tears sometimes. Goodness gracious, I was > going to become a monk at one point! .... I appreciate this, James. Anumodana.......I have to laugh about the ‘even if it bores me to tears’...... at least here on DSG, you can ‘zap’ any of us that have that effect on you;-) Sarah ===== 16675 From: James Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:30am Subject: Re: Fear and Courage Christine, Glad you enjoyed the post. You write, "One bit I definitely disagree with (and I think you may have written it more casually than I read it) is "Those who are not brave are not cut out to be Buddhist" Yes, I didn't mean that sentence the way you took it. I was thinking, "Those who will not allow themselves to be brave are not cut out to be Buddhist." But I thought that was kinda wordy. I love 'punchlines' (Sarah got me on that one! :-). I don't believe that people are born 'brave'. In my opinion, bravery is the result of childhood upbringing for the most part and can be cultivated later in life if not established in early childhood; but this cultivation is much more difficult later in life and can facilitate the need for therapy since meditation alone would be incomplete. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi James, and All, > > I appreciate your reply very much. Especially the way you > feel 'doubt' is the opposite of 'courage'. When I first read it, I > disagreed immediately but could not rid myself of a niggling feeling > that it 'felt' right, and that I had seen something similar > recently. I eventually realised that it was when I was reading about > Determination (adhimokkha) and Energy (Viriya) in the chapter on The > Particulars in Nina's book 'Cetasikas'. > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas11.html > ------------------------------- > "The Visuddhimagga ( XIV, 151) gives the following definition of > adhimokkha: > The act of resolving is resolution. It has the characteristic of > conviction. Its function is not to grope. It is manifested as > decisiveness. Its proximate cause is a thing to be convinced about. > It should be regarded as like a boundary-post owing to its > immovableness with regard to the object. > The "Paramattha Manjusa" (489), the commentary to the Visuddhimagga, > states that: > " the act of resolving should be understood as the act of being > convinced about an object". > As well ...<> "We read in the Visuddhimagga that the function > of viriya is to consolidate conascent states. Viriya strengthens, > supports the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies so that > they can carry out their work and do not "collapse"." > --------------------------- > So Adhimokkha (determination) and Viriya (energy) acting together > could be seen as 'courage' in the sense that you mention of > persevering with 'a right course of action'. > Reading your post I experienced a 'fluctuation' in response - "yes, I > agree" "no, I disagree" "that's a good bit" "uh-oh, not sure about > that" ... > Some bits I liked are: ". You aren't going to find much > mention of `Courage' in the teachings because ALL of the teachings > are about courage. Buddhism = Courage." > "The Buddha's entire life is a testament to courage." > > One bit I definitely disagree with (and I think you may have written > it more casually than I read it) is "Those who are not brave are not > cut out to be Buddhist". I don't believe people have permanent > characteristics. They are sometimes this, and sometimes that. Often > in the same minute. My understanding is informed by an acceptance > of time as unimaginably beginingless, rebirth as having occured > uncountable times in many forms, kamma. and anatta. I am what I am > (i.e. the sum total of my accumulations gathered in the long, long > round of rebirths) and I cannot, quickly, be other than what I am, > no matter how hard *I* strive. It is a very gradual process. I can > be very brave in some situations. That is, I can stand for a > principle and face criticism and derision even though I feel > miserable, or angry, at the time. Usually I feel fear after the > event, particularly if the threat was physical. But I do not think > bravery or any emotion or mood is something solid that lasts more > than a flickering mind moment before being replaced by many other > wholesome (intending to keep the precepts, intending to abstain from > breaking a precept) and unwholesome (anger, fear, misery, regret) > moments in a neverending process. > > Interesting post James - I'm still thinking it through ... > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Christine, > > > > I read your post about courage, and the replies, and I think I have > > a unique perspective to add. Allow me to give you my input. > > > > The post of mine you were referring to was examining `fear' and in > > this recent post you suggest that courage is the opposite of fear, > > the `other side of the coin'. I would not completely agree with > > that. I see the opposite of fear being `equanimity'; I believe the > > opposite of courage is `doubt'. You were wondering where courage > > occurred in the teachings of the Buddha, your post was > > titled, "Searching for `Courage' in the teachings." Now, I really > > ask this lighthearted and loving, have you heard the saying > > about, "One who can't see the `forest' through the `trees'"? I > > believe this is the case here. You aren't going to find much > > mention of `Courage' in the teachings because ALL of the teachings > > are about courage. Buddhism = Courage. Those who are not brave > are > > not cut out to be Buddhist. > > > > The Buddha's entire life is a testament to courage. And he had > this > > courage, as he explained, because he had conquered his doubt. > > Courage is not a Buddhist quality for the individual to develop, > and > > isn't explained thus in Buddhist scripture, because `courage' is a > > quality that is `other' and not `self'. In other words, other > > people will see a brave person as `courageous', but > > that `courageous' person typically won't see himself as anything > > other than ordinary and plain. If a person views him/herself > > as `courageous', than it is more than likely vanity and not > > courage. The courageous person simply knows that he/she has no > > doubt about the right course of action to take. He or she does it, > > in the face of incredible odds, and then other people label that > act > > as courageous. Sure sounds like the Buddha and all those who > choose > > to follow his teachings, though his teachings run contrary to the > > mores of predominate society. > > > > Actually, paradoxically, the scriptures do talk about courage quite > > frequently; it just isn't called courage, it is called > > the `Elimination of Doubt', which is one of the five hindrances to > > the eightfold path and enlightenment (the other four being: Sensual > > Desire, Ill-will, Sloth/Torpor, Restlessness/Remorse). I don't > want > > to quote numerous suttas about this subject, but allow me to quote > > one of my favorite passages about doubt: > > > > "If there is a pot of water which is turbid, stirred up and muddy, > > and this pot is put into a dark place, then a man with a normal > > faculty of sight could not properly recognize and see the image of > > his own face. In the same way, when one's mind is possessed by > > doubt, overpowered by doubt, then one cannot properly see the > escape > > from doubt which has arisen; then one does not properly understand > > one's own welfare, nor that of another, nor that of both; and also > > texts memorized a long time ago do not come into one's mind, not to > > speak of those not memorized." SN 46:55 > > > > If the Buddha had not conquered his doubt early on, there would not > > be any such thing called `Buddhism'. Most people who would like to > > become monks, like to meditate more often, like to be better > people, > > like to call him/herselves Buddhist, like to lead an ethical life, > > like to be more generous, etc., etc., etc., but don't do this, > > usually don't do these things because of doubt. Doubt in ourselves > > and The Triple Gem is what we all must conquer if we are to achieve > > true peace. (A good article on the Five Hindrances and how they > can > > be conquered is available here: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html#doubt) > > > > Allow me to end with one of my favorite Shakespearean lines related > > to this subject, from 'The Tragedy of Macbeth': > > > > MACBETH. > > If we should fail? > > > > LADY MACBETH. > > We fail! > > But screw your courage to the sticking-place, > > And we'll not fail. > > > > (Wasn't for a good purpose in this case, but the same idea). > > > > Metta, James 16676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, . Pali texts co and subco. Hi Larry, As you saw, I also have Qu about recollection of kusala. Always something to learn! op 02-11-2002 19:35 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: I guess for now I will be satisfied with simply > saying sati is recollection of kusala and satipatthana is directing that > kusala toward nibbana, unless you have some qualms about this. N: As to your last sentence: The development of satipatthana, I believe, is the development of right understanding of any nama or rupa apperaing now, even if it is akusala, such as doubt, fear, impatience. All the accumulated kusala is never lost, it is a supporting condition for the development of panna. But it is important not to take kusala for my kusala. The first goal, reached at the first stage of enlightenment is the eradication of the wrong view of self. Your other qu: [Tika] Drawing distinctions, it is said: Body and feeling are the cause of zest [assadassa karana] What does assadassa mean? Is it the same as piti ('joyful interest')? N: assaada is enjoyment, satisfaction. We read in the Suttas: what is the enjoyment in visible object, etc. What is the escape: nissara.na. Nina 16677 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18,jhana and insight. Hi Larry, op 30-10-2002 01:35 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Way 16: For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing > of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of > the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of > this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the > second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the > Path to Purity. > > Way 18: [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The > keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross > subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of > feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of > absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption > reached with the material body as subject. > > Hi all, > > I am taking this to mean for the dull or keen-witted man who wants to > practice jhana, taking body or feeling as object of jhana is the path to > purity. Is this saying that jhana using body or feeling as object > qualifies as satipatthana but using a kasina, for example, does not? Or > is it just an example of alternate uses of objects of satipatthana? Or N: After someone has attained jhana he develops insight of, for example the happy feeling that arose with jhanacitta and other jhanafactors that appear. At such moments it is the development of satipatthana. I believe that this is the meaning of the above quoted texts. We have to distinguish moments of development and attainment of jhana, and after that moments of development of insight: when nama and rupa appearing at the present moment are the objects. your Q :getting at the mental reflex: the nimitta in the development of samatha. A mental image of the meditation subject. Nina. 16678 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, Comm. eradication. Hi Larry, There are four kinds of ahara, nutriment: physical nutriment, contact, volition (feeds rebirth), citta: rebirth-consciousness: feeds nama and rupa, life goes on. The four Arousings, thus, satipatthana, finally leads to the eradication of all defilements: the floods, etc. . op 03-11-2002 05:00 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Further these Four Arousings of Mindfulness were taught not only for the > purpose of casting out the four illusions, but for getting rid of the > four floods, bonds, outflowings, knots, clingings, wrong courses, and > the penetration of fourfold nutriment, too. This is according to the > method of exegesis in the Nettipakarana. > > Hi all, > > Here is something from Visuddhimagga XIV par. 226: > > And in particular, one who sees internal materiality as foul (ugly) > fully understands nutriment consisting of physical nutriment. He > abandons the perversion [of perceiving] beauty in the foul (ugly), he > crosses the flood of sense desire, he is loosed from the bond of sense > desire, he becomes canker free as regards the canker of sense desire, he > breaks the bodily tie of covetousness. He does not cling with > sense-desire clinging. > > One who sees feeling as pain fully understands nutriment consisting of > contact. He abandons the perversion of perceiving pleasure in the > painful. He crosses the flood of becoming. He is loosed from the bond of > becoming. He becomes caker free as regards the canker of becoming. He > breaks the bodily tie of ill-will. He does not cling with > rites-and-ritual clinging. > > One who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands > nutriment consisting of mental volition. He abandons the perversion of > perceiving self in the not-self. He crosses the flood of views. He is > loosed from the bond of views. He breaks the bodiy tie of > interpretations (insistence) that 'This is the truth'. He does not cling > with self-theory clinging. > > One who sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands nutriment > consisting of consciousness. He abandons the perversion of perceiving > permanence in the impermanent. He crosses the flood of ignorance. He is > loosed from the bond of ignorance. He breaks the bodily tie of holding > to rites and rituals. He does not [cling with false-] view clinging. > -----------------end quote > > L: So seeing consciousness as impermanent, perception and formation as > not self, feeling as pain, and internal materiality as foul is, in > brief, the sum total of the vipassana aspect of satipatthana. Correct? 16679 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Sarah, My view, at the moment, is if someone relies on a teacher, they should follow the instructions of the teacher; if they don't, they should do whatever seems reasonable (kusala). It seems to me A. Sujin's approach to teaching satipatthana is don't stay with one satipatthana practice in a disciplined way because that will reinforce 'self' view. Just follow the moment. Whatever arises, that is your 'object'. This is fine with me, especially as it is part of a larger program of immersion in abhidhamma, but it isn't the only way. Most teachers teach a disciplined practice and the commentary certainly suggests that a person take one practice as a main practice. If 'self' view is a problem, take that as object. Try to find the self. The main value for me in this section of the commentary is that it shows me what to look for. If I am practicing a 'body' or 'feeling' practice (there's no 'practise' in Am. english) then I should relax into tranquility and perhaps remind myself of the disgusting qualities of the body or the disappointing quality of feeling. If I am looking at states of mind (or consciousness in general ?) I should be looking for their impermanence. If I am looking at views or compounds I should be looking for their 'self'. This is all a bit sketchy in my mind, but I am sure we will gain a better understanding as we go along. Larry 16680 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, . Pali texts co and subco. Hi Nina, Thanks for your reply. I think we're in agreement on the general purpose of satipatthana. As for 'assadassa' I guess we can at least conclude it isn't the same as piti. Other translators translate 'piti' as 'zest' but the zest that is caused by body and feeling isn't piti, an enlightenment factor and quality in some of the jhanas. Is 'assaada' (enjoyment, satisfaction) a form of 'assaadassa'? Btw, I did a search and found out it is also a girl's name. http://www.kabalarians.com/female/assadassa.htm Larry 16681 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18,jhana and insight. Thanks again Nina. "Mental reflex' = nimita. Larry 16682 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, Comm. eradication. Hi Nina, What do you think about this question: "L: So seeing consciousness as impermanent, perception and formation as not self, feeling as pain, and internal materiality as foul is, in brief, the sum total of the vipassana aspect of satipatthana. Correct?" Is the fine discrimination of all the various dhammas in the abhidhamma really necessary? Or could we just see whatever arises as foul, painful, impermanent, or not self? Larry 16683 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 6:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 --- Dear Howard, I am not sure I understand your posts on Nibbana. Are you suggesting that after the death of an arahant that awareness still continues? If so which of the five aggreagtes is this awareness? Is it permanent or is it still arising and ceasing? | Robert > In a message dated 11/1/02 11:08:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > > > The fuel is craving > > and ignorance. The fire is nama and rupa (ie the khandas). Once > > that fuel is no longer being added (upon attainment of arahant) > > the fire will soon die out(khandha parinibbana > > Arahant is a term useful to designate a stream of nama and rupa > > (past, present or future) that no longer has avijja (and hence > > no other defilements). > > Before cuti citta(death moment) arises this stream is like a > > fire where no > > more fuel is added; at cuti citta the fire is finally > > extinguished. > > > ============================ > Howard: How, please, is that different from the atheist/materialist > annihilationist picture of death? [Unless, of course, the cessation of > namarupa is not the cessation of awareness in *every* possible sense, but > only of a particular, dualistic sort of defiled awareness flowing out of > unexpired kamma.] > Some people will answer that this would be an annihilationist view > only if to begin with there is a self which is annihilated at death. But I > find that response to be inadequate, because a complete cessation of > awareness in every possible sense, even a non-samsaric sense, is > annihilationist enough for me. > It seems to me that the passages in the Udana and elsewhere suggest a > meaning for nibbana that is something else, something that is neither the > becoming of the worlding nor the nothingness of absolute death. And, in fact, > throughout the Sutta Pitaka, the most common characterizations of nibbana are > that it is the end of dukkha and the end of the three poisons. Also, it seems > to me that if the death-simile for nibbana had been the core understanding > presented by the Buddha, it would have led to words other than 'Buddha' and > 'bodhi' - it would have led to words which instead of denoting an awakened > one and the awakened state would signify nothingness and annihilation. > > With metta, > Howard 16684 From: jaran jai-nhuknan Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 6:41pm Subject: Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b Hi Chris, please see below. Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 20:48:13 -0000 From: "christine_forsyth" Subject: Practice on DSG Dear Group, I found the two posts about Roberts' meeting with Acharn Somporn very interesting, but I have a few questions about death and practice and hope someone may have the time and inclination to comment on them ... > From the first post :Meeting with Acharn somporn" "He said that reading the texts is one aspect but only by understanding sabhava -realities - directly can there be proper understanding. Everything is dhamma , whether it be seeing or hearing, colour or sound, hardness, heat, even avijja (ignorance) is dhamma. There is no one,no being there at all but because of wrong view the characteristics (lakkhana ) which are simply conditioned dhamma are taken as self. This is very deep and subtle sakkya ditthi shows itself by clinging to wrong practice. He said if there is real understanding of sabhava dhamma then there is no fear of death because there is no self in sabhava." Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify for me how 'right practice' would occur in the everyday life of a buddhist today? (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in everyday life of a buddhist today would be defined? ---------------------------------- I enjoyed the posts as well. Roberts always has interesting points to share with us. Regarding the question above, it is an important question. I am sure many have addressed this very point many times although it may not have been in the way that answers your question directly. Before answering your question, let me tell you my view of 'right practice'. Right understanding encompasses right practice. IMHO, there is only one practice in Buddhism, and it is a noun, practice. Practice refers to the development of right understanding, meaning the growth of right understanding, not the making or improvement. :-) This is because right understanding is a dhamma; it arises due to conditions, falls away immediately, contains its own characteristics, and cannot be controlled. This is why it cannot be 'developed' (by us). The right practice of a Buddhist today is the same as that of those in the Buddha's time since the right understanding is always right understanding (although of many levels). However, what makes today different from the Buddha's time is the degree of wrong-view and other akusala dhammas. According to the Tipitaka and from my observations, we are full of, and affected by, more akusala dhammas than kusala dhammas. We have been influenced by the enemies of right understanding for a long time. Let's take this life as an example, we have been working hard for happiness, wealth, recognition, achievements all our life because wrong-view tell us there is 'Self'. As you know, the idea of Self is due to three things: wrong-view, attachment and conceit, and the idea of Self can be so subtle what we cannot 'feel' it or it can be very apparent. We don't have to think that there is a 'Self'-- it's automatic. As automatic as we see when we open our eyes, when we wake up, there is already idea of Self, how subtle it may be. Then we learned that people, things, concept are synthesized in our head due to ignorance, attachment and anger. Furthermore, everything around us is dhamma with anicca, dhukka and anatta quality. (we can be specific about anatta here, but let's leave it for the future discussion). Soon we learn that the 'Self' is due to, among other things, wrong-view, an akusala dhamma, a very bad thing. This is one degree of right understanding--listening and perhaps contemplating. Now because we love our Self and we want to be good and happy, we have to "do something" to get rid of Self and wrong-view. Automatically, being influenced by the enemies of right understanding, we have to be as successful as we are in the worldlies, so we set out to find a way. As you can see, this is under influence of "Self", but many of us don't know it or don't have enough courage to admit it. As you can see, the right understanding in one level does not easily translate to another (higher) level of understanding. We read all about the 'concept' of dhamma and understand most of it. However, when we come back to the 'world' in stead of sticking to we leave our understanding in the books we read (in our case, in the emails :-), we often go back to our 'usual': the influence of the enemies of right understanding--often lobha, attachment. With the attachment to Self, we go after kusala dhamma, metta, sati, panna, insights, vipassana nana, and even Nibbana, and we can't help feeling sorry (or guilty) when akusala dhamma arise. Often we tell ourselves (or Self) that we do it for the higher level of understanding, but what we fail to realize (or admit) is that we are going after good kusala dhamma and running away from akusala dhamma because of the idea of 'Self'. This is often because we are not being very 'honest' (to ourselves or just for the sake of dhamma). This is where tattaramajjhatattaa (one of general wholesome cetasikas) comes in. Until we are brave enough to accept any dhamma arising for us to study, until we are brave enough to study the quality of Self when we feel we have to do something for higher level of understanding, until we are brave enough to stick to what we study and understand in the book, and until we are brave enough to reason everything we read, listen, learn, observe, it is hard for the 'right practice' to grow or even arise. To me, facing the idea of 'Self' in daily life seems the hardest thing, and most critical, of the whole study. If you ask Sarah this question, I am sure she would say ''right practice' is anything that is based on 'right understanding.'' This is probably because you cannot put your finger on the 'right practice' since it is the quality of mind not visible to the eye as A Sujin once said that 'by looking, you cannot tell a person to whom satipatthana has arisen from others because noone knows his mind'. This stresses the importance of being very honest to oneself, since no one knows the quality his mind better than himself. We can fool someone else but not ourselves. I am digressing. Now that you know what my 'right practice' is, let's try to answer your question. Simply put, 'right practice' occurs in daily life that same way that lobha and other dhammas do--when there are conditions for it....so natural. And the prominent condition is probably right understanding. Based on the same principles, the 'wrong practice' can be simply defined as anything that is 'done' based on the idea of Self (due to attachment, wrong view, conceit as well as other akusala dhamma) whether one realizes it or not. Who can tell if it's right practice or a wrong one? Nobody knows that better than ourselves. Please note that I think that 'right practice' includes more than satipatthana (we have to ask Nina, Roberts K, Kom, Num, Jon and others I don't remember the names, sorry) according to AN8,2 (panna sutta), among others. Chris, may I say I always enjoy your posts. I wish I could be half as articulate as you are. With appreciation, Jaran 16685 From: James Mitchell Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 6:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Robert and All, OUCH!!! The question of questions! The long salami, the whole enchalada, the big cheese! I eagerly await how Howard will answer this question! This is more exciting than any action adventure movie yet! Get your popcorn ready! I don't mean to put the pressure on Howard; but I bet he has never gotten a question like this before! This is a question that even the Buddha would avoid answering for 45 years! Anyone want to vote on how he should answer? If so, dial 1-800-BUDDHIST-AMERICAN-IDOL. Calls are $2.00 a minute, but well worth it! :-) Metta, James --- rjkjp1 wrote: > --- > Dear Howard, > I am not sure I understand your posts on Nibbana. > Are you suggesting > that after the death of an arahant that awareness > still continues? If > so which of the five aggreagtes is this awareness? > Is it permanent or > is it still arising and ceasing? | > Robert > > > > In a message dated 11/1/02 11:08:03 PM Eastern > Standard Time, > > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > > > > > > The fuel is craving > > > and ignorance. The fire is nama and rupa (ie the > khandas). Once > > > that fuel is no longer being added (upon > attainment of arahant) > > > the fire will soon die out(khandha parinibbana > > > Arahant is a term useful to designate a stream > of nama and rupa > > > (past, present or future) that no longer has > avijja (and hence > > > no other defilements). > > > Before cuti citta(death moment) arises this > stream is like a > > > fire where no > > > more fuel is added; at cuti citta the fire is > finally > > > extinguished. > > > > > ============================ > > Howard: How, please, is that different from > the > atheist/materialist > > annihilationist picture of death? [Unless, of > course, the > cessation of > > namarupa is not the cessation of awareness in > *every* possible > sense, but > > only of a particular, dualistic sort of defiled > awareness flowing > out of > > unexpired kamma.] > > Some people will answer that this would be > an > annihilationist view > > only if to begin with there is a self which is > annihilated at > death. But I > > find that response to be inadequate, because a > complete cessation > of > > awareness in every possible sense, even a > non-samsaric sense, is > > annihilationist enough for me. > > It seems to me that the passages in the > Udana and elsewhere > suggest a > > meaning for nibbana that is something else, > something that is > neither the > > becoming of the worlding nor the nothingness of > absolute death. > And, in fact, > > throughout the Sutta Pitaka, the most common > characterizations of > nibbana are > > that it is the end of dukkha and the end of the > three poisons. > Also, it seems > > to me that if the death-simile for nibbana had > been the core > understanding > > presented by the Buddha, it would have led to > words other > than 'Buddha' and > > 'bodhi' - it would have led to words which instead > of denoting an > awakened > > one and the awakened state would signify > nothingness and > annihilation. > > > > 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) > > ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16686 From: James Mitchell Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b --- jaran jai-nhuknan wrote: > Hi Chris, please see below. > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 20:48:13 -0000 > From: "christine_forsyth" > Subject: Practice on DSG > > Dear Group, > > I found the two posts about Roberts' meeting with > Acharn Somporn very > interesting, Is this Ajahn Somporn? The well-recognized meditation teacher who is now the abbot of: Wat Buddhamahamunee Buddhist Meditation Center 2501 Clover Lane Arlington, TX 76015 I would be very interested to know. He was my meditation teacher for four years and he has grown in stature/fame since then. However, in Thai Buddhist circles, things change very quickly. Thanks for any information you may have. Metta, James but I have a few questions about death > and practice and > hope someone may have the time and inclination to > comment on them ... > > > From the first post :Meeting with Acharn somporn" > "He said that reading the texts is one aspect but > only by understanding > sabhava -realities - directly can there be proper > understanding. > Everything is dhamma , whether it be seeing or > hearing, colour or > sound, hardness, heat, even avijja (ignorance) is > dhamma. There is no > one,no being there at all but because of wrong view > the > characteristics (lakkhana ) which are simply > conditioned dhamma are > taken as self. This is very deep and subtle sakkya > ditthi shows > itself by clinging to wrong practice. > He said if there is real understanding of sabhava > dhamma then there > is no fear of death because there is no self in > sabhava." > > Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify > for me how 'right > practice' would occur in the everyday life of a > buddhist today? > (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in > everyday > life of a buddhist today would be defined? > ---------------------------------- > > I enjoyed the posts as well. Roberts always has > interesting points to share > with us. > > Regarding the question above, it is an important > question. I am sure many > have addressed this very point many times although > it may not have been in > the way that answers your question directly. Before > answering your question, > let me tell you my view of 'right practice'. > > Right understanding encompasses right practice. > IMHO, there is only one > practice in Buddhism, and it is a noun, practice. > Practice refers to the > development of right understanding, meaning the > growth of right > understanding, not the making or improvement. :-) > This is because right > understanding is a dhamma; it arises due to > conditions, falls away > immediately, contains its own characteristics, and > cannot be controlled. > This is why it cannot be 'developed' (by us). > > The right practice of a Buddhist today is the same > as that of those in the > Buddha's time since the right understanding is > always right understanding > (although of many levels). However, what makes today > different from the > Buddha's time is the degree of wrong-view and other > akusala dhammas. > According to the Tipitaka and from my observations, > we are full of, and > affected by, more akusala dhammas than kusala > dhammas. We have been > influenced by the enemies of right understanding for > a long time. Let's take > this life as an example, we have been working hard > for happiness, wealth, > recognition, achievements all our life because > wrong-view tell us there is > 'Self'. As you know, the idea of Self is due to > three things: wrong-view, > attachment and conceit, and the idea of Self can be > so subtle what we cannot > 'feel' it or it can be very apparent. We don't have > to think that there is a > 'Self'-- it's automatic. As automatic as we see when > we open our eyes, when > we wake up, there is already idea of Self, how > subtle it may be. > > Then we learned that people, things, concept are > synthesized in our head due > to ignorance, attachment and anger. Furthermore, > everything around us is > dhamma with anicca, dhukka and anatta quality. (we > can be specific about > anatta here, but let's leave it for the future > discussion). > > Soon we learn that the 'Self' is due to, among other > things, wrong-view, an > akusala dhamma, a very bad thing. This is one degree > of right > understanding--listening and perhaps contemplating. > Now because we love our > Self and we want to be good and happy, we have to > "do something" to get rid > of Self and wrong-view. Automatically, being > influenced by the enemies of > right understanding, we have to be as successful as > we are in the worldlies, > so we set out to find a way. As you can see, this is > under influence of > "Self", but many of us don't know it or don't have > enough courage to admit > it. > > As you can see, the right understanding in one level > does not easily > translate to another (higher) level of > understanding. We read all about the > 'concept' of dhamma and understand most of it. > However, when we come back to > the 'world' in stead of sticking to we leave our > understanding in the books > we read (in our case, in the emails :-), we often go > back to our 'usual': > the influence of the enemies of right > understanding--often lobha, > attachment. With the attachment to Self, we go after > kusala dhamma, metta, > sati, panna, insights, vipassana nana, and even > Nibbana, and we can't help > feeling sorry (or guilty) when akusala dhamma arise. > Often we tell ourselves > (or Self) that we do it for the higher level of > understanding, but what we > fail to realize (or admit) is that we are going > after good kusala dhamma and > running away from akusala dhamma because of the idea > of 'Self'. > > This is often because we are not being very 'honest' > (to ourselves or just > for the sake of dhamma). This is where > tattaramajjhatattaa (one of general > wholesome cetasikas) comes in. Until we are brave > enough to accept any > dhamma arising for us to study, until we are brave > enough to study the > quality of Self when we feel we have to do something > for higher level of > understanding, until we are brave enough to stick to > what we study and > understand in the book, and until we are brave > enough to reason everything > we read, listen, learn, observe, it is hard for the > 'right practice' to grow > or even arise. > > To me, facing the idea of 'Self' in daily life seems > the hardest thing, and > most critical, of the whole study. > > If you ask Sarah this question, I am sure she would > say ''right practice' is > anything that is based on 'right understanding.'' > > This is probably because you cannot put your finger > on the 'right practice' > since it is the quality of mind not visible to the > eye as A Sujin once said > that 'by looking, you cannot tell a person to whom > satipatthana has arisen > from others because noone knows his mind'. > > This stresses the importance of being very honest to > oneself, since no one > knows the quality his mind better than himself. We > can fool someone else but > not ourselves. > > I am digressing. Now that you know what my 'right > practice' is, let's try to > answer your question. Simply put, 'right practice' > occurs in daily life that > same way that lobha and other dhammas do--when there > are conditions for > it....so natural. And the prominent condition is > probably right > understanding. > > Based on the same principles, the 'wrong practice' > can be simply defined as > anything that is 'done' based on the idea of Self > (due to attachment, wrong > view, conceit as well as other akusala dhamma) > whether one realizes it or > not. Who can tell if it's right practice or a wrong > one? Nobody knows that > better than ourselves. > > Please note that I think that 'right practice' > includes more than > satipatthana (we have to ask Nina, Roberts K, Kom, > Num, Jon and others I > don't remember the names, sorry) according to AN8,2 > (panna sutta), among > others. > > Chris, may I say I always enjoy your posts. I wish I > could be half as > articulate as you are. > > With appreciation, > Jaran > > ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16687 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 8:40pm Subject: Re: Buddha's Parinibbana: "Like a flame's unbinding was the liberation of awareness" --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > A liberated awareness is still awareness. It is well described as = > vi~n~nanam anidassanam anantam sabbato paham (translated as "discernment, > non-manifestive, infinite, accessible from all round"), and this in answer to > the question of where the four great elements stop without remainder. [The > preceding is taken from the Kevaddha Sutta of the Digha Nikaya as translated > by Peter Harvey. Maurice Walshe translates it as "Where consciousness is > signless, boundless, all luminous"] > The following is the ending of the Parinibbana Sutta (taken from ATI), > translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: > ************************** > When the Blessed One was totally Unbound, simultaneously with the total > Unbinding, Ven. Anuruddha uttered this verse: > < > > he endured the pain. > > Like a flame's unbinding > > was the liberation > > of awareness. > ************************ >Dear Howard, You might remember an earlier post from Suan where he explained htis in some detail: He wrote, 1. PARINIBBANA COMMENTARY PALI "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati attho." "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality like the lamp without fuel." Carimacittanirodho – termination of the last mind Apannattikabhaavo - the state of undefined reality Buddhaghosa's explanation of `parinibbutaa' includes the unmistakable expression `carimacittanirodhena – by termination of the last mind' on the death of an Arahant. The last mind in a lifetime is the dying consciousness (cuticittam), which is, by the way, the finish line of `bhavanga cittam – the life-cause consciousness.' The term `bhavanga' is made up of two words `bhava+anga'. Bhava means life or sentient existence. Anga means component or cause. Thus, bhavanga means life-cause or life-component, or the cause of sentient existence. Bhavanga cittam is the consciousness that makes the sentient existence possible. It causes and perpetuates sentient existence. On the death of a sentient being who hasn't attained Arahatta awakening, the linking consciousness (patisandhi cittam) immediately follows the dying consciousness for a rebirth. Why immediately? It is because we can't suspend the bhavanga cittam in a limbo state. The linking consciousness is the start line of the life-cause consciousness (bhavanga cittam) in a lifetime. In other words, the difference between an Arahant and a non-Arahant is the termination of the life-cause consciousness for the Arahant and the perpetuation of the life-cause consciousness for the non- Arahant. An Arahant terminates the life-cause consciousness while ordinary sentient beings perpetuate the life-cause consciousnesses. The death of an Arahant is the termination of bhavanga cittam, the life-cause consciousness. In other words, the Parinibbaana of an Arahant is the end of the sentient existence. PARINIBBANA SUBCOMMENTARY Part Two Ends Here. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw 16688 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 9:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Larry (& Jaran a little), I understand what you are saying. You may be surprised to hear this, but I don’t actually think it’s very helpful to rely on a teacher or to just follow instructions from anyone, no matter how well regarded they are. I think we need to listen to what seems helpful at the time, consider carefully as to whether it really makes sense for us and test it out in daily life. This also applies to what we read in the suttas and the abhidhamma. I know I referred a lot to K.Sujin in my post to you-(I said to Jon later that there was too much K.Sujin for Larry;-). This was because I was reporting back to others directly from discussions (according to how I heard and understood at the time) and I wished to give the credit/clarification where it was due. It doesn’t mean anyone should just take it as ‘gospel’ truth or follow blindly;-) I think, Jaran (great to read you after your loooong break btw), that I understand ‘right practice’ in daily life to refer to any moments of kusala of any kind - sila, dana or bhavana. If we’re discussing it in the context of the satipatthana sutta, however, then I’d say that ‘right practice’(patipada) refers to moments of awareness, accompanied by rt. understanding of one of the 4 satipatthanas. Larry, I don’t think it is a question of being disciplined or not. Awareness can be aware of any dhamma, even whilst lazing in the sun or watching a movie.You mention that the commentary suggests taking one practice as a main practice and I think this is a good example of just how un-simple the suttas really are. We’re reading the same sutta and the same commentary and sub-commentary. I don’t read it as suggesting anyone take any practice or select any object. How is this possible when there is no self to ‘take’ and dhammas arising are conditioned and anatta? I know that when you talk about ‘I’ it is just for convenience, but still, in this phrase, for example:“If I am looking at views or compounds I should be looking for their 'self'”, what is the “I” looking and what is the “self” it is looking for? Is it necessary to separate the knowledge gained from abhidhamma from that of the suttas? Shouldn’t the understanding gained from other parts of the Teachings be applied when we read a sutta? As you say, hopefully we’ll learn more as we go along. I feel very indebted to you for raising so many points and questions and for checking and clarifying at each point. It’s a condition for a lot of helpful consideration for me. You may also be surprised to hear that I learn a lot from your sincere,constructive and helpful approach too and particularly from the lack of evident ‘fear’ or mana (conceit) when it comes to raising these points or having any ignorance revealed. I believe this is the way for understanding and rt practice to develop. In appreciation. Sarah p.s. I think you’ll hear when different people go away and we all trust you to use your judgment as to whether to slow down installments, break or continue as you think fit. Nina will be away for the longest period, but others may help out in the meantime.... ================================================= 16689 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/4/02 9:34:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > I am not sure I understand your posts on Nibbana. Are you suggesting > that after the death of an arahant that awareness still continues? If > so which of the five aggreagtes is this awareness? Is it permanent or > is it still arising and ceasing? | > Robert > ======================== I don't know exactly what "reality" is. Nibbana, the absence of dukkha and of the three poisons, leaves that which is exposed as it really is. Now, *what* exatly that is I don't know. I doubt that, in fact, it is even describable. I think that anything we can talk about is not it. Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean vi~n~nana, the discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama includes nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness of absence, absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely foreign to anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as to be not even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but something totally "other". All that I definitely believe is that nibbana is not absolute nothingness, and that an arahant, both before and after death, is, at essence, indescribable, untraceable, and ungraspable, but not nothing. 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) 16690 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha's Parinibbana: "Like a flame's unbinding was the liberat... Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/4/02 11:41:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, all - > > > > A liberated awareness is still awareness. It is well described as = > > > >vi~n~nanam anidassanam anantam sabbato paham (translated > as "discernment, > >non-manifestive, infinite, accessible from all round"), and this in > answer to > >the question of where the four great elements stop without > remainder. [The > >preceding is taken from the Kevaddha Sutta of the Digha Nikaya as > translated > >by Peter Harvey. Maurice Walshe translates it as "Where > consciousness is > >signless, boundless, all luminous"] > > The following is the ending of the Parinibbana Sutta (taken from > ATI), > >translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: > >************************** > >When the Blessed One was totally Unbound, simultaneously with the > total > >Unbinding, Ven. Anuruddha uttered this verse: > >< > >> he endured the pain. > >>Like a flame's unbinding > >> was the liberation > >> of awareness. > >************************ > >Dear Howard, > You might remember an earlier post from Suan where he explained htis > in some detail: > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I remember it. I just don't buy it. It essentially makes the death of an arahant into the same thing as materialists consider to be the death of any human or animal - DEATH, absolute, complete, and final, a complete cessation in *every* sense. And I see no reason to value such. Were I a materialist I wouldn't *fear* death - there would be nothing to fear. I just wouldn't consider it a worthwhile goal. And if that is what parinibbana is, then I wouldn't consider that a worthwhile goal either - nothing to fear, but nothing to value either. What is of value to me is the complete and utter cessation of ignorance, craving, and aversion, and hence of all that is unsatisfactory. =========================== With metta, Howard He wrote,> > 1. PARINIBBANA COMMENTARY PALI > > "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa > khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa > khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi > parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati > attho." > > "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete > extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of > defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and > the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical > machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). > It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality > like the lamp without fuel." > > Carimacittanirodho – termination of the last mind > Apannattikabhaavo - the state of undefined reality > > Buddhaghosa's explanation of `parinibbutaa' includes the > unmistakable expression `carimacittanirodhena – by termination of the > last mind' on the death of an Arahant. > > The last mind in a lifetime is the dying consciousness (cuticittam), > which is, by the way, the finish line of `bhavanga cittam – > the life-cause consciousness.' > > The term `bhavanga' is made up of two words `bhava+anga'. Bhava > means > life or sentient existence. Anga means component or cause. Thus, > bhavanga means life-cause or life-component, or the cause of sentient > existence. Bhavanga cittam is the consciousness that makes the > sentient existence possible. It causes and perpetuates sentient > existence. > > On the death of a sentient being who hasn't attained Arahatta > awakening, the linking consciousness (patisandhi cittam) immediately > follows the dying consciousness for a rebirth. Why immediately? It is > because we can't suspend the bhavanga cittam in a limbo state. > The linking consciousness is the start line of the life-cause > consciousness (bhavanga cittam) in a lifetime. > > In other words, the difference between an Arahant and a non-Arahant > is the termination of the life-cause consciousness for the Arahant > and the perpetuation of the life-cause consciousness for the non- > Arahant. > > An Arahant terminates the life-cause consciousness while ordinary > sentient beings perpetuate the life-cause consciousnesses. > > The death of an Arahant is the termination of bhavanga cittam, the > life-cause consciousness. In other words, the Parinibbaana of an > Arahant is the end of the sentient existence. > > PARINIBBANA SUBCOMMENTARY Part Two Ends Here. > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > /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) 16691 From: James Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Robert and Howard, A member wrote to me and suggested that this post may be interpreted as sarcastic and that it isn't 'Right Speech'. I apologize that it could be seen that way. That was definitely not my intention. I was just being lighthearted and having fun. Even though I am more serious about Buddhism than anyone I know, I am really not that 'serious' about it; if you know what I mean. :-) I apologize if this post caused either of you any undue stress. Metta, James :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Robert and All, > > OUCH!!! The question of questions! The long salami, > the whole enchalada, the big cheese! I eagerly await > how Howard will answer this question! This is more > exciting than any action adventure movie yet! Get > your popcorn ready! I don't mean to put the pressure > on Howard; but I bet he has never gotten a question > like this before! This is a question that even the > Buddha would avoid answering for 45 years! > > Anyone want to vote on how he should answer? If so, > dial 1-800-BUDDHIST-AMERICAN-IDOL. Calls are $2.00 a > minute, but well worth it! :-) > > Metta, James > > --- rjkjp1 wrote: > > --- > > Dear Howard, > > I am not sure I understand your posts on Nibbana. > > Are you suggesting > > that after the death of an arahant that awareness > > still continues? If > > so which of the five aggreagtes is this awareness? > > Is it permanent or > > is it still arising and ceasing? | > > Robert > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/1/02 11:08:03 PM Eastern > > Standard Time, > > > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > > > > > > > > > The fuel is craving > > > > and ignorance. The fire is nama and rupa (ie the > > khandas). Once > > > > that fuel is no longer being added (upon > > attainment of arahant) > > > > the fire will soon die out(khandha parinibbana > > > > Arahant is a term useful to designate a stream > > of nama and rupa > > > > (past, present or future) that no longer has > > avijja (and hence > > > > no other defilements). > > > > Before cuti citta(death moment) arises this > > stream is like a > > > > fire where no > > > > more fuel is added; at cuti citta the fire is > > finally > > > > extinguished. > > > > > > > ============================ > > > Howard: How, please, is that different from > > the > > atheist/materialist > > > annihilationist picture of death? [Unless, of > > course, the > > cessation of > > > namarupa is not the cessation of awareness in > > *every* possible > > sense, but > > > only of a particular, dualistic sort of defiled > > awareness flowing > > out of > > > unexpired kamma.] > > > Some people will answer that this would be > > an > > annihilationist view > > > only if to begin with there is a self which is > > annihilated at > > death. But I > > > find that response to be inadequate, because a > > complete cessation > > of > > > awareness in every possible sense, even a > > non-samsaric sense, is > > > annihilationist enough for me. > > > It seems to me that the passages in the > > Udana and elsewhere > > suggest a > > > meaning for nibbana that is something else, > > something that is > > neither the > > > becoming of the worlding nor the nothingness of > > absolute death. > > And, in fact, > > > throughout the Sutta Pitaka, the most common > > characterizations of > > nibbana are > > > that it is the end of dukkha and the end of the > > three poisons. > > Also, it seems > > > to me that if the death-simile for nibbana had > > been the core > > understanding > > > presented by the Buddha, it would have led to > > words other > > than 'Buddha' and > > > 'bodhi' - it would have led to words which instead > > of denoting an > > awakened > > > one and the awakened state would signify > > nothingness and > > annihilation. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard 16692 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi KKT & Rahula, Thanks for raising this verse and your comments: > > KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: > > > > O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. > > Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > > there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > > Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > > so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > > > > > > This definition could easily lead > > one to think that Nibbana is atta > > since one meaning of atta is that > > something << exists by itself >> and > > is << independent >> of other things. > > > > If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> > > then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> > > and << independent >> of everything? --- rahula_80 wrote: > Hi, > "In a psychological sense, a design could be 'unmade' or 'dissolved' > by shifting one's attention to its components. Even so, 'what is born' > (jaatam), 'become' (bhuutam), 'made' (katam) and 'compounded' > (samkhatam) is transformed into a 'not-born', 'not-become', 'not-made' > and 'not-compounded' state by a penetrative insight into its causes > and conditions. ..... I don’t understand nibbana to be ‘atta’ in any sense or to have been ‘transformed into’ as suggested by the quote form ‘The Magic of the Mind’. Let me quote from the commentary to this same passage in the Udana, Patali Villagers Chapter3(Masefield, PTS trans): ***** “That which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned (ajaata.m abhuuta.m akata.m asa”nkhata.m): all these terms are synonymous with one another. Or alternatively, it is “that which is unborn”(ajaata.m) since, unlinke sensations and so on, it has not been born (na jaata.m), has not come into being, by way of the harmony of causes reckoned as the conjunction of root-cause and condition, “that which is unbecome” (abhuuta.m) since it has not become (na bhuuta.m), has not appeared, has not arisen, either in the absence of such a cause or else solely of its own accord, (whilst) on account of its being so unborn, on account of its being so unbecome, it is “that which is uncreated” (akata.m) since it has not been created (na kata.m) by way of any cause whatsoever, “that which is unconditioned” (asa”nkhata.m) being said with the aim of indicating that nibbaana, whose own nature is that of being unconditioned, does not possess the own nature of being born, become and created possessed by states that are conditioned, such as name-and-form and so on. Or alternatively, (taking things) in reverse order, “that which is conditioned” (sa”nkhata.m) is such since it has been created (kata.m) by conditions that have come together (samecca), that have become co-existent (sambuuya), “that which is unconditioned” (asa”nkhata.m) being such since that it is not so conditioned, since it lacks the characteristics of that which is conditioned. “That which is uncreated” (akata.m) is said with the aim of indicating that it has not been created by way of any (cause) whatsoever, lest the suspicion arise, when fact of its having been thus brought into being by way of multiple causes is ruled out, that it might still have been created by way of one sole cause. “That which is unbecome” (abhuuta.m) is said with the aim of steering (people) away from the suspicion that, although thus existing independently of any condition (appaccaya.m), it might still have become, have appeared, solely of its own accord. “That which is unborn” (ajaata.m) is said to indicate “And it has this state of being unconditioned, uncreated, (and) unbecome on account of its nature being that in which there is a total absence of birth”......................... “If there were not (na abhavissa = na siyaa, synonyms) that unconditioned element having as its own nature that which is unborn and so on, there could not be made known, there could not be discovered, there could not be witnessed, here, in this world, the escape, allayment without remainder (anavasesavuupasamo), for that which is conditioned reckoned as the khandha-pentad of form and so on that has as its own nature being born and so forth. For states associated with the ariyan path, such as right view and so on, as they proceed making nibbana their object, extirpate the defilements without remainder. In this way, there is made known in this connection the non-occurrence of, the disappearance of, the escape from, the entire dukkha belonging to the cycle.” ***** Look forward to more of your comments and quotes. Sarah ===== 16693 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 10:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 - Dear Howard and James, I think because of avijja(ignorance) that is so deeply embedded and still accumulating (ayuhana) it is hard to grasp even at this most basic intellectual level that all existence is inherently dukkha. Nina and Rahula= discussed Mara recently: "Maara is a name that can be used for all that is dukkha. Birth, old age and death are Maara. The PTS dict gives: death, maara can be applied to all conditioned realities: realm of rebirth, opposed to nibbana. Khandha(agreggates), dhatu, ayatana, they are maara. S, I, Many suttas confirm this, see suttas below that you quoted. Maara Samyutta. "Form, Radha is Mara, Feeling is Mara, Perceptions are Mara, Volitional Formations are Mara, Consciousness is Mara. He understands: '... there is no more for this state of being." > 1. Maarasuttam "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaro, vedanaa maaro, > saññaa maaro, sa"nkhaaraa maaro, viññaa.na.m maaro. Eva.m passa.m, > raadha, sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupasmimpi nibbindati, vedanaayapi > nibbindati, saññaayapi nibbindati, sa"nkhaaresupi nibbindati, > viñña.nasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbinda.m virajjati; viraagaa vimuccati. > Vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ñaa.na.m hoti. `Khii.naa jaati, vusita.m > brahmacariya.m, kata.m kara.niiya.m, naapara.m itthattaayaa'ti > pajaanaatii"ti. Pathama.m. Thus all the aggregates are mara. When we think of the Buddha as someone who existed we may already be caught in view. There was the khanda (agreggate ) of form , the khandha of Feeling, of Perceptions , of Volitional Formations of Consciousness . Was Buddha apart from the khandhas or in the Khandas ? What there was was dukkha: the khandhas. Once the causes for mara were extingushed at khandha parinibbana the flame of dukkha went out like a lamp that has run of fuel. Vacchagotta asked what happens to a Buddha after he dies. The Buddha talked about the extreme profundity of the Dhamma and then pointed to a fire and asked vacchagotta where the flame went after it had been extinguished: MAJJHIMA NIKAAYA II II. 3.2.Aggi-vacchagottasutta.m (72) "So then Vaccha, I will question you, on this and you may reply as it pleases you. There is a fire burning in front of you, would you know, there is a fire burning in front of me?' `Good Gotama, if a fire burns in front of me, I would know, there's a fire burning in front of me.' `Vaccha, if you were asked, this fire burning in front of you, on account of what is it burning, how would you reply?''Good Gotama, if I was asked, this fire burning in front of you, on account of what is it burning, I would reply, this fire burning in front of me is burning on account of grass and sticks.' `Vaccha, if the fire in front of you extinguishes, would you know, this fire in front of me has extinguished?''Good Gotama, if the fire in front of me extinguishes, I would know, this fire has extinguished''Vaccha, if you were asked, this fire that has extinguished in which direction did it go, to the east, west, north or south?' `Good, Gotama, it does not apply. That fire burnt on account of grass and sticks, those supports finished, no other supports were supplied, without supports the fire, went out.'. `Vaccha, in that same manner, the matter with which the Thus Gone One is pointed out, is dispelled, uprooted, made a palm stump, made a thing not to grow again."endquote. Robert -- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > I don't know exactly what "reality" is. Nibbana, the absence of dukkha > and of the three poisons, leaves that which is exposed as it really is. Now, > *what* exatly that is I don't know. I doubt that, in fact, it is even > describable. I think that anything we can talk about is not it. > Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean vi~n~nana, the > discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama includes > nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness of absence, > absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely foreign to > anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as to be not > even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but something > totally "other". All that I definitely believe is that nibbana is not > absolute nothingness, and that an arahant, both before and after death, is, > at essence, indescribable, untraceable, and ungraspable, but not nothing. > > With metta, > Howard 16694 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 5:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, James - I happened to have no problem with your post. Go know! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/5/02 1:33:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Robert and Howard, > > A member wrote to me and suggested that this post may be interpreted > as sarcastic and that it isn't 'Right Speech'. I apologize that it > could be seen that way. That was definitely not my intention. I > was just being lighthearted and having fun. Even though I am more > serious about Buddhism than anyone I know, I am really not > that 'serious' about it; if you know what I mean. :-) I apologize > if this post caused either of you any undue stress. > > Metta, James :-) > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > >Robert and All, > > > >OUCH!!! The question of questions! The long salami, > >the whole enchalada, the big cheese! I eagerly await > >how Howard will answer this question! This is more > >exciting than any action adventure movie yet! Get > >your popcorn ready! I don't mean to put the pressure > >on Howard; but I bet he has never gotten a question > >like this before! This is a question that even the > >Buddha would avoid answering for 45 years! > > > >Anyone want to vote on how he should answer? If so, > >dial 1-800-BUDDHIST-AMERICAN-IDOL. Calls are $2.00 a > >minute, but well worth it! :-) > > > >Metta, James > > > > --- rjkjp1 wrote: > >>--- > >>Dear Howard, > >>I am not sure I understand your posts on Nibbana. > >>Are you suggesting > >>that after the death of an arahant that awareness > >>still continues? If > >>so which of the five aggreagtes is this awareness? > >>Is it permanent or > >>is it still arising and ceasing? | > >>Robert > >> > >> > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 16695 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 11:07pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b Dear All, Only adding a crumb to this post... > -----Original Message----- > From: jaran jai-nhuknan [mailto:jjn@b...] > Then we learned that people, things, concept are > synthesized in our head due > to ignorance, attachment and anger. Furthermore, > everything around us is > dhamma with anicca, dhukka and anatta quality. > (we can be specific about > anatta here, but let's leave it for the future > discussion). The Arahants synthesize people, things, and concepts too, although with perfect mindfulness. > I am digressing. Now that you know what my 'right > practice' is, let's try to > answer your question. Simply put, 'right > practice' occurs in daily life that > same way that lobha and other dhammas do--when > there are conditions for > it....so natural. And the prominent condition is > probably right > understanding. > > Based on the same principles, the 'wrong > practice' can be simply defined as > anything that is 'done' based on the idea of Self > (due to attachment, wrong > view, conceit as well as other akusala dhamma) > whether one realizes it or > not. Who can tell if it's right practice or a > wrong one? Nobody knows that > better than ourselves. > > Please note that I think that 'right practice' > includes more than > satipatthana (we have to ask Nina, Roberts K, > Kom, Num, Jon and others I > don't remember the names, sorry) according to > AN8,2 (panna sutta), among > others. > Thanks for the inspiring post. I do have some concept about what the right practice is as well. For me, the right practice is the dhammas that lead to nibbana. The wrong practice (also dhammas) doesn't lead to nibbana. And what leads to nibbana? Satipatthana (the 8-fold path), and all the kusala states supporting it, conditioning it. kom 16696 From: Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 11:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Sarah, Thanks for the kind words. I was just trying to be ecumenical. I don't really see a problem wth A. Sujin's approach except that it seems to make some efforts to invalidate any other method. There really can't be a problem with 'self' view in practicing satipatthana whether one practices for 2 hours at a time or off and on throughout the day because 'self' view can't arise with sati. And if one says I choose not to practice a certain way, that is making a choice. We have to go forward from where we are, baggage and all. We can't wait until we are arahants to take a step. I was a little confused about what you said about why we can't choose to look for a self. We are many months from getting to this topic (dhammanupassana) in the commentary and I haven't read ahead but I have heard that looking for a self is a good way of finding that there isn't one. This would apply to any compound or apparent whole whether a person or something else like the 'self' (identity) of a carriage. "Self" is actually a concept and can't be experienced. This is a good reason to understand, at least tentatively, what can and cannot be experienced (concept & reality). Experience = reality. But it is a little tricky seeing what exactly we are experiencing. I wouldn't mind taking a month off from further commentary postings just to let this stuff soak in a little. I was thinking mid november to mid december. What's the view? Too much break? not enough? Larry 16697 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha's gradual instruction Hi Antony, You’ve been considering some difficult areas and making some good points about gradual instruction. You always give us useful quotes too. I’ve appreciated your discussion and the comments made by Rob K, Chris and James as well. --- antony272b2 > > My attempt to focus on mundane happiness instead of sankhara dukkha > was incomplete. ..... I think that we all focus on ‘mundane happiness’ and take for pleasure that which with more wisdom may later to be seen as ultimately unsatisfactory. We may appreciate that anger or fear are unhelpful/to be abandoned and we don’t need to be concerned if there are no conditions for them to arise in the future. Can we appreciate strong lust or wrong view in the same way? With more understanding there may be some wisdom about the danger of medium attachments or even of ignorance. Gradually all kilesa(defilements) and indeed all conditioned phenomena can be seen as dukkha. In other words, there is nothing to fear about the cessation of formations (at parinibbana) if there should ever be the conditions for the eradication of all defilements. Unless defilements (and all other kinds of phenomena) are seen and known as they really are, there won’t be any attenuation of them. While we crave for mundane happiness, the craving will continue. As Rob K suggested, it’s not a matter of trying to stop it or of changing our tendencies, but of slowly understanding them for what they are. Just as a child only understands to keep away from the fire after being burnt, so it’s only when conditioned dhammas are very gradually seen to be ‘burning, burning, burning, suffering, suffering, suffering’(thanks, James), that there will be any ‘turning away’ or appreciation of an end to the cycle of birth and death. Grieving or feeling sad or even taking the path too seriously with unhappy feelings is not the way. There’s no need to put anything on the line. Just live naturally and in ‘good cheer’, considering and appreciating just those aspects of the Teachings that are helpful for you at the present time. Imho, there’s no need to be interested or concerned about nibbana or parinibbana - this moment and understanding of what life is now, is far more precious. metta, Sarah ====== 16698 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 4, 2002 11:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Larry, I think your idea of a break in the Way from mid Nov to mid Dec would work fine....it certainly will for Nina who'll be away all/most that time and the end Nov/beg Dec is when others of us will be away too. You've really been doing a great job to date and as you say, there's plenty to 'sink in'. Hopefully, we'll all be back inspired;-) Sarah (needing to rush around now)-will look at the rest of yr message and a couple of others another time. ====== 16699 From: jaranoh Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 2:39am Subject: [dsg] Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b Hi James: Late welcome to the group from me. I don't think A. Somporn is the same person you have in mind. This A. Somporn, about 80, as Roberts suggested, is a Pali scholar who lives (mostly) in Thailand. I don't know if he speaks English. Best Regards, jaran --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > > --- jaran jai-nhuknan wrote: > > Hi Chris, please see below. > > > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 20:48:13 -0000 > > From: "christine_forsyth" > > Subject: Practice on DSG > > > > Dear Group, > > > > I found the two posts about Roberts' meeting with > > Acharn Somporn very > > interesting, > > Is this Ajahn Somporn? The well-recognized meditation > teacher who is now the abbot of: > Wat Buddhamahamunee > Buddhist Meditation Center > 2501 Clover Lane > Arlington, TX 76015 > > I would be very interested to know. He was my > meditation teacher for four years and he has grown in > stature/fame since then. However, in Thai Buddhist > circles, things change very quickly. Thanks for any > information you may have. > > Metta, James > 16700 From: azita gill Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: PERFECTIONS --- kenhowardau wrote: > Thank you Christine, you really are a helpful > person. I > now have all those posts pasted into one document. > (Thanks also to Nina, by the way.) > Yes, the same goes for me to, Christine. And esp. since I asked the question in the first place. < may you have much courage, patience and good cheer, Azita, > 16701 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 4:32am Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 --- > > -- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean > vi~n~nana, the > > discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama > includes > > nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness of > absence, > > absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely foreign to > > anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as to be > not > > even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but > something > > totally "other". _______________ Dear Howard, As has being discussed before Nibbana is classified in the Abhidhamma as arupa (not rupa) and hence nama because all relaities are either nama or rupa. Nama has one meaning as bending and so because nibbana is experienced by magga and phala it 'bends' these cittas towards it. But to have any idea of nibbana as some sort of awareness is not suported by the texts:In the Khandhasamyutta nikaya. XXII. 94 (p949 of Bodhi trans.) The Buddha said :A corporeal phenomenon, a feeling, a perception, a mental formation, a consciousness, which is permanent and persistent, eternal and not subject to change, such a thing the wise men in this world do not recognize; and I also say that there is no such thing.{endquote] Nynatiloka says'One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only for the actual realisation of the goal of Nibbana, but also for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anatta, the egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive Nibbana - according to one's either materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an ego, or an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or with which it merges"endquote Robert 16702 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 8:58am Subject: Monks should not write to laypeople? --- Dear James, You write: "" I hold that monks should not teach or discuss > Dhamma on the Internet as self-identified monks. If they want to do > it as regular laypeople, and not state that they are monks, I don't > see a problem with that."" I do not think this is correct. While any monk may not wish to discuss dhamma others may. Many well-known monks have exchanged letters with laypeople and other monks; I read one from Ledi Sayadaw to C.A. F Rhys davids written about ninety years back. And others such as Narada thera (translator ) of several texts have also written letters on Dhamma to laypeople. The section you quote in the Vinya applies to face to face meeting not to letter writing. If it was the case that monks were not permitted to teach Dhamma by the written word if laypeople might read it, then monks such as Bhikkhu Bodhi - who has written letters about Dhamma via email and mail to several of us - would not be able to publish their books. I believe what is more important is that what is written by in accordance with the Dhamma. __________ You write :When a bhikkhu discusses Dhamma in an > Internet group with laypeople, on the same level as lay people, in > the same forum as laypeople, that is not right either. That bhikkhu > is cheapening his position as a bhikkhu to discuss the Dhamma as if > he is a layperson. A bhikkhu will get my respect as a bhikkhu if he > acts like one. If he doesn't, he is just another layperson to me"" ______ You know the sutta perhaps where the layman Citta is discussing Dhamma with seniormonks and explains a knotty point to them.He is thanked by the monks for his great understanding. The monks were not proud. Many monks listen to laypeople and discuss Dhamma with them to this day in Thailand. They will listen to Dhamma if it is explained corectly because they see its value. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Explanation: 1. The Internet is a level-playing field where we are > lay people discussing the Dhamma, not seeking instruction. When a > member self-identifies as a bhikkhu, tells people how they should be > or think about Dhamma, declares that no one should disagree because > they aren't a bhikkhu, that is abuse of the position in the Sangha. > I don't respect that. 2. When a bhikkhu discusses Dhamma in an > Internet group with laypeople, on the same level as lay people, in > the same forum as laypeople, that is not right either. That bhikkhu > is cheapening his position as a bhikkhu to discuss the Dhamma as if > he is a layperson. A bhikkhu will get my respect as a bhikkhu if he > acts like one. If he doesn't, he is just another layperson to me. > 3. Bhikkhu's participating in Dhamma discussion on the Internet are > breaking several Bhikkhu precepts. The Buddha, in his infinite > wisdom, foresaw how situations like this might happen and he came up > with precepts as to how the Dhamma should be discussed and taught by > bhikkhu's. Here are the rules: > > 57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 58. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand and > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 59. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand and > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 60. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 61. [62] I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather > [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 63. I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle and who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 64. I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a > training to be observed. > 65. I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits holding up his > knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 66. I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 67. I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with > a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 68. Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 69. Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 70. Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 71. Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking > ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 72. Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > walking on the path and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > Now, how is a monk discussing or teaching Dhamma on the Internet > going to be able to follow these precepts? He isn't. He cannot see > the person, cannot check for their understanding or if they are of > the proper mind to listen to Dhamma, so he is breaking 15 very > important precepts. At my temple, the monks do not discuss Dhamma > on the Internet, and won't even discuss it on the telephone!! I > once forgot this and wrote an e-mail to a monk at my Buddhist > temple, asked him a question about Buddhism, and he refused to > answer by e-mail! He asked me to come see him. I have discussed > this issue with monks of the Thera and Mahayana tradition and they > all agree with me, monks should not discuss Dhamma on the Internet. > A person who wants Dhamma instruction from a monk, in discussion > rather than a book, needs to see that monk face-to-face. Otherwise, > the teaching is corrupt. > > > This is just my opinion and I could be wrong. I am not trying to > create controversy or `stir-things-up', just relating what I feel, > think, researched, and discussed with others. > Metta, James > 16703 From: Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 4:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, Robert - You and I are in agreement that Buddhism is not a species of substantialism. It seems to me, however, that you see Buddhism as a kind of nihilism inasmuch as you see its ultimate goal (paramattha) as absolute nothingness. You have asked me whether I see the khandhas, or at least vi~n~nana, as continuing after the death of an arahant. No, I don't think they do. But I don't think they exist for the living arahant either. The "experience" of an arahant is, I believe, *radically* different from that of a worldling, with the khandas constituting the worldling's world, but the arahant's experience already transcending that "world" (and all "worlds") and being indescribable because of being unconditioned and having no basis for being described. Now I would like to ask you whether you believe that the ultimate goal of Buddhism is an absolute nothingness. It seems to me that for every sutta portion that can be interpreted as saying that the ultimate goal of the Dhamma is a nothingness, there are other suttas that can be interpreted as saying that this is not so, though still, of course, avoiding the opposite extreme. Perhaps I tend towards the substantialist heresy. I think you tend towards the nihilist perspective. Does it not make sense, perhaps, for us to just agree to disagree on this matter? ;-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/5/02 7:33:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > > --- > > >-- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean > >vi~n~nana, the > >>discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama > >includes > >>nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness > of > >absence, > >>absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely > foreign to > >>anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as > to be > >not > >>even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but > >something > >>totally "other". > _______________ > > Dear Howard, > As has being discussed before Nibbana is classified in the Abhidhamma > as arupa (not rupa) and hence nama because all relaities are either > nama or rupa. Nama has one meaning as bending and so because nibbana > is experienced by magga and phala it 'bends' these cittas towards > it. > But to have any idea of nibbana as some sort of awareness is not > suported by the texts:In the Khandhasamyutta nikaya. XXII. 94 (p949 > of Bodhi trans.) > The Buddha said :A corporeal phenomenon, a feeling, a > perception, a mental > formation, a consciousness, which is permanent and persistent, > eternal and not subject to change, such a thing the wise men in > this world do not recognize; and I also say that there is no > such thing.{endquote] > > Nynatiloka says'One cannot too often and too > emphatically stress the fact that not > only for the actual realisation of the goal of Nibbana, but also > for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable > preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anatta, the > egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. > Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive > Nibbana - according to one's either materialistic or > metaphysical leanings - either as > annihilation of an ego, or an eternal state of existence into > which an ego or self enters or with which it merges"endquote > > Robert > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 16704 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 10:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] commentary break Dear Larry, how thoughtful of you. I will be away longer: Nov 26 until Dec 13. I was worried I would miss the thread, but I have the book. I like so much to read along part of the subco in Pali, the relevant passages, trying to translate parts of them, but of course I read slowly. See what is best to do. I will not have time to go to the archives later on. Nina. op 03-11-2002 21:13 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Dear Nina and all, > > I don't want anyone to miss out on the commentary while they are > visiting Thailand, so when should we take a break? 16705 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 10:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 20, Comm. bhikkhu Dear Larry and all, a lot to consider here about the word bhikkhu. From this text it is clear that also laypeople who develop satipatthana are in a sense bhikkhu. Why bhikkhu? When we think of bhkkhu: one of the meanings is, destroying lobha, dosa and moha. See Dispeller, Ch 12, on jhanas: Sekkho, trainer (ariyan who is not arahat) together with the kaliyana putthujjana, the worthy ordinary man, should be understood as bhikkhu. The arahat is aggo bhikkhu, the highest bhikkhu. From the beginning of the training there should be detachment, namely from wrong practice, wanting to *do* things. As Sarah said, < I would suggest that the 4 satipatthanas consist of all the actual phenomena in our lives. If there is an idea of doing’ rather than understanding’ these, then we’re bound to be on the wrong track. That’s why the emphasis is on sati and panna rather than on atta’(self).> and: Clinging is so tricky, so subtle, we may not notcie it that we are selecting objects just a little. I like the idea that sati and panna don’t mind at all what they know. Thus, right from the beginning we should see the danger of clinging. I read in the subco about bhikkhu, and I shall try to translate part of it later on. Nina. op 04-11-2002 01:55 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: Continuing the commentary on: "What are the four? Here, Bhikkhus a > bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." > > Katame cattaro = "What are the four?" This is a question indicating the > desire to expound the teaching. > Bhikkhu[15] is a term to indicate a person who earnestly endeavors to > accomplish the practice of the teaching. Others, gods and men, too, > certainly strive earnestly to accomplish the practice of the teaching, > but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state by way of practice, > the Master said: "Bhikkhu." For amongst those who accept the teaching of > the Buddha, the bhikkhu is the highest owing to fitness for receiving > manifold instruction. Further, when that highest kind of person, the > bhikkhu, is reckoned, the rest too are reckoned, as in regard to a royal > procession and the like, when the king is reckoned, by the reckoning of > the king, the retinue is reckoned. Also the word "bhikkhu" was used by > the Buddha to point out the bhikkhu-state through practice of the > teaching in this way: "He who practices this practice of the Arousing of > Mindfulness is called a bhikkhu." He who follows the teaching, be he a > shining one [deva] or a human, is indeed called a bhikkhu. Accordingly > it is said: 16706 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 11:39am Subject: Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b Hi Jaran (and Kom), Great to hear from you. :) I really appreciate your comments on right understanding and right practice. I'll think about your post for a while, and get back to you, if I may - I'm distracted a little at present dealing with a Great Dane with a ruptured cruciate ligament (knee surgery today). metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., jaran jai-nhuknan wrote: > Hi Chris, please see below. > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 20:48:13 -0000 > From: "christine_forsyth" > Subject: Practice on DSG > > Dear Group, > > I found the two posts about Roberts' meeting with Acharn Somporn very > interesting, but I have a few questions about death and practice and > hope someone may have the time and inclination to comment on them ... > > > From the first post :Meeting with Acharn somporn" > "He said that reading the texts is one aspect but only by understanding > sabhava -realities - directly can there be proper understanding. > Everything is dhamma , whether it be seeing or hearing, colour or > sound, hardness, heat, even avijja (ignorance) is dhamma. There is no > one,no being there at all but because of wrong view the > characteristics (lakkhana ) which are simply conditioned dhamma are > taken as self. This is very deep and subtle sakkya ditthi shows > itself by clinging to wrong practice. > He said if there is real understanding of sabhava dhamma then there > is no fear of death because there is no self in sabhava." > > Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify for me how 'right > practice' would occur in the everyday life of a buddhist today? > (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in everyday > life of a buddhist today would be defined? > ---------------------------------- > > I enjoyed the posts as well. Roberts always has interesting points to share > with us. > > Regarding the question above, it is an important question. I am sure many > have addressed this very point many times although it may not have been in > the way that answers your question directly. Before answering your question, > let me tell you my view of 'right practice'. > > Right understanding encompasses right practice. IMHO, there is only one > practice in Buddhism, and it is a noun, practice. Practice refers to the > development of right understanding, meaning the growth of right > understanding, not the making or improvement. :-) This is because right > understanding is a dhamma; it arises due to conditions, falls away > immediately, contains its own characteristics, and cannot be controlled. > This is why it cannot be 'developed' (by us). > > The right practice of a Buddhist today is the same as that of those in the > Buddha's time since the right understanding is always right understanding > (although of many levels). However, what makes today different from the > Buddha's time is the degree of wrong-view and other akusala dhammas. > According to the Tipitaka and from my observations, we are full of, and > affected by, more akusala dhammas than kusala dhammas. We have been > influenced by the enemies of right understanding for a long time. Let's take > this life as an example, we have been working hard for happiness, wealth, > recognition, achievements all our life because wrong-view tell us there is > 'Self'. As you know, the idea of Self is due to three things: wrong- view, > attachment and conceit, and the idea of Self can be so subtle what we cannot > 'feel' it or it can be very apparent. We don't have to think that there is a > 'Self'-- it's automatic. As automatic as we see when we open our eyes, when > we wake up, there is already idea of Self, how subtle it may be. > > Then we learned that people, things, concept are synthesized in our head due > to ignorance, attachment and anger. Furthermore, everything around us is > dhamma with anicca, dhukka and anatta quality. (we can be specific about > anatta here, but let's leave it for the future discussion). > > Soon we learn that the 'Self' is due to, among other things, wrong- view, an > akusala dhamma, a very bad thing. This is one degree of right > understanding--listening and perhaps contemplating. Now because we love our > Self and we want to be good and happy, we have to "do something" to get rid > of Self and wrong-view. Automatically, being influenced by the enemies of > right understanding, we have to be as successful as we are in the worldlies, > so we set out to find a way. As you can see, this is under influence of > "Self", but many of us don't know it or don't have enough courage to admit > it. > > As you can see, the right understanding in one level does not easily > translate to another (higher) level of understanding. We read all about the > 'concept' of dhamma and understand most of it. However, when we come back to > the 'world' in stead of sticking to we leave our understanding in the books > we read (in our case, in the emails :-), we often go back to our 'usual': > the influence of the enemies of right understanding--often lobha, > attachment. With the attachment to Self, we go after kusala dhamma, metta, > sati, panna, insights, vipassana nana, and even Nibbana, and we can't help > feeling sorry (or guilty) when akusala dhamma arise. Often we tell ourselves > (or Self) that we do it for the higher level of understanding, but what we > fail to realize (or admit) is that we are going after good kusala dhamma and > running away from akusala dhamma because of the idea of 'Self'. > > This is often because we are not being very 'honest' (to ourselves or just > for the sake of dhamma). This is where tattaramajjhatattaa (one of general > wholesome cetasikas) comes in. Until we are brave enough to accept any > dhamma arising for us to study, until we are brave enough to study the > quality of Self when we feel we have to do something for higher level of > understanding, until we are brave enough to stick to what we study and > understand in the book, and until we are brave enough to reason everything > we read, listen, learn, observe, it is hard for the 'right practice' to grow > or even arise. > > To me, facing the idea of 'Self' in daily life seems the hardest thing, and > most critical, of the whole study. > > If you ask Sarah this question, I am sure she would say ''right practice' is > anything that is based on 'right understanding.'' > > This is probably because you cannot put your finger on the 'right practice' > since it is the quality of mind not visible to the eye as A Sujin once said > that 'by looking, you cannot tell a person to whom satipatthana has arisen > from others because noone knows his mind'. > > This stresses the importance of being very honest to oneself, since no one > knows the quality his mind better than himself. We can fool someone else but > not ourselves. > > I am digressing. Now that you know what my 'right practice' is, let's try to > answer your question. Simply put, 'right practice' occurs in daily life that > same way that lobha and other dhammas do--when there are conditions for > it....so natural. And the prominent condition is probably right > understanding. > > Based on the same principles, the 'wrong practice' can be simply defined as > anything that is 'done' based on the idea of Self (due to attachment, wrong > view, conceit as well as other akusala dhamma) whether one realizes it or > not. Who can tell if it's right practice or a wrong one? Nobody knows that > better than ourselves. > > Please note that I think that 'right practice' includes more than > satipatthana (we have to ask Nina, Roberts K, Kom, Num, Jon and others I > don't remember the names, sorry) according to AN8,2 (panna sutta), among > others. > > Chris, may I say I always enjoy your posts. I wish I could be half as > articulate as you are. > > With appreciation, > Jaran > > 16707 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 11:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi James, I hadn't heard these rules before. If we all get webcams would that be acceptable? Then any Bhikkhu could see that I don't have an umbrella, staff, knife, or weapon in my hand. I have no shoes on, I'm not in a vehicle, I'm not lying down, not sitting holding up my knees and not wearing head gear. I would be happy to sit, stand or walk as directed to obtain Dhamma teachings. I am sure, though they sound very odd, that there must be a good reasons behind these rules. I have never met with or spoken to a Bhikkhu personally - and the last time I met another Buddhist was when the dsg members got together at Noosa three months ago. But I have had a few private emails from members of the Sangha that were invaluable in helping me understand the Dhamma. Email and the internet is the only avenue I have for contact, and having the Dhamma explained. Appreciate the opportunities you have ... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: The Buddha, in his infinite > wisdom, foresaw how situations like this might happen and he came up > with precepts as to how the Dhamma should be discussed and taught by > bhikkhu's. Here are the rules: > > 57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 58. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand and > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 59. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand and > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 60. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 61. [62] I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather > [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 63. I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle and who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 64. I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a > training to be observed. > 65. I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits holding up his > knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 66. I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 67. I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with > a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 68. Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 69. Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 70. Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not > ill: a training to be observed. > 71. Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking > ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 72. Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > walking on the path and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > 16708 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 11:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi Howard and Robert, and All, It is so important, in one way, to have an accurate idea - even if vague - of what Nibanna is and is not. From the beginning of my learning about Buddhism, I have felt an uneasiness which could best be described by the question "Where/what is all this leading to ?" Sometimes I read posts from people discussing the finer details of what they are currently doing, and they seem like a horse wearing 'blinkers' to prevent distraction from anything except the task right in front of their noses - mostly formal practice of some kind. We are told that The eightfold Path (if followed) leads to the end of suffering and dissatisfaction. But it is natural, having come from a theistic religion that is quite definite and graphically descriptive about it's Ulimate Goal, that many would wonder about the state, condition, experience of the Ultimate Goal in Buddhism. One has to know a little of the Ultimate Goal - else how would one know that it is 'safe' to aim for? One wonders about Lemmings ... what are they thinking as they rush towards the edge of the cliff? Is the one out in front shouting: "Don't ask questions, chaps, there are no words to describe what's going to happen to us, only put all your energy into getting there. We're never going to agree, so cut the chatter. Just keep running." :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > You and I are in agreement that Buddhism is not a species of > substantialism. It seems to me, however, that you see Buddhism as a kind of > nihilism inasmuch as you see its ultimate goal (paramattha) as absolute > nothingness. > You have asked me whether I see the khandhas, or at least vi~n~nana, > as continuing after the death of an arahant. No, I don't think they do. But I > don't think they exist for the living arahant either. The "experience" of an > arahant is, I believe, *radically* different from that of a worldling, with > the khandas constituting the worldling's world, but the arahant's experience > already transcending that "world" (and all "worlds") and being indescribable > because of being unconditioned and having no basis for being described. Now I > would like to ask you whether you believe that the ultimate goal of Buddhism > is an absolute nothingness. > It seems to me that for every sutta portion that can be interpreted as > saying that the ultimate goal of the Dhamma is a nothingness, there are other > suttas that can be interpreted as saying that this is not so, though still, > of course, avoiding the opposite extreme. Perhaps I tend towards the > substantialist heresy. I think you tend towards the nihilist perspective. > Does it not make sense, perhaps, for us to just agree to disagree on this > matter? ;-) > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/5/02 7:33:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... > writes: > > > > > --- > > > >-- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean > > >vi~n~nana, the > > >>discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama > > >includes > > >>nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness > > of > > >absence, > > >>absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely > > foreign to > > >>anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as > > to be > > >not > > >>even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but > > >something > > >>totally "other". > > _______________ > > > > Dear Howard, > > As has being discussed before Nibbana is classified in the Abhidhamma > > as arupa (not rupa) and hence nama because all relaities are either > > nama or rupa. Nama has one meaning as bending and so because nibbana > > is experienced by magga and phala it 'bends' these cittas towards > > it. > > But to have any idea of nibbana as some sort of awareness is not > > suported by the texts:In the Khandhasamyutta nikaya. XXII. 94 (p949 > > of Bodhi trans.) > > The Buddha said :A corporeal phenomenon, a feeling, a > > perception, a mental > > formation, a consciousness, which is permanent and persistent, > > eternal and not subject to change, such a thing the wise men in > > this world do not recognize; and I also say that there is no > > such thing.{endquote] > > > > Nynatiloka says'One cannot too often and too > > emphatically stress the fact that not > > only for the actual realisation of the goal of Nibbana, but also > > for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable > > preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anatta, the > > egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. > > Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive > > Nibbana - according to one's either materialistic or > > metaphysical leanings - either as > > annihilation of an ego, or an eternal state of existence into > > which an ego or self enters or with which it merges"endquote > > > > Robert 16709 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 2:15pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa: To KKT Dear Suan, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: Dear KKT You wrote the following. "...since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things." I wonder if you could post those meanings of atta in Pali or Sanskrit when you have spare time. I will like to check them side by side with the meanings of nibbana in that Udaana passage. Thanking in advance. With kind regards Suan KKT: I think there are two main meanings of atta or self: __The empirical self: This is the ego or the << feeling of I, Me, Mine, Myself >> or the << I-thought >> This << self >> was categorically denied by the Buddha in His 2nd sermon i.e. Anattalakkhana Sutta and in many other suttas by this famous phrase: << This is not mine, this I am not, this is not myself >> (*) __The metaphysical self: In the historical context of the Buddha's time, this is the Atman/Brahman of orthodox Brahmanism or the Jiva (life principle) of Jainism (another unorthodox system like Buddhism) It seems that the Buddha didn't give a definite answer when being asked about this << self >> as in this sutta: Vacchagotta comes to the Buddha and asks: 'Venerable Gotama, is there an Atman?' The Buddha is silent. 'Then Venarable Gotama, is there no Atman?' Again the Buddha is silent. Vacchagotta gets up and goes away. (Samyutta Nykaya) I think just because of the silence of the Buddha that after Buddha's Parinibbana people began to speculate alot about this << fundamental >> question. (and a quite exciting question :-)) As for your request, I've found a list of some << attributes >> of Braman/Atman in Sanskrit but they are not complete (I am not expert in Sanskrit) pure existence = sat pure consciousness = cit pure bliss = ananda truth = satyam knowledge = jnanam goodness = shivam beauty = sundaram omnipotent = infinite = anantam unborn = ajo uncreated = uncompounded = self-existent = immanent in all beings (and things) = sarva-sattva-dehantar-gata immortal = nitya eternal = shasvata permanent = dhruva BTW, in the Milindapanho, Nibbana is described as: << pure bliss >> << cannot be elucidated by means of any simile, explanation, reason, or inference >> << is not past, not future, not present, not produced, not unproduced, not producible >> << is not in storage somewhere >> << is not due to kamma, causes, climatic changes >> Hope this helps. Peace, KKT (*) In the Maitreya Upanishads there is a similar phrase: Borne along and defiled by the stream of qualities, unsteady, wavering, bewildered, full of desire, distracted, one goes on into the state of self-conceit. In thinking, "This is I" and "That is mine" one binds himself with himself, as does a bird with a snare. ============== --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, Rahula - Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking that position causes me to wonder about that organization. The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be unintentional. With metta, Howard KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. This definition could easily lead one to think that Nibbana is atta since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things. If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> and << independent >> of everything? I raise this question not because I want to defend the atta doctrine but because I want to show that this matter is not easily to clinch. Peace, KKT 16710 From: Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Way 21, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on "Here, Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Kayanupassi = "Contemplating the body." Possessed of the character of body-contemplation, or of observing the body. Why is the word "body" used twice in the phrase: "Contemplating the body in the body?" For determining the object and isolating it, and for the sifting out thoroughly [vinibbhoga] of the apparently compact [ghana] nature of things like continuity [santati]. Because there is no contemplating of feeling, consciousness nor mental objects in the body, but just the contemplating of the body only, determination through isolation is set forth by the pointing out of the way of contemplating the body only in the property called the body. In the body there is no contemplation of a uniform thing, apart from the big and small members of the body, or of a man, or of a woman, apart from such things like the hair of the head and the hair of the body. There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body. Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of the major and the minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a cart. The character of contemplating the collection of the hair of the head, the hair of the body and the like is comparable to the seeing of the component parts of a city; and the character of contemplating the collection of primary and derived materiality is comparable to the separation of the leaf covering of a plantain-trunk, or is like the opening of an empty fist. Therefore, by the pointing out of the basis called the body in the form of a collection in many ways, the sifting out thoroughly of the apparently compact is shown. 16711 From: Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 5:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. "There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body." Hi all, Anyone know what primary and derived materiality is? Also, I was wondering about the word "anupassanaa". Is the meaning something like 'minutely observing'? Larry 16712 From: James Mitchell Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi James, > > I hadn't heard these rules before. If we all get > webcams would that > be acceptable? Then any Bhikkhu could see that I > don't have an > umbrella, staff, knife, or weapon in my hand. I > have no shoes on, > I'm not in a vehicle, I'm not lying down, not > sitting holding up my > knees and not wearing head gear. I would be happy > to sit, stand or > walk as directed to obtain Dhamma teachings. (Christine, if you were willing to go to that extent to observe the bhikkhu rules, then of course a monk could teach the dhamma to you over the Internet. I am not sure if you are mocking these rules or not, probably not, but they do serve a very valuable purpose. A person must be in the right frame-of-mind to properly receive the dhamma. As the Buddha said, ""This Dhamma that I have attained is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, peaceful, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise." If a person is walking with an umbrella, or even walking a path, or driving, or has his shoes on (ready to go somewhere else), or has a walking stick (again, going somewhere), or has a knife or weapon in his hand (obviously not ready for dhamma teaching), or lying down relaxing, or holding the knees in a relaxing state of mind, or is wearing a hat or > I am sure, though they sound very odd, that there > must be a good > reasons behind these rules. > I have never met with or spoken to a Bhikkhu > personally - and the > last time I met another Buddhist was when the dsg > members got > together at Noosa three months ago. But I have had > a few private > emails from members of the Sangha that were > invaluable in helping me > understand the Dhamma. > Email and the internet is the only avenue I have for > contact, and > having the Dhamma explained. > Appreciate the opportunities you have ... > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" > wrote: > The Buddha, in his infinite > > wisdom, foresaw how situations like this might > happen and he came > up > > with precepts as to how the Dhamma should be > discussed and taught > by > > bhikkhu's. Here are the rules: > > > > 57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an > umbrella in his > hand > > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > 58. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a > staff in his hand > and > > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > 59. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a > knife in his hand > and > > who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > 60. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a > weapon in his hand > > and who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > 61. [62] I will not teach Dhamma to a person > wearing non-leather > > [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to > be observed. > > 63. I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a > vehicle and who is not > > ill: a training to be observed. > > 64. I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down > who is not ill: > a > > training to be observed. > > 65. I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits > holding up his > > knees and who is not ill: a training to be > observed. > > 66. I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing > headgear who is not > > ill: a training to be observed. > > 67. I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head > is covered (with > > a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to > be observed. > > 68. Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma > to a person > > sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be > observed. > > 69. Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma > to a person > > sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training > to be observed. > > 70. Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person > sitting who is > not > > ill: a training to be observed. > > 71. Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a > person walking > > ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed. > > 72. Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma > to a person > > walking on the path and who is not ill: a training > to be observed. > > > ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16713 From: James Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 10:38pm Subject: Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- > Dear James, > You write: > "" I hold that monks should not teach or discuss > > Dhamma on the Internet as self-identified monks. If they want to > do > > it as regular laypeople, and not state that they are monks, I don't > > see a problem with that."" > > I do not think this is correct. While any monk may not wish to > discuss dhamma others may. > Many well-known monks have exchanged letters with laypeople and other > monks; I read one from Ledi Sayadaw to C.A. F Rhys davids written > about ninety years back. And others such as Narada thera > (translator ) of several texts have also written letters on Dhamma to > laypeople. The section you quote in the Vinya applies to face to face > meeting not to letter writing.\ (Robert, with all due respect, you are making an > assertion here that is completely not true and > unfounded. The section that I quoted from the > Vinaya > Pitaka relates to ALL Dhamma teaching by monks. > There > aren't any rules in the VP about teaching the Dhamma > through letter writing. Obviously, the Buddha did > not > want his monks to do such a thing. He wanted his > teachings to be taught by monks face-to-face.) > If it was the case that monks were not permitted to teach Dhamma by > the written word if laypeople might read it, then monks such as > Bhikkhu Bodhi - who has written letters about Dhamma via email and > mail to several of us - would not be able to publish their books. > I believe what is more important is that what is written by in > accordance with the Dhamma. (I do not believe that monks should write about > Dhamma > with the goal of teaching it. That is not their > 'duty' as a monk. The duties of a monk, following > how > I interpret the Buddha's guidelines, are: First: > Self-Liberation; Second: Teaching and finding other > monks; Third: Maintaining the Sangha; Fourth: > Teaching > Dhamma to interested lay people. > > I am not going to respond to any monks in > particular. > I know that many famous monks write letters and > books, > go on lecture tours, and discuss the Dhamma on the > Internet. I don't agree with any of that. I refuse > to buy books written by monks (even the Dali Lama) > and > usually won't read articles written by monks unless > someone refers to them in this group or they are > acutally transcriptions of verbal Dhamma teachings > presented to an interested audience. > > But this is just me and doesn't have to match > everyone > else.) > > __________ > You write :When a bhikkhu discusses Dhamma in an > > Internet group with laypeople, on the same level as lay people, in > > the same forum as laypeople, that is not right either. That > bhikkhu > > is cheapening his position as a bhikkhu to discuss the Dhamma as if > > he is a layperson. A bhikkhu will get my respect as a bhikkhu if > he > > acts like one. If he doesn't, he is just another layperson to me"" > ______ > You know the sutta perhaps where the layman Citta is discussing > Dhamma with seniormonks and explains a knotty point to them.He is > thanked by the monks for his great understanding. The monks were not > proud. Many monks listen to laypeople and discuss Dhamma with them to > this day in Thailand. They will listen to Dhamma if it is explained > corectly because they see its value. (Frankly, I don't see how a layperson has much to > offer to a monk in the way of Dhamma instruction; > unless that monk isn't really a 'monk' if you know > what I mean. Monks shouldn't need to discuss Dhamma > with most laypeople to learn it (of course, there > are > a few exceptions of dynamic, insighful, wise > laypeople > who monks could learn from). If monks need to go to > laypeople to learn Dhamma, there is really something > wrong with the Sangha in that case. When I meet a > monk and discuss Dhamma with him, I know that I am > doing it to learn, not to teach. I haven't even > renounced as much as a monk, been trained as much as > a > monk, or have the same dedication to Dhamma that a > monk has. And I am not sure about your > generalization > about laypeople and monks in Thailand. From my > experience, that is not true. Laypeople in Thailand > would never, ever presume to tell a monk about > Dhamma. > The laypeople in Thailand have a level of respect > and > deference for monks that I have never seen anywhere > in > the world. I have been to Thailand twice, visited > many temples, attend an American/Thai Wat now, so I > think I have some experience on which to base these > comments. But, then again, maybe the quality of the > Sangha has gone down in Thailand. If monks and > laypeople discuss Dhamma on an even-level, than it > definitely has.) Metta, James > > Robert > > 16714 From: James Mitchell Date: Tue Nov 5, 2002 10:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Sorry, my e-mail is not cooperating with me today. Here is the complete message I intended to send. Sorry for the odd spacing. > > --- christine_forsyth > wrote: > > > Hi James, > > > I hadn't heard these rules before. If we all > get > > > webcams would that > > > be acceptable? Then any Bhikkhu could see that > I > > > don't have an > > > umbrella, staff, knife, or weapon in my hand. > I > > > have no shoes on, > > > I'm not in a vehicle, I'm not lying down, not > > > sitting holding up my > > > knees and not wearing head gear. I would be > happy > > > to sit, stand or > > > walk as directed to obtain Dhamma teachings. > > > > (Christine, if you were willing to go to that > extent > > to observe the bhikkhu rules, then of course a > monk > > could teach the dhamma to you over the Internet. > I > > am > > not sure if you are mocking these rules or not, > > probably not, but they do serve a very valuable > > purpose. A person must be in the right > > frame-of-mind > > to properly receive the dhamma. As the Buddha > said, > > ""This Dhamma that I have attained is deep, hard > to > > see, hard to realize, peaceful, refined, beyond > the > > scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by > > the > > wise." If a person is walking with an umbrella, > or > > even walking a path, or driving, or has his shoes > on > > (ready to go somewhere else), or has a walking > stick > > (again, going somewhere), or has a knife or weapon > > in > > his hand (obviously not ready for dhamma > teaching), > > or > > lying down relaxing, or holding the knees in a > > relaxing pose, or is wearing a hat or headgear > > (again, > > going somewhere), or sitting in a chair relaxing, > or > > sitting higher than a monk, than that person is > not > > ready to receive the teachings of the dhamma. The > > Dhamma is a very serious business and should not > be > > taken lightly. Whenever I read the dhamma or > > discuss > > the dhamma, I make sure that I am not lying down, > > that > > my shoes are off, that I am not planning on going > > anywhere else, that I am alert...and I have even > > added > > some of my own rules to this list that the Buddha > > didn't require: I make sure that my hands are > clean, > > that my face is clean, and that I am not eating > > anything (drinking water is acceptable). I won't > > even > > meditate unless I have washed my face and hands. > I > > believe that the body must be clean when receiving > > the > > dhamma or it is disrespectful to the Triple Gem. > > And > > eating food is a big no-no. If I eat, I eat. If > I > > study the dhamma, I study the dhamma. I don't do > > both.) > > > I am sure, though they sound very odd, that > there > > > must be a good > > > reasons behind these rules. > > (I think I have explained some. But it is just my > > interpretation. I don't know all of the reasons > > behind the rules.) > > > I have never met with or spoken to a Bhikkhu > > > personally - and the > > > last time I met another Buddhist was when the > dsg > > > members got > > > together at Noosa three months ago. But I have > > had > > > a few private > > > emails from members of the Sangha that were > > > invaluable in helping me > > > understand the Dhamma. > > (I will not comment on the monk writing to you. I > > really don't know all of the ins and outs about > > that. > > But I do know one thing: Christine, it is your > karma > > to be in a situation where you must learn the > Dhamma > > on your own. You have this situation in your life > > now > > for a reason. I would lightly suggest that you > not > > begrudge it or hope that things were different for > > you. Though it may seem difficult at times, later > > you > > will probably see the wisdom of it. You will rise > > like a Phoenix from the ashes of your solitary > > struggles; which I think you have already > actually. > > I > > see you streaking across the sky, with a trail of > > Dhamma fire, and I have little sympathy for > > you...maybe some envy but not sympathy. > > > > No Dhamma is better than corrupt Dhamma. The > Buddha > > came up with these rules for a reason. If a > person, > > lay or monk, takes refuge in the Triple Gem, they > > must > > accept the whole enchilada. It isn't a 'pick and > > choose' kinda thing for those who accept The > Triple > > Gem into their hearts and minds.) > > > Email and the internet is the only avenue I have > > for > > > contact, and > > > having the Dhamma explained. > > (No, you have your mind and your heart. Even if > you > > had absolutely nothing, no e-mail, no books, no > > suttas, no contacts, nothing! When you are ready, > > the > > Dhamma will find you and teach you. In Taoism, it > > is > > said, "When the heart is ready the teacher will > > come." > > I believe that very much. And I also believe > that > > often the teacher is oneself. > > > Appreciate the opportunities you have ... > > (Accept the karma you have.) > > > > > > metta, > > > Christine > > > > Metta, James ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16715 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? Hi James & Rob K, Just a few considerations only to add to your comments: 1. The reason for the particular rules which James mentioned (below) were to emphasise the importance of respect for the dhamma and sangha. For example, soldiers may have weapons on their bodies, but not in their hands, as this shows no hostility. With regard to footwear and head gear, there is the same consideration - there’s no use teaching to those who are obviously showing disrespect for the Teachings. 2. Without wishing to downplay the importance of these or any other rules, I wish to point out that these fall under the category of ‘sekhiya’ or duties/traditions. They concern the traditions about a)entering towns and villages, b) accepting almsfood and eating meals c) not teaching dhamma to disrespectful people and d) the manner of urinating and stooling. Unlike other rules, these are training rules for which there is no penalty (aapatti) for transgression. It just says “this training should be done”.If a monk is careless and doesn’t follow these traditions, it is considered a dukka.ta (light offence). 3. This classification of ‘sekhiya’ is in marked contrast to other rules. Those which concern false or abusive speech (inc. sarcasm and ridicule) for example, fall under “Paacittiya” which means the breaking of precept which causes the loss of kusala (wholesome states) and is aapatti, for which there is a penalty. I would question James’ assertion that there is nothing wrong with a monk using a cybername which suggests he is other than a monk. From Vinaymukha vol 1, “ ‘Sampajaanamusaavaada’ means to utter false speech with full awareness. It should be understood in this way: There exists a certain matter but the speaker with intention utters words divrging from the truth about it, or makes gestures with the same intention, so that the other person there understands something differing from the truth. Physical actions, such as writing a letter which conveys falsehood are as complete (a breakage of the training rule) as verbal communication and are counted in this training-rule also.” One member on DSG sometime back changed from using a cyber name to using a real name because of concern about this very point. 4. Other examples of the importance of respect by lay-followers if attending activities with monks include (in the Cullavagga from the vinaya) the points or rules by which a lay-follower cannot eat with the bhikkhus. These include, for example, abuse of monks, dispraise of the buddha or the Sangha and so on. In thee cases, his bowl is turned upside down which is another way of being moderated;-) 5. Far more serious, as I understand it, than the above examples as far as a monk is concerned would be the explaining of “non-dhamma as dhamma” and the explaining of “dhamma as non-dhamma”, “non-discipline as discipline” and “discipline as non-discipline”. These are explained in the cullavagga to lead to dissension and schism in the Order. “Now, Upaali, having split an Order that was harmonious, he sets up demerit that endures for an aeon and he is boiled in hell for an aeon.” 6. I don’t recall reading anything in the rules or the vinaya to suggest a monk cannot listen to dhamma from a lay person, participate in a dhamma discussion or instruct by the written word, assuming there is no apparent (and I’d like to stress the apparent or obvious rather than possible) lack of respect on the part of the addressee. I’d be glad to be given references or quotes with any suggestions to the contrary. Again, I believe the emphasis should be on respect for the Triple Gem. 7. I agree that the use of internet by a monk is a potential minefield. Perhaps the same could be said about living in a city wat or any other activity/situation. Indeed this is why there are strict rules, confessions, penalties and so on, none of which we, as lay people, are responsible for implementing. As I suggested in my initial post, I think we can all learn from the examples in the vinaya about apects and Teachings which reveal shortcomings in our own practice or observance of the Teachings. Sarah ====== Here are the rules (given by James): 57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 58. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 59. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 60. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 61. [62] I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed. 63. I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 64. I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a training to be observed. 65. I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits holding up his knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 66. I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not ill: a training to be observed. 67. I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 68. Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. 69. Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed. 70. Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not ill: a training to be observed. 71. Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed. 72. Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking on the path and who is not ill: a training to be observed. 16716 From: James Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 2:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? Dear Sarah, This is a very impressive post! The wealth of information/knowledge you have on this subject is quite extensive. As I stated, the reasons I gave for the bhikkhu rules are from my own interpretations and reasoning. However, you seem to have access to information I have not encountered. Would you mind giving the sources you have researched for the information you detail here? I would like to read them as well since I believe they would be of great benefit to my overall Dhamma understanding. Like the TV commercial that has the actor stating, "I may not be a doctor, but I play one on TV", then I can say, "I may not be a monk, but I play one on the Internet" :-) J/K You write regarding a position of mine: I would question James' assertion that there is nothing wrong with a monk using a cyber name which suggests he is other than a monk. From Vinaymukha vol 1, " `Sampajaanamusaavaada' means to utter false speech with full awareness. It should be understood in this way: There exists a certain matter but the speaker with intention utters words divrging from the truth about it, or makes gestures with the same intention, so that the other person there understands something differing from the truth. Physical actions, such as writing a letter which conveys falsehood are as complete (a breakage of the training rule) as verbal communication and are counted in this training-rule also." I am not sure what you mean by you would `question' my assertion. Does this mean you would disagree, are not sure, or couldn't care less? I am going to assume that this means you disagree but are being nice about it. If my assumption is wrong, I apologize. (See how easily things are confused/misunderstood with the written medium? When communicating face-to-face, there is the opportunity to check for understanding many times.) In my opinion, a monk or layperson, using a cyber-identity on the Internet, is not lying or deceiving. The Internet doesn't require anyone to give personal information, reveal personal details of lifestyle, or state physical location. The Internet is a face-less, name-less, position-less, socio-economic-less, degree-less, etc., means of communication. Actually the Internet is very Anatta in this regard. A monk doesn't have to state that he is a monk, where he lives, his real name, his age, anything. These are the accepted rules and standards of the Internet and they apply to everyone, monk or layperson. If a monk wants to participate in Dhamma discussion on the Internet, not teaching but discussion, then it is not misleading or unusual for that monk to use a pseudonym and not discuss personal details. That is the nature of this medium so that is why I have stated this position. Everyone who uses this medium understands these rules and they are accepted universally without any problems. Actually, the real identities of those participating in Yahoo services are protected by law and cannot be revealed to even a government agency for any reason. Real identity is not important on the Internet. Additionally, the Bhikkhu rules are for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines. It is not a 'sin' for a monk to be in the Internet, protect his/her identity, and participate in Dhamma discussion as a layperson. There won't be a 'Big Buddha' in the sky throwing down any thunderbolts at such a monk. The member who was concerned about the 'morality' of this and started to use his own name was just being paranoid about his karma. He could have used whatever identity he wanted and his karma would remain untouched, in my opinion. However, writing letters, writing books, using the telephone, or sending telegrams does not meet this special circumstance/criteria of the Internet. I believe that a monk who misrepresents him/herself in those mediums are deceiving others purposefully and that shouldn't be done. Metta, James 16717 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 2:53am Subject: Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? --- Dear James, There are many points in your post that others may want to comment on. I'll just look at one for now, I snip it just to get to the point: In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- > > If monks need to go to > > laypeople to learn Dhamma, there is really something > > wrong with the Sangha in that case. > > ______________ I mentioned yesterday Citta the layman: There is a section in the Tipitaka about him called, I think, Citta samyutta, salayatana: He became enlightened after the the Venerable Mahanama taught him about the ayatanas (sense bases). In the Samyutta Nikaya there are 2 suttas where he discussed deep Dhamma with monks: ""The first documented teaching by Citta relates an event where some senior Bhikkhus were sitting together in the entrance of the monastery discussing whether fetters and sense objects are one and the same. Some of the monks felt that they were the same, while some felt that they were not. Citta joined the gathering and the monks asked him his opinion. He declared that in his view fetters and sense objects were different not only in name but also in meaning. Citta then used an example to illustrate his viewpoint. He said that just as a pair of black and white oxen tied to a cart were not fetters to each other but were both fettered by a single rope or yoke strap, the sense faculties do not bind the external objects. Instead, they are bound or yoked by craving. The Bhikkhus praised Citta's understanding of the Dhamma and said that he must surely possess the eye of wisdom. On another occasion a Bhikkhu named Kamabhu recited a stanza dispensed by the Buddha and asked Citta for its meaning. The stanza with which he needed help was as follows: "The faultless chariot with its one axle, And white canopy rolls. See him coming without blemish, Without ties, the one who has crossed the stream." After some reflection Citta explained that the Buddha was referring to an Arahanth, who, without blemish or ties, has crossed the stream. He has done away with greed, hatred and delusion and is safe from the ocean of craving. The chariot is the body, the one axle is mindfulness, the smooth, frictionless holding together of the parts (faultless) is virtue and the white canopy is the final deliverance of emancipation. Impressed by his explanation, the Bhikkhu Kamabhu thanked Citta and praised him by saying that he had surely achieved great wisdom to be able to explain such complex teachings."""" 2RelativesAndDisciplesOfTheBuddha/c33.htm These suttas are recorded in The Tipitaka and carefully studied by monks even in these times BTW In the Dhammapada Atthakatha it says that once Citta made offerings to some monks and one of the monks was a little rude. He was rebuked by Citta and the monk complained to the Buddha but it was he who was made to apologize to Citta (the monk became an arahant eventually). He used to exchange letters about Dhamma with a man and he later met this man when he became a monk called (I think) Isadatta. ___________ And I am not sure about your > > generalization > > about laypeople and monks in Thailand. From my > > experience, that is not true. Laypeople in Thailand > > would never, ever presume to tell a monk about > > Dhamma. ______________ I have spoken with 4 Thai monks in Bangkok over the last month. All of whom at the time were attending Dhamma talks given by laymen, at the center where I went to meet with Sujin Boriharnwanaket. Naturally the laypeople were also very interested to hear the monks explanations of any aspects of Dhamma. And, even while listening to Dhamma teaching by laymen, are held with special high regard by the layperson. Monks are due the utmost respect . Robert 16718 From: James Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 5:55am Subject: Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- Dear James, > There are many points in your post that others may want to comment > on. I'll just look at one for now, I snip it just to get to the point: > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > --- > > > > If monks need to go to > > > laypeople to learn Dhamma, there is really something > > > wrong with the Sangha in that case. > > > ______________ Robert, This particular sentence may have jumped out at you, but you failed to include the sentence that proceeds it which reads, "Monks shouldn't need to discuss Dhamma with most laypeople to learn it (of course, there are a few exceptions of dynamic, insighful, wise laypeople who monks could learn from)". I don't believe that you and I are in disagreement. Of course there are some examples of exceptional laypeople in the suttas who could teach monks. Their good karma had probably ripened for considerable eons for them to be of this ability. But these people are rare exceptions, not the general rule. I would comment about the story of the monks in Thailand attending lectures by laypeople, but I am going to stop here. I am starting to get away from my original post, monks on the Internet, and entering a new area, the dhamma knowledge of monks vs. laypeople. And from experience, that type of discussion is really pointless. It just becomes a messy clash of generalizations leading nowhere. Monks should be respected and monks have a lot to offer to laypeople. Where laypeople fall in the scheme of the 'dhamma hierachy' should not be important or relevant. As the Buddha taught, it is conceit to believe oneself better than others, worse than others, or the same stature as others. Ultimately, there is no self and no other. Metta, James 16719 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 6:46am Subject: Attributes Of Nibbana: To KKT And All Dear KKT You provided the following meanings of Brahman/ Atman. "pure existence = sat pure consciousness = cit pure bliss = ananda truth = satyam knowledge = jnanam goodness = shivam beauty = sundaram omnipotent = infinite = anantam unborn = ajo uncreated = uncompounded = self-existent = immanent in all beings (and things) = sarva-sattva-dehantar-gata immortal = nitya eternal = shasvata permanent = dhruva" To my knowledge, the following eight attributes of Brahman/Atman do not apply to those of nibbana. ( pure existence = sat pure consciousness = cit pure bliss = ananda knowledge = jnanam beauty = sundaram omnipotent = self-existent = immanent in all beings (and things) = sarva-sattva-dehantar-gata ) Nibbana is not a sentient being. Therefore, sat, cit, annada, jnanam, omnipotent, and sarva-sattva-dehantar-gata (entering and residing as an homunculi in all beings) do not apply to nibbana. Similarly, sundaram (beauty) does not apply to nibbana because nibbana is "anidassana.m (invincible, unseeable)". Similarly, nibbana is not self-existent because it is selfless and because it is "abhuutam,neither caused by others nor self-caused". However, nibbana also has the following nine attributes. ( truth = satyam goodness = shivam infinite = anantam unborn = ajo uncreated = uncompounded = immortal = nitya eternal = shasvata permanent = dhruva ) With kind regards and appreciation Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: Dear Suan, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: Dear KKT You wrote the following. "...since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things." I wonder if you could post those meanings of atta in Pali or Sanskrit when you have spare time. I will like to check them side by side with the meanings of nibbana in that Udaana passage. Thanking in advance. With kind regards Suan KKT: I think there are two main meanings of atta or self: __The empirical self: This is the ego or the << feeling of I, Me, Mine, Myself >> or the << I-thought >> This << self >> was categorically denied by the Buddha in His 2nd sermon i.e. Anattalakkhana Sutta and in many other suttas by this famous phrase: << This is not mine, this I am not, this is not myself >> (*) __The metaphysical self: In the historical context of the Buddha's time, this is the Atman/Brahman of orthodox Brahmanism or the Jiva (life principle) of Jainism (another unorthodox system like Buddhism) It seems that the Buddha didn't give a definite answer when being asked about this << self >> as in this sutta: Vacchagotta comes to the Buddha and asks: 'Venerable Gotama, is there an Atman?' The Buddha is silent. 'Then Venarable Gotama, is there no Atman?' Again the Buddha is silent. Vacchagotta gets up and goes away. (Samyutta Nykaya) I think just because of the silence of the Buddha that after Buddha's Parinibbana people began to speculate alot about this << fundamental >> question. (and a quite exciting question :-)) As for your request, I've found a list of some << attributes >> of Braman/Atman in Sanskrit but they are not complete (I am not expert in Sanskrit) pure existence = sat pure consciousness = cit pure bliss = ananda truth = satyam knowledge = jnanam goodness = shivam beauty = sundaram omnipotent = infinite = anantam unborn = ajo uncreated = uncompounded = self-existent = immanent in all beings (and things) = sarva-sattva-dehantar-gata immortal = nitya eternal = shasvata permanent = dhruva BTW, in the Milindapanho, Nibbana is described as: << pure bliss >> << cannot be elucidated by means of any simile, explanation, reason, or inference >> << is not past, not future, not present, not produced, not unproduced, not producible >> << is not in storage somewhere >> << is not due to kamma, causes, climatic changes >> Hope this helps. Peace, KKT (*) In the Maitreya Upanishads there is a similar phrase: Borne along and defiled by the stream of qualities, unsteady, wavering, bewildered, full of desire, distracted, one goes on into the state of self-conceit. In thinking, "This is I" and "That is mine" one binds himself with himself, as does a bird with a snare. ============== --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "phamdluan2000" wrote: Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, Rahula - Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking that position causes me to wonder about that organization. The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be unintentional. With metta, Howard KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. This definition could easily lead one to think that Nibbana is atta since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things. If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> and << independent >> of everything? I raise this question not because I want to defend the atta doctrine but because I want to show that this matter is not easily to clinch. Peace, KKT 16720 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 8:07am Subject: Re: Monks should not write to laypeople? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" > I don't believe that you and I are in disagreement. Of course there > are some examples of exceptional laypeople in the suttas who could > teach monks. Their good karma had probably ripened for considerable > eons for them to be of this ability. But these people are rare > exceptions, not the general rule. > _____________________ Dear James, I think from this post that we do agree on most points. Certainly I agree that the ripening of kamma over aeons would be the cause for these laypeople having this ability , and the same for those wise monks who could do the same. Just to add a related point about the importance of both monks and laypeople having the responsibilty of passing on the Dhamma there is one sutta where the Buddha said he "will not pass away until monks, nuns , wise laymen and laywoman are able to proclaim this Dhamma correctly and refute any erroneous notions about Dhamma that arise" or words to that effect. _______________ > > Monks should be respected and monks have a lot to offer to > laypeople. Where laypeople fall in the scheme of the 'dhamma > hierachy' should not be important or relevant. As the Buddha taught, > it is conceit to believe oneself better than others, worse than > others, or the same stature as others. Ultimately, there is no self > and no other. __________ Yes, I think so too. Robert 16721 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 8:59am Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:32 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. > > > "There can be nothing apart from the qualities of > primary and derived > materiality, in a body." > > Hi all, > > Anyone know what primary and derived materiality > is? The primary materiality is the 4 primary rupa elements (hardness-softness, cohesion, tension, and heat-cold), and the derived materiality is the 24 other rupa elements. The 4 primary rupa elements are said to arise in mutual dependence on one another, but not on the derived elements. The derived elements are derived because they all depend on the primary elements to arise. kom 16722 From: uanchihliu Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 9:07am Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Hi Antony and all, This thread has evolved into a great discussion of what nibbana is, and I follow it with tremendous interest. However, may I share a different perspectives on this. You said > I would like to appreciate and form skillful beliefs > about the Buddhist goal of parinibbana in order to feel > inspired and arouse interest in practising the path. > > I would like to believe that parinibbana is full of love > and compassion like the path is rather than just an > undifferentiated peace. > Personally I feel that if you would like to believe that parinibbana is full of love and compassion, or if I may re-phrase it, if you are looking for love and compassion, then I think you are on the wrong path. However, if you are looking to find truth, or to see things as they really are, then give Buddhism a try, because that's what it says it's offering. I hope I don't sound too harsh. Somehow it just reminded me of the movie, "Matrix", where one was being offered the "red pill" and the "blue pill". When you take the "red pill" (or was it blue, sorry I am getting old), you will see the truth as it is. In the movie, it turned out the truth is not beautiful, and in fact, one person regretted taking the red pill. So my question to you is, do you like to take the red pill or the blue pill. Buddhism is not a belief, if I understand it correctly. That is why there is so much emphasis on knowledge by direct experience. It is showing you the way, but you have to confirm every bit of what's being told to you by direct experience. There are many discussions on nibbana, but fact remains, if you are not a arahat, you would never comprehend what nibbana means. Even in Christianity, no matter how much you hear about heaven, the fact remains, if you are not in heaven, you would never comprehend what heaven is like. I thank you for prompting this question in this group. It really makes me to reconsider, and these are just my thoughts... with metta, WL 16723 From: Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 4:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Hi, Kom and all - In a message dated 11/6/02 12:00:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > > Dear Larry, > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > >Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:32 PM > >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > >Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. > > > > > >"There can be nothing apart from the qualities of > >primary and derived > >materiality, in a body." > > > >Hi all, > > > >Anyone know what primary and derived materiality > >is? > > The primary materiality is the 4 primary rupa elements > (hardness-softness, cohesion, tension, and heat-cold), and > the derived materiality is the 24 other rupa elements. The > 4 primary rupa elements are said to arise in mutual > dependence on one another, but not on the derived elements. > The derived elements are derived because they all depend on > the primary elements to arise. > > kom > ========================= I have a few questions: 1) Kom, you render the traditional 'air' as "tension". Is one to think of this "tension" as the directly experienced rupa corresponding to the pa~n~natti of motion? 2) In what sense/way are rupas such as images and sounds *derived* from primary rupas? Also, doesn't this notion of primary rupas hark back the the Hindu notion of three gunas: satvas, tamas, and rajas? 3) Does their being derived from primary rupas in any way compromise the status of derived elements as paramattha? Or, better put, what do the derived rupa elements and the primary rupa elements have in common that makes them all paramattha dhammas? 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) 16724 From: James Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 10:14am Subject: Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "uanchihliu" wrote: > Personally I feel that if you would like to believe that > parinibbana is full of love and compassion, or if I > may re-phrase it, if you are looking for love and > compassion, then I think you are on the wrong path. > > However, if you are looking to find truth, or to see > things as they really are, then give Buddhism a try, > because that's what it says it's offering. > > I hope I don't sound too harsh. Dear WL, I really like your style of writing. It is very clean and forceful. However, while I see your good intentions with these statements (discouraging attachment), I strongly disagree with this conclusion you draw about Buddhism, Nibbana, and Parinibanna. Seeking `the truth' and seeking `love and compassion' are synonymous in my book. The truth is love and compassion and love and compassion are the truth. At least the Buddha said so, and I consider him the authority on `truth' (conventional and absolute), though others may not. Here are some links to some of the suttas where he addresses this important subject. I included the descriptions available at www.accesstoinsight.org: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-027.html (The Buddha encourages the practice of the brahmavihara (sublime states of metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha) as a basis for concentration practice, as it leads to five important realizations.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-063.html (The Buddha describes the practices of the four sublime states (metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha) and of the four frames of reference (foundations of mindfulness) as a basis for concentration practice.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-016.html (Eleven benefits arising from the practice of metta (loving kindness, or good- will) meditation.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn20-005.html (Two suttas on the extraordinary power of metta (goodwill).) And allow me to quote one whole sutta in conclusion, even though I know this is discouraged on this list it is a rather short sutta, and it states emphatically that metta (love, compassion, and good will) will lead one to Nibbana. And if the state of Nibbana has these qualities, it only stands to reason that Parinibbana would also, and possibly even more so. The Buddha stated that death was not the end and hinted very strongly that Nibbana was not the end. He knew that there wasn't an end, and couldn't discern a beginning…therefore, there must be only being. And `being' has the strong quality of metta. This is not attachment to metta in my eyes, this is truth. Metta, James Karaniya Metta Sutta Good Will This is to be done by one skilled in aims who wants to break through to the state of peace: Be capable, upright, & straightforward, easy to instruct, gentle, & not conceited, content & easy to support, with few duties, living lightly, with peaceful faculties, masterful, modest, & no greed for supporters. Do not do the slightest thing that the wise would later censure. Think: Happy, at rest, may all beings be happy at heart. Whatever beings there may be, weak or strong, without exception, long, large, middling, short, subtle, blatant, seen & unseen, near & far, born & seeking birth: May all beings be happy at heart. Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. As a mother would risk her life to protect her child, her only child, even so should one cultivate a limitless heart with regard to all beings. With good will for the entire cosmos, cultivate a limitless heart: Above, below, & all around, unobstructed, without enmity or hate. Whether standing, walking, sitting, or lying down, as long as one is alert, one should be resolved on this mindfulness. This is called a sublime abiding here & now. Not taken with views, but virtuous & consummate in vision, having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, one never again will lie in the womb. 16725 From: James Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 10:27am Subject: Sutta Research Tip Hello All, Since this is a study group, I would like to share a technique I use to find suttas quickly on whatever subject matter I am seeking. My hope is that this may inspire others to share various techniques they use to find and research Buddhist information. Of course, we all know about www.accesstoinsight.org. And we all know that it has a search feature. But, when a search is done using this feature, it will often bring up articles and repeated links that can equal hundreds of sources. Not very helpful to find a sutta on a particular subject. What very few people know is that in Internet Explorer, if you push the `Ctrl' button and the `F' button at the same time, that will bring up a little dialogue box that is able to search all of the text of a page. Since the Sutta Pitaka has been translated with brief descriptions of the contents of the suttas, but the descriptions and the suttas are very numerous, if you do a Ctrl- F, you can type in `metta' for example, it will search the whole page and jump to the first instance of that word. Hit search again, and it will jump the page to the next instance, etc. until it reaches the end. This search capability is also helpful when looking at a very long sutta and you want to find out if it has a certain idea contained within. You don't have to read the whole sutta, just push Ctrl-F, enter the word or phrase, and you will automatically go to it or told that it doesn't exist. Hope this helps some of you in your Internet research. If you have any helpful hints/tips, I would love to hear them. Metta, James 16726 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 11:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Hi James (and Antony), I want to clarify that I don't have the slightest intention of de-emphasizing the importantce of love, compassion and good will. As James stated and quoted that metta (love, compassion, and good will) will lead one to Nibbana. Love, and compassion indeed come very naturally when one sees things the way they are. Perhaps the post is more of self-reflection on my part to be careful about seeking for a perfect world of harmony, peace, and love vs. seeing for things really are. To be careful about the moment of wanting a perfect world and creating an adversion for war and self-destruction in this world. I still don't quite agree with the statement "Seeking `the truth' and seeking `love and compassion' are synonymous in my book. But perhaps ultimately we are after the same thing, just saying them from different angles. with metta, WL ----- Original Message ----- From: "James" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:14 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "uanchihliu" wrote: > Personally I feel that if you would like to believe that > parinibbana is full of love and compassion, or if I > may re-phrase it, if you are looking for love and > compassion, then I think you are on the wrong path. > > However, if you are looking to find truth, or to see > things as they really are, then give Buddhism a try, > because that's what it says it's offering. > > I hope I don't sound too harsh. Dear WL, I really like your style of writing. It is very clean and forceful. However, while I see your good intentions with these statements (discouraging attachment), I strongly disagree with this conclusion you draw about Buddhism, Nibbana, and Parinibanna. Seeking `the truth' and seeking `love and compassion' are synonymous in my book. The truth is love and compassion and love and compassion are the truth. At least the Buddha said so, and I consider him the authority on `truth' (conventional and absolute), though others may not. Here are some links to some of the suttas where he addresses this important subject. I included the descriptions available at www.accesstoinsight.org: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-027.html (The Buddha encourages the practice of the brahmavihara (sublime states of metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha) as a basis for concentration practice, as it leads to five important realizations.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-063.html (The Buddha describes the practices of the four sublime states (metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha) and of the four frames of reference (foundations of mindfulness) as a basis for concentration practice.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an11-016.html (Eleven benefits arising from the practice of metta (loving kindness, or good- will) meditation.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn20-005.html (Two suttas on the extraordinary power of metta (goodwill).) And allow me to quote one whole sutta in conclusion, even though I know this is discouraged on this list it is a rather short sutta, and it states emphatically that metta (love, compassion, and good will) will lead one to Nibbana. And if the state of Nibbana has these qualities, it only stands to reason that Parinibbana would also, and possibly even more so. The Buddha stated that death was not the end and hinted very strongly that Nibbana was not the end. He knew that there wasn't an end, and couldn't discern a beginning.therefore, there must be only being. And `being' has the strong quality of metta. This is not attachment to metta in my eyes, this is truth. Metta, James Karaniya Metta Sutta Good Will This is to be done by one skilled in aims who wants to break through to the state of peace: Be capable, upright, & straightforward, easy to instruct, gentle, & not conceited, content & easy to support, with few duties, living lightly, with peaceful faculties, masterful, modest, & no greed for supporters. Do not do the slightest thing that the wise would later censure. Think: Happy, at rest, may all beings be happy at heart. Whatever beings there may be, weak or strong, without exception, long, large, middling, short, subtle, blatant, seen & unseen, near & far, born & seeking birth: May all beings be happy at heart. Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. As a mother would risk her life to protect her child, her only child, even so should one cultivate a limitless heart with regard to all beings. With good will for the entire cosmos, cultivate a limitless heart: Above, below, & all around, unobstructed, without enmity or hate. Whether standing, walking, sitting, or lying down, as long as one is alert, one should be resolved on this mindfulness. This is called a sublime abiding here & now. Not taken with views, but virtuous & consummate in vision, having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, one never again will lie in the womb. 16727 From: James Mitchell Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 0:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Dear WL, Yes, I think we are after the same things, just looking at them from different angles. For example, I know that life is not completely happy because I have not fully realized the 'truth'. Buddhism has nothing to do with this unhappiness and it did not create the dukkha for me. I see Buddhism as the only means to true love, compassion and happiness. As I wrote to Jan, the little girl, I am happy that she is learning about Buddhism because it views life in a positive way, not a negative way. It shows that there are possibilities and ways to reach them in this lifetime. It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that many Buddhists seem to forget this. They focus on dukkha, believing that will bring wisdom, rather than focusing on the path away from dukkha. Therefore, Buddhists can become more attached to experiencing and examining dukkha rather than focusing on the release evident in Nibbana. Now, I am a novice at the Abhidhamma, but I seem to understand the most basic principles (maybe??). In 'A Comprehensive Manual of the Abhidhamma' by Mahathera Narada it is written, "This is the division of actuality into the four ultimate realities (paramattha): consciousness, mental factors, material phenomena, and Nibbana (citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana), the first three comprising conditioned reality and the last the unconditioned element." So Nibbana isn't something that is 'out there', which only the Buddhas/Arahants have, it is something that is a part of our everyday reality. It is all around us and within us. We just can't see it fully, but we can usually sense that it is there. I think it is better to focus on the Nibbana present in each moment than the dukkha. To focus on the dissatisfaction of dukkha and the peace, love, compassion of Nibbana. But maybe I am just being too optimistic. (I know that this explantion of Abhidhamma is rather simplistic, and may be somewhat misconstrued, but I'm trying to reach the advanced knowledge of the rest of this group of these theories. Please forgive my novice understanding and explanations:-) Metta, James ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16728 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 1:02pm Subject: Re: Sutta Research Tip Hello James, and All, Thanks for that tip about Ctrl F - I tried it on your post using the word 'sutta'. :) I only have one search tip, which you may already know. I usually use Google as a search engine. I insert a stream of words or sentence or quote in the 'search' box. Good for finding suttas where you know three, four, or half a dozen words but can't remember the Nikaya or name of sutta. If you want some words in a particular order, you can enclose just those words in single inverted commas and leave additional words unenclosed in the search box. It usually throws up thousands of results with the closest matches at the top. I look at the first page of links, choose the most likely link/article, and click on 'cached'. Most links/articles have this 'cached' option. This highlights in individual different colours ALL the words in the Search request throughout the article. This way you can scroll at high speed down the page and only stop when you see the right 'blur' of colour. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Hello All, > > Since this is a study group, I would like to share a technique I use > to find suttas quickly on whatever subject matter I am seeking. My > hope is that this may inspire others to share various techniques they > use to find and research Buddhist information. > > Of course, we all know about www.accesstoinsight.org. And we all > know that it has a search feature. But, when a search is done using > this feature, it will often bring up articles and repeated links that > can equal hundreds of sources. Not very helpful to find a sutta on a > particular subject. What very few people know is that in Internet > Explorer, if you push the `Ctrl' button and the `F' button at the > same time, that will bring up a little dialogue box that is able to > search all of the text of a page. Since the Sutta Pitaka has been > translated with brief descriptions of the contents of the suttas, but > the descriptions and the suttas are very numerous, if you do a Ctrl- > F, you can type in `metta' for example, it will search the whole page > and jump to the first instance of that word. Hit search again, and > it will jump the page to the next instance, etc. until it reaches the > end. This search capability is also helpful when looking at a very > long sutta and you want to find out if it has a certain idea > contained within. You don't have to read the whole sutta, just push > Ctrl-F, enter the word or phrase, and you will automatically go to it > or told that it doesn't exist. > > Hope this helps some of you in your Internet research. If you have > any helpful hints/tips, I would love to hear them. > > Metta, James 16729 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 1:07pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Hi Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > The primary materiality is the 4 primary rupa elements > > (hardness-softness, cohesion, tension, and heat-cold), and > > the derived materiality is the 24 other rupa elements. The > > 4 primary rupa elements are said to arise in mutual > > dependence on one another, but not on the derived elements. > > The derived elements are derived because they all depend on > > the primary elements to arise. > > > > kom > > > ========================= > I have a few questions: > > 1) Kom, you render the traditional 'air' as "tension". Is > one to think > of this "tension" as the directly experienced rupa corresponding to the > pa~n~natti of motion? I think the typical rendering of the characteristics of air is: tension, vibration, and motion. Tension works for me the best: vibration and motion may work for others. I would think the pannatti of motion would correspond to the paramatha dhamma. > 2) In what sense/way are rupas such as images and sounds *derived* > from primary rupas? It is derived because sound doesn't arise singly (similar to cetasikas cannot arise without the cittas): it co-arises with the 4 primary elements (and other derived elements) and is said to be dependent on the primary elements (although the reverse isn't true). >Also, doesn't this notion of primary rupas > hark back the > the Hindu notion of three gunas: satvas, tamas, and rajas? I have no clue about anything hindu. It is called primary because it is not dependent on the derived! > > 3) Does their being derived from primary rupas in any way > compromise > the status of derived elements as paramattha? Or, better put, what do the > derived rupa elements and the primary rupa elements have in > common that makes > them all paramattha dhammas? > No. Even though the cetasikas are dependent on the citta, it doesn't compromise the status of the cetasikas as being paramatha. Paramatha means it has actual characteristics that can be directly experienced by the mind unlike concepts, which has no characteristic at all. kom 16730 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 2:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana James, I believe many Buddhists talked about dukkha not because of pessimism, but rather, if one does not sense dukkha, how can one have the desire to end the suffering? If we feel that this world is beautiful and human life is wonderful, how will one have the desire to end the rebirth? But I agree one should be careful not become more attached to experiencing and examining dukkha. Clinging to dukkha or happiness is afterall clinging. Your post somehow reminds me another post a while back by Robert: "There is a glass with water in it. The optimist "automatically" sees the glass as "half full"; the classification happened because of his perspective. The pessimist "automatically" sees the glass as "half empty"; again his conditioning plays a role. A "mindful person" does not see "half empty", does not see "half full", does not see "glass" and does not see "water"; a "mindful person" only sees "visible object". http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15922 You may be interested. I am a novice to Abhidhamma, also, so I am definitely all ears. although I don't see Buddhism as looking things from positive or negative views, nor does that implicate any indifference. I think there is no better way to explain it except back to the same old phrase: looking at the things as they really are. with metta, WL ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Mitchell" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:04 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana > Dear WL, > > Yes, I think we are after the same things, just > looking at them from different angles. For example, I > know that life is not completely happy because I have > not fully realized the 'truth'. Buddhism has nothing > to do with this unhappiness and it did not create the > dukkha for me. I see Buddhism as the only means to > true love, compassion and happiness. As I wrote to > Jan, the little girl, I am happy that she is learning > about Buddhism because it views life in a positive > way, not a negative way. It shows that there are > possibilities and ways to reach them in this lifetime. > > It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that many > Buddhists seem to forget this. They focus on dukkha, > believing that will bring wisdom, rather than focusing > on the path away from dukkha. Therefore, Buddhists > can become more attached to experiencing and examining > dukkha rather than focusing on the release evident in > Nibbana. > > Now, I am a novice at the Abhidhamma, but I seem to > understand the most basic principles (maybe??). In 'A > Comprehensive Manual of the Abhidhamma' by Mahathera > Narada it is written, "This is the division of > actuality into the four ultimate realities > (paramattha): consciousness, mental factors, material > phenomena, and Nibbana (citta, cetasika, rupa, > nibbana), the first three comprising conditioned > reality and the last the unconditioned element." So > Nibbana isn't something that is 'out there', which > only the Buddhas/Arahants have, it is something that > is a part of our everyday reality. It is all around > us and within us. We just can't see it fully, but we > can usually sense that it is there. I think it is > better to focus on the Nibbana present in each moment > than the dukkha. To focus on the dissatisfaction of > dukkha and the peace, love, compassion of Nibbana. > But maybe I am just being too optimistic. (I know > that this explantion of Abhidhamma is rather > simplistic, and may be somewhat misconstrued, but I'm > trying to reach the advanced knowledge of the rest of > this group of these theories. Please forgive my > novice understanding and explanations:-) > > Metta, James 16731 From: James Mitchell Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 3:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Dear WL, Though everyone may get sick of this conversation, I want to continue it. I really enjoy this exchange with you. It makes me think and examine my own Buddhist beliefs. I will reply to your post in-text. Please do not take this as picking it apart, because I am not. It is just that each sentence of yours has a wealth of information and thought, I must do it that way. James, I believe many Buddhists talked about dukkha not because of pessimism, but rather, if one does not sense dukkha, how can one have the desire to end the suffering? (The desire to end suffering is in all of us. We are all born wanting to end the suffering of our lives, our birth, old age, sickness, death, lamentation, sorrow. This is nothing new. Even before the Buddha declared the 4NT, the people of ancient India knew this fact of life. The only thing the Buddha added is a way to escape it that was real and workable. Before the Buddha, everyone resigned themselves to suffer. Suffering is extremely easy to see for everyone. What is not so easy to see is what causes it and the path away from it. So I still say that the emphasis of mindfulness should not be on the dukkha inherent in one’s self or the world; the emphasis should be on the Eightfold Path to liberation. Most Buddhists see the Four Noble Truths as separate things, separate truths. But I posit that they are not separate, they are actually One Noble Truth that has four parts. If a person focuses on just one part, they won’t get the rest of the one truth. The only time the Buddha told his monks to focus on dukkha separate from the 4NT is when he suggested seeing the body as ugly and decaying. And that is a very controversial meditation in my estimation and caused some monks to kill themselves or have others kill them [I have read this elsewhere but cannot find the sutta on the Internet. I suspect it has been censored]. Focusing on dukkha alone is unhealthy and dangerous.). If we feel that this world is beautiful and human life is wonderful, how will one have the desire to end the rebirth? (Because we will. We will see that the human mind has tortured us for eons, that it has made us not enjoy the beauty around us and in us, and that now that we finally have seen it, it is time to go. The party is over because the Pinata has been broken open, the candy is all over the floor, and the end has been reached. It is ironic that just when we see the true beauty of life, it is time to leave it behind. But life is ironic sometimes) But I agree one should be careful not become more attached to experiencing and examining dukkha. Clinging to dukkha or happiness is afterall clinging. Your post somehow reminds me another post a while back by Robert: "There is a glass with water in it. The optimist "automatically" sees the glass as "half full"; the classification happened because of his perspective. The pessimist "automatically" sees the glass as "half empty"; again his conditioning plays a role. A "mindful person" does not see "half empty", does not see "half full", does not see "glass" and does not see "water"; a "mindful person" only sees "visible object". http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15922 You may be interested. (I read this prior post and I don’t agree with how mindfulness has been interpreted. This post suggests that mindfulness is the process of sensations entering the sense doors and not having conceptual understanding applied to them. I don’t see that as mindfulness, I see that as being brain dead. Concepts must be applied to have mindfulness and the resulting wisdom. In the example you give, I believe that the mindful person would see (in Abhidhamma terms): Rupa dhamma enters Nama dhamma. Nama dhamma applies nama dhamma to rupa dhamma. Nama dhamma and nibbana dhamma combine nama-nama dhamma to nama-rupa dhamma. Get that?? :-) Translation: The image of the glass enters the mind. The mind adds a mental categorization to that image. The mind with the quality of Nibbana, which is separate and unconditioned from this process, is able to see this nama-rupa process as being separate from self [called meta-cognition]. The mind process and the rupa process are seen as separate but combined. Wisdom arises in the mind at the most basic level with this understanding through unconditioned nibbana dhamma.) I am a novice to Abhidhamma, also, so I am definitely all ears. (Good, then is the above is all wrong, you won’t be able to correct me! :-) although I don't see Buddhism as looking things from positive or negative views, nor does that implicate any indifference. I think there is no better way to explain it except back to the same old phrase: looking at the things as they really are. (Seeing things as they really are is, true, unconditioned by positive or negative interpretations. But the nibbana dhamma quality still sees how the mind applies either positive or negative interpretions to nama-rupa occurrences. But the quickest route to that level of nibbana dhamma is through an initially positive outlook, in my opinion) With Much Metta, James with metta, WL ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16732 From: James Mitchell Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 4:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta Research Tip Christine, No, I was not familiar with this search technique. I will give it a try. It sounds pretty neat. Glad you like the Ctrl-F function. I would use it on more important things than my posts though! :-) Metta, James --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello James, and All, > > Thanks for that tip about Ctrl F - I tried it on > your post using the > word 'sutta'. :) > I only have one search tip, which you may already > know. > I usually use Google as a search engine. I insert a > stream of words > or sentence or quote in the 'search' box. Good for > finding suttas > where you know three, four, or half a dozen words > but can't remember > the Nikaya or name of sutta. If you want some words > in a particular > order, you can enclose just those words in single > inverted commas and > leave additional words unenclosed in the search box. > It usually > throws up thousands of results with the closest > matches at the top. > I look at the first page of links, choose the most > likely > link/article, and click on 'cached'. Most > links/articles have > this 'cached' option. This highlights in individual > different colours > ALL the words in the Search request throughout the > article. This way > you can scroll at high speed down the page and only > stop when you see > the right 'blur' of colour. > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" > wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > Since this is a study group, I would like to share > a technique I > use > > to find suttas quickly on whatever subject matter > I am seeking. My > > hope is that this may inspire others to share > various techniques > they > > use to find and research Buddhist information. > > > > Of course, we all know about > www.accesstoinsight.org. And we all > > know that it has a search feature. But, when a > search is done > using > > this feature, it will often bring up articles and > repeated links > that > > can equal hundreds of sources. Not very helpful > to find a sutta on > a > > particular subject. What very few people know is > that in Internet > > Explorer, if you push the `Ctrl' button and the > `F' button at the > > same time, that will bring up a little dialogue > box that is able to > > search all of the text of a page. Since the Sutta > Pitaka has been > > translated with brief descriptions of the contents > of the suttas, > but > > the descriptions and the suttas are very numerous, > if you do a Ctrl- > > F, you can type in `metta' for example, it will > search the whole > page > > and jump to the first instance of that word. Hit > search again, and > > it will jump the page to the next instance, etc. > until it reaches > the > > end. This search capability is also helpful when > looking at a very > > long sutta and you want to find out if it has a > certain idea > > contained within. You don't have to read the > whole sutta, just > push > > Ctrl-F, enter the word or phrase, and you will > automatically go to > it > > or told that it doesn't exist. > > > > Hope this helps some of you in your Internet > research. If you have > > any helpful hints/tips, I would love to hear them. > > > > Metta, James > > ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16733 From: Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 4:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of the major and the minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a cart. The character of contemplating the collection of the hair of the head, the hair of the body and the like is comparable to the seeing of the component parts of a city; and the character of contemplating the collection of primary and derived materiality is comparable to the separation of the leaf covering of a plantain-trunk, or is like the opening of an empty fist. Therefore, by the pointing out of the basis called the body in the form of a collection in many ways, the sifting out thoroughly of the apparently compact is shown. Hi all, I think the above answers a question I raised a few days ago: "Is the fine discrimination of all the various dhammas in the abhidhamma really necessary? Or could we just see whatever arises as foul, painful, impermanent, or not self?" The answer is yes, the fine discrimination of the various dhammas is necessary for the "sifting out thoroughly of the apparently compact". This also accords with the definition of anupassana, see below. Larry -------------- Anu (p. 17) (adj.) [Sk. anu; as to etym. see Walde Lat. Wtb. under ulna. See also ani] small, minute, atomic, subtle Anupassana (p. 39) (f.) [abstr. of anupassati, cf. Sk. anudarsana] looking at, viewing, contemplating, consideration, realisation 16734 From: Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 5:07pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Hi Kom, Thanks for the info on rupa elements. How would you interpret this sentence: "the character of contemplating the collection of primary and derived materiality is comparable to the separation of the leaf covering of a plantain-trunk, or is like the opening of an empty fist." L: Also, there seems to be a difference between kaya and rupa. Kaya includes the various parts of the body and rupa. Would you agree? The intention of 'anupassana' seems to be to break down any apparent whole (concept) into its parts. The phrase "contemplate the body in the body" is said in order to isolate body from feeling, citta, and dhamma. So the contemplation of the elements of rupa here must be different from contemplating rupa as a khandha in dhammanupassana. Any thoughts on this? Larry 16735 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 6:15pm Subject: Re: Practice on DSG, Q1a,b Hi Jaran, Kom (and all), I liked your explanation and reminder that Right Practice occurs when there are conditions for it to do so - the prominent condition being Right Understanding. (I don't know why I seem to 'forget'dhamma knowledge so easily from time to time. But I see that "He has heard much, has retained what he has heard, has stored what he has heard." is part of the fifth requisite condition for the acquiring of panna.) I know what you say about conditions is true , and I remember RobK saying similar things a while ago, about there being no self and no control and that if the right conditions exist for something to arise, then whether one 'wants' it to or not, it will arise. And, of course, the opposite applies also. Jaran, I know you warned about: > "Now because we love our > Self and we want to be good and happy, we have to "do something" to > get rid of Self and wrong-view. Automatically, being influenced by the > enemies of right understanding, we have to be as successful as we are in > the worldlies, so we set out to find a way." But - aren't 'listening to Dhamma' 'considering Dhamma' and 'discussing Dhamma' choices whereby a condition is created that may influence the arising of panna? Perhaps not everytime ... So - 'who' is it that can choose to listen, consider and discuss the Dhamma? And I wonder 'how' this 'who' would differ from one who chooses to sit on a cushion, watches the breath and anything that presents at the sense doors, and believes a condition is created for sati to arise, though perhaps not everytime. I guess I'm thinking out loud and wondering if the cushion sitter is encouraging the kusala states that support the 8-fold path, as in Kom's explanation of what leads to nibbana ... "And what leads to nibbana? Satipatthana (the 8-fold path), and all the kusala states supporting it, conditioning it." Thanks for the 'Panna' sutta, and for your kind words. I found a new site (to me) with suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya: http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0228.HTM 'Panna Sutta' http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0228/$3p.htm metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., jaran jai-nhuknan wrote: > Hi Chris, please see below. > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 20:48:13 -0000 > From: "christine_forsyth" > Subject: Practice on DSG > > Dear Group, > > I found the two posts about Roberts' meeting with Acharn Somporn very > interesting, but I have a few questions about death and practice and > hope someone may have the time and inclination to comment on them ... > > > From the first post :Meeting with Acharn somporn" > "He said that reading the texts is one aspect but only by understanding > sabhava -realities - directly can there be proper understanding. > Everything is dhamma , whether it be seeing or hearing, colour or > sound, hardness, heat, even avijja (ignorance) is dhamma. There is no > one,no being there at all but because of wrong view the > characteristics (lakkhana ) which are simply conditioned dhamma are > taken as self. This is very deep and subtle sakkya ditthi shows > itself by clinging to wrong practice. > He said if there is real understanding of sabhava dhamma then there > is no fear of death because there is no self in sabhava." > > Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify for me how 'right > practice' would occur in the everyday life of a buddhist today? > (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in everyday > life of a buddhist today would be defined? > ---------------------------------- > > I enjoyed the posts as well. Roberts always has interesting points to share > with us. > > Regarding the question above, it is an important question. I am sure many > have addressed this very point many times although it may not have been in > the way that answers your question directly. Before answering your question, > let me tell you my view of 'right practice'. > > Right understanding encompasses right practice. IMHO, there is only one > practice in Buddhism, and it is a noun, practice. Practice refers to the > development of right understanding, meaning the growth of right > understanding, not the making or improvement. :-) This is because right > understanding is a dhamma; it arises due to conditions, falls away > immediately, contains its own characteristics, and cannot be controlled. > This is why it cannot be 'developed' (by us). > > The right practice of a Buddhist today is the same as that of those in the > Buddha's time since the right understanding is always right understanding > (although of many levels). However, what makes today different from the > Buddha's time is the degree of wrong-view and other akusala dhammas. > According to the Tipitaka and from my observations, we are full of, and > affected by, more akusala dhammas than kusala dhammas. We have been > influenced by the enemies of right understanding for a long time. Let's take > this life as an example, we have been working hard for happiness, wealth, > recognition, achievements all our life because wrong-view tell us there is > 'Self'. As you know, the idea of Self is due to three things: wrong- view, > attachment and conceit, and the idea of Self can be so subtle what we cannot > 'feel' it or it can be very apparent. We don't have to think that there is a > 'Self'-- it's automatic. As automatic as we see when we open our eyes, when > we wake up, there is already idea of Self, how subtle it may be. > > Then we learned that people, things, concept are synthesized in our head due > to ignorance, attachment and anger. Furthermore, everything around us is > dhamma with anicca, dhukka and anatta quality. (we can be specific about > anatta here, but let's leave it for the future discussion). > > Soon we learn that the 'Self' is due to, among other things, wrong- view, an > akusala dhamma, a very bad thing. This is one degree of right > understanding--listening and perhaps contemplating. Now because we love our > Self and we want to be good and happy, we have to "do something" to get rid > of Self and wrong-view. Automatically, being influenced by the enemies of > right understanding, we have to be as successful as we are in the worldlies, > so we set out to find a way. As you can see, this is under influence of > "Self", but many of us don't know it or don't have enough courage to admit > it. > > As you can see, the right understanding in one level does not easily > translate to another (higher) level of understanding. We read all about the > 'concept' of dhamma and understand most of it. However, when we come back to > the 'world' in stead of sticking to we leave our understanding in the books > we read (in our case, in the emails :-), we often go back to our 'usual': > the influence of the enemies of right understanding--often lobha, > attachment. With the attachment to Self, we go after kusala dhamma, metta, > sati, panna, insights, vipassana nana, and even Nibbana, and we can't help > feeling sorry (or guilty) when akusala dhamma arise. Often we tell ourselves > (or Self) that we do it for the higher level of understanding, but what we > fail to realize (or admit) is that we are going after good kusala dhamma and > running away from akusala dhamma because of the idea of 'Self'. > > This is often because we are not being very 'honest' (to ourselves or just > for the sake of dhamma). This is where tattaramajjhatattaa (one of general > wholesome cetasikas) comes in. Until we are brave enough to accept any > dhamma arising for us to study, until we are brave enough to study the > quality of Self when we feel we have to do something for higher level of > understanding, until we are brave enough to stick to what we study and > understand in the book, and until we are brave enough to reason everything > we read, listen, learn, observe, it is hard for the 'right practice' to grow > or even arise. > > To me, facing the idea of 'Self' in daily life seems the hardest thing, and > most critical, of the whole study. > > If you ask Sarah this question, I am sure she would say ''right practice' is > anything that is based on 'right understanding.'' > > This is probably because you cannot put your finger on the 'right practice' > since it is the quality of mind not visible to the eye as A Sujin once said > that 'by looking, you cannot tell a person to whom satipatthana has arisen > from others because noone knows his mind'. > > This stresses the importance of being very honest to oneself, since no one > knows the quality his mind better than himself. We can fool someone else but > not ourselves. > > I am digressing. Now that you know what my 'right practice' is, let's try to > answer your question. Simply put, 'right practice' occurs in daily life that > same way that lobha and other dhammas do--when there are conditions for > it....so natural. And the prominent condition is probably right > understanding. > > Based on the same principles, the 'wrong practice' can be simply defined as > anything that is 'done' based on the idea of Self (due to attachment, wrong > view, conceit as well as other akusala dhamma) whether one realizes it or > not. Who can tell if it's right practice or a wrong one? Nobody knows that > better than ourselves. > > Please note that I think that 'right practice' includes more than > satipatthana (we have to ask Nina, Roberts K, Kom, Num, Jon and others I > don't remember the names, sorry) according to AN8,2 (panna sutta), among > others. > > Chris, may I say I always enjoy your posts. I wish I could be half as > articulate as you are. > > With appreciation, > Jaran 16736 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 6:46pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" James, I assure you I wasn't mocking the Vinaya. I meant the remarks exactly as written. I do not disparage or discount any of the three baskets of the Tipitaka - to do that (IMO) would be to set myself above the Buddha and/or the Arahats, and reduce what the Enlightened Ones saw as vital, to a mere topic for intellectual discussion, creating the illusion of serious consideration while going backwards in the practice. It doesn't concern me to say it sounds odd, or I don't understand - that's the truth as it appears to me, and I always welcome further clarification ... which you, Rob and Sarah have given. The installing of a webcam, if the Bhikkhu Sangha genuinely and universally required that to teach Dhamma, would be no problem at all. And though your words are something to reflect on, I am not presently convinced of that. I think it is commendable the way you prepare yourself for Dhamma study and meditation and show your respect for the Dhamma. I totally agree with you. James, I accept that where I am born is the fruits of kamma - but still I feel it is so easy to become fatalistic. The result of past action only lasts a mind moment (the instant of conception, say) , and this places me in this country and with these parents. But it doesn't mean I have to be frozen within current circumstances. From time to time certain aspects of Kamma give me food for thought - e.g. To be born in the animal kingdom is seen as 'bad' kamma - but yesterday while waiting for word of my dog's surgery someone at work remarked that 90% of the humans in the world would not have access to such skilled care and surgery if they suffered from the same injury ... at first I thought to myself, yes, but Rusty doesn't have the chance of hearing the Dhamma (apart from listening to the cadence of the Brahma Viharas). And then I remembered that neither do all humans, perhaps not even the majority. So - I put Kamma back in the 'too hard' basket again for a while ... Thank you for your confidence in my progress in the Dhamma. :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Sorry, my e-mail is not cooperating with me today. > Here is the complete message I intended to send. > Sorry for the odd spacing. > > > > --- christine_forsyth > > wrote: > > > > Hi James, > > > > I hadn't heard these rules before. If we all > > get > > > > webcams would that > > > > be acceptable? Then any Bhikkhu could see that > > I > > > > don't have an > > > > umbrella, staff, knife, or weapon in my hand. > > I > > > > have no shoes on, > > > > I'm not in a vehicle, I'm not lying down, not > > > > sitting holding up my > > > > knees and not wearing head gear. I would be > > happy > > > > to sit, stand or > > > > walk as directed to obtain Dhamma teachings. > > > > > > (Christine, if you were willing to go to that > > extent > > > to observe the bhikkhu rules, then of course a > > monk > > > could teach the dhamma to you over the Internet. > > I > > > am > > > not sure if you are mocking these rules or not, > > > probably not, but they do serve a very valuable > > > purpose. A person must be in the right > > > frame-of-mind > > > to properly receive the dhamma. As the Buddha > > said, > > > ""This Dhamma that I have attained is deep, hard > > to > > > see, hard to realize, peaceful, refined, beyond > > the > > > scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by > > > the > > > wise." If a person is walking with an umbrella, > > or > > > even walking a path, or driving, or has his shoes > > on > > > (ready to go somewhere else), or has a walking > > stick > > > (again, going somewhere), or has a knife or weapon > > > in > > > his hand (obviously not ready for dhamma > > teaching), > > > or > > > lying down relaxing, or holding the knees in a > > > relaxing pose, or is wearing a hat or headgear > > > (again, > > > going somewhere), or sitting in a chair relaxing, > > or > > > sitting higher than a monk, than that person is > > not > > > ready to receive the teachings of the dhamma. The > > > Dhamma is a very serious business and should not > > be > > > taken lightly. Whenever I read the dhamma or > > > discuss > > > the dhamma, I make sure that I am not lying down, > > > that > > > my shoes are off, that I am not planning on going > > > anywhere else, that I am alert...and I have even > > > added > > > some of my own rules to this list that the Buddha > > > didn't require: I make sure that my hands are > > clean, > > > that my face is clean, and that I am not eating > > > anything (drinking water is acceptable). I won't > > > even > > > meditate unless I have washed my face and hands. > > I > > > believe that the body must be clean when receiving > > > the > > > dhamma or it is disrespectful to the Triple Gem. > > > And > > > eating food is a big no-no. If I eat, I eat. If > > I > > > study the dhamma, I study the dhamma. I don't do > > > both.) > > > > I am sure, though they sound very odd, that > > there > > > > must be a good > > > > reasons behind these rules. > > > (I think I have explained some. But it is just my > > > interpretation. I don't know all of the reasons > > > behind the rules.) > > > > I have never met with or spoken to a Bhikkhu > > > > personally - and the > > > > last time I met another Buddhist was when the > > dsg > > > > members got > > > > together at Noosa three months ago. But I have > > > had > > > > a few private > > > > emails from members of the Sangha that were > > > > invaluable in helping me > > > > understand the Dhamma. > > > (I will not comment on the monk writing to you. I > > > really don't know all of the ins and outs about > > > that. > > > But I do know one thing: Christine, it is your > > karma > > > to be in a situation where you must learn the > > Dhamma > > > on your own. You have this situation in your life > > > now > > > for a reason. I would lightly suggest that you > > not > > > begrudge it or hope that things were different for > > > you. Though it may seem difficult at times, later > > > you > > > will probably see the wisdom of it. You will rise > > > like a Phoenix from the ashes of your solitary > > > struggles; which I think you have already > > actually. > > > I > > > see you streaking across the sky, with a trail of > > > Dhamma fire, and I have little sympathy for > > > you...maybe some envy but not sympathy. > > > > > > No Dhamma is better than corrupt Dhamma. The > > Buddha > > > came up with these rules for a reason. If a > > person, > > > lay or monk, takes refuge in the Triple Gem, they > > > must > > > accept the whole enchilada. It isn't a 'pick and > > > choose' kinda thing for those who accept The > > Triple > > > Gem into their hearts and minds.) > > > > Email and the internet is the only avenue I have > > > for > > > > contact, and > > > > having the Dhamma explained. > > > (No, you have your mind and your heart. Even if > > you > > > had absolutely nothing, no e-mail, no books, no > > > suttas, no contacts, nothing! When you are ready, > > > the > > > Dhamma will find you and teach you. In Taoism, it > > > is > > > said, "When the heart is ready the teacher will > > > come." > > > I believe that very much. And I also believe > > that > > > often the teacher is oneself. > > > > Appreciate the opportunities you have ... > > > (Accept the karma you have.) > > > > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > > > > > Metta, James 16737 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 6:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Hello James and WL, I am enjoying the exchanges between the two of you as well. May I add that with regard to the Four Noble Truths that our job is To understand the First Truth To Abandon the Second Truth To Realise the Third Truth To Develop the Fourth Truth. None of which is easy to do. None or which we have managed to do through uncountable lives. It is not just a case of acknowledging the saying, "Sh-t happens, and then you die", and thinking you understand Dukkha. Dukkha, anatta, anicca are all difficult to realise. Buddhism does recognise beauty. You may enjoy reading a couple of essays by Ven. Professor Dhammavihari http://www.metta.lk/english/12essays.htm Essay no. 1 "Aesthetic enjoyment within the framework of Buddhist thinking" Essay no. 3 " Buddhism and Beauty' James, the sutta you were unable to find is still where it has always been :) (I hope buddhism is about finding reality not censoring and covering it up :) in the Samyutta Nikaya, Chapter IX 53 Jhanasamyutta 'Connected Discourses on the Jhanas' 9 (9) "At Vesali" p. 1774. Excerpt 'Then those bhikkhus, thinking: "The Blessed One was giving a talk on foulness in many ways, was speaking in praise of foulness, was speaking in praise of the development of foulness meditation," dwelt devoted to the development of founess meditation in its many aspects and factors. Being repelled, humiliated, and disgusted with this body, they sought for an assailant. In one day ten bhikkhus used the knife, or in one day twenty or thirty bhikkhus used the knife." <> Ven. Ananda requested that "the Blessed One explain another method so that this Bhikkhu Sangha may be established in final knowledge." [I really would like to have met Ananda - he is just about my favourite disciple.] There are a few other suttas, also in the Samyutta Nikaya, about monks killing themselves: Godhika in Ch. IV Sagathavagga 'Connected Discourses with Mara'; Marasamyutta 23 (3) Godhika p.212 Vakkali in Part III Khandhavagga 'Connected Discourses on the Aggregates'; Khandhasamyutta 87 (5) p.938 Channa Part IV Salayatanavagga 'The book of the Six Sense Bases' ; Salayatanasayutta 87(4) p.1164 And a couple of articles that are interesting: "Buddhism and Suicide" The Case of Channa by Damian Keown http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/3/keown3.html#1 "Suicide in Buddhism - Post-Canonical deflections" by Bhikkhu Professor Dhammavihari http://www.metta.lk/english/suicide.htm This is probably more about suicide in the scriptures than anyone really wanted to know - but, it is such a common part of life whether young or old, rich or poor, ill or in good health, of all nationalities, and whether Buddhist or not. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Dear WL, > > Though everyone may get sick of this conversation, I > want to continue it. I really enjoy this exchange > with you. It makes me think and examine my own > Buddhist beliefs. I will reply to your post in-text. > Please do not take this as picking it apart, because I > am not. It is just that each sentence of yours has a > wealth of information and thought, I must do it that > way. > > James, I believe many Buddhists talked about dukkha > not because of pessimism, but rather, if one does not > sense dukkha, how can one have the desire to end the > suffering? > > (The desire to end suffering is in all of us. We are > all born wanting to end the suffering of our lives, > our birth, old age, sickness, death, lamentation, > sorrow. This is nothing new. Even before the Buddha > declared the 4NT, the people of ancient India knew > this fact of life. The only thing the Buddha added is > a way to escape it that was real and workable. Before > the Buddha, everyone resigned themselves to suffer. > Suffering is extremely easy to see for everyone. What > is not so easy to see is what causes it and the path > away from it. So I still say that the emphasis of > mindfulness should not be on the dukkha inherent in > one's self or the world; the emphasis should be on the > Eightfold Path to liberation. Most Buddhists see the > Four Noble Truths as separate things, separate truths. > But I posit that they are not separate, they are > actually One Noble Truth that has four parts. If a > person focuses on just one part, they won't get the > rest of the one truth. The only time the Buddha told > his monks to focus on dukkha separate from the 4NT is > when he suggested seeing the body as ugly and > decaying. And that is a very controversial meditation > in my estimation and caused some monks to kill > themselves or have others kill them [I have read this > elsewhere but cannot find the sutta on the Internet. > I suspect it has been censored]. Focusing on dukkha > alone is unhealthy and dangerous.). > > If we feel that this world is beautiful and human life > is wonderful, how will one have the desire to end the > rebirth? > > (Because we will. We will see that the human mind has > tortured us for eons, that it has made us not enjoy > the beauty around us and in us, and that now that we > finally have seen it, it is time to go. The party is > over because the Pinata has been broken open, the > candy is all over the floor, and the end has been > reached. It is ironic that just when we see the true > beauty of life, it is time to leave it behind. But > life is ironic sometimes) > > But I agree one should be careful not become more > attached to experiencing and examining dukkha. > Clinging to dukkha or happiness is afterall clinging. > Your post somehow reminds me another post a while back > by Robert: "There is a glass with water in it. The > optimist "automatically" sees the glass as "half > full"; the classification happened because of his > perspective. The pessimist "automatically" sees the > glass as "half empty"; again his conditioning plays a > role. A "mindful person" does not see "half empty", > does not see "half full", does not see "glass" and > does not see "water"; a "mindful person" only sees > "visible object". > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15922 > You may be interested. > > (I read this prior post and I don't agree with how > mindfulness has been interpreted. This post suggests > that mindfulness is the process of sensations entering > the sense doors and not having conceptual > understanding applied to them. I don't see that as > mindfulness, I see that as being brain dead. Concepts > must be applied to have mindfulness and the resulting > wisdom. In the example you give, I believe that the > mindful person would see (in Abhidhamma terms): Rupa > dhamma enters Nama dhamma. Nama dhamma applies nama > dhamma to rupa dhamma. Nama dhamma and nibbana dhamma > combine nama-nama dhamma to nama-rupa dhamma. Get > that?? :-) Translation: The image of the glass > enters the mind. The mind adds a mental > categorization to that image. The mind with the > quality of Nibbana, which is separate and > unconditioned from this process, is able to see this > nama-rupa process as being separate from self [called > meta-cognition]. The mind process and the rupa > process are seen as separate but combined. Wisdom > arises in the mind at the most basic level with this > understanding through unconditioned nibbana dhamma.) > > > I am a novice to Abhidhamma, also, so I am definitely > all ears. > > (Good, then is the above is all wrong, you won't be > able to correct me! :-) > > although I don't see Buddhism as looking things from > positive or negative views, nor does that implicate > any indifference. I think there is no better way to > explain it except back to the same old phrase: looking > at the things as they really are. > > (Seeing things as they really are is, true, > unconditioned by positive or negative interpretations. > But the nibbana dhamma quality still sees how the > mind applies either positive or negative interpretions > to nama-rupa occurrences. But the quickest route to > that level of nibbana dhamma is through an initially > positive outlook, in my opinion) > > With Much Metta, James > > with metta, WL 16738 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 7:11pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 --- Dear Howard, Of course we can agree to disagree on this matter. I hope you don't mind me adding some points. I think to the degree that there is self view latent then misinterprations about what nibbana is will occur. So one who sees the self as something to get rid of will incline towards an anihilationist view, while one who sees it as something good will incline the other way. This can happen of course even while one says that they believe that there is no self and that only evanasent khandas exist. The reason is that selfview is so deeply accumulated. That is why examining our ideas about nibbana and khandha parinibbana can show us some of the more gross clingings to self view. _______ Howard: "You have asked me whether I see the khandhas, or at least vi~n~nana, > as continuing after the death of an arahant. No, I don't think they do. But I > don't think they exist for the living arahant either."" ________ I am not sure what this means. There is no arahant in actuality - the term arahant is merely a useful designation such as human being or wordling. Howver the khandhas certainly exist - that is what conditioned phenomena are, what samsara is. Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it exists. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote You suggest that I see the goal of Buddhism from a nihilist perspective. That may or may not be. If you said I believed that the Buddha taught the annihilation of Dukkha you would not be wrong. And what is Dukkha is the five khandhas. These include even the most rarefied state of existence such as the plane of neither preception or non-perception. Samyutta. XXII. 30 ""Hence the annihilation, cessation and overcoming of corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness: this is the extinction of suffering, the end of disease, the overcoming of old age and death."" (endsutta) Anguttara. III. 32 ""This, truly, is Peace, this is the Highest, namely the end of all Karma formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving. detachment, extinction, Nibbaana." There are two types of nibbana. The one where an arahant is still alive and the one upon his death: From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) ""This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and thus have I heard: there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element with the groups of existence still remainin (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining. And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining.""" endquote For commentary notes see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/9420 Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > You and I are in agreement that Buddhism is not a species of > substantialism. It seems to me, however, that you see Buddhism as a kind of > nihilism inasmuch as you see its ultimate goal (paramattha) as absolute > nothingness. > You have asked me whether I see the khandhas, or at least vi~n~nana, > as continuing after the death of an arahant. No, I don't think they do. But I > don't think they exist for the living arahant either. The "experience" of an > arahant is, I believe, *radically* different from that of a worldling, with > the khandas constituting the worldling's world, but the arahant's experience > already transcending that "world" (and all "worlds") and being indescribable > because of being unconditioned and having no basis for being described. Now I > would like to ask you whether you believe that the ultimate goal of Buddhism > is an absolute nothingness. > It seems to me that for every sutta portion that can be interpreted as > saying that the ultimate goal of the Dhamma is a nothingness, there are other > suttas that can be interpreted as saying that this is not so, though still, > of course, avoiding the opposite extreme. Perhaps I tend towards the > substantialist heresy. I think you tend towards the nihilist perspective. > Does it not make sense, perhaps, for us to just agree to disagree on this > matter? ;-) > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/5/02 7:33:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... > writes: > > > > > --- > > > >-- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Now, when we talk about awareness, we generally mean > > >vi~n~nana, the > > >>discernment of an object. But nama goes beyond vi~n~nana. Nama > > >includes > > >>nibbana, which perhaps is (inadequately) describable as awareness > > of > > >absence, > > >>absence of any and all separate conditions, and completely > > foreign to > > >>anything a worldling has experienced - so different, in fact, as > > to be > > >not > > >>even properly called a thing or an awareness of a thing, but > > >something > > >>totally "other". > > _______________ > > > > Dear Howard, > > As has being discussed before Nibbana is classified in the Abhidhamma > > as arupa (not rupa) and hence nama because all relaities are either > > nama or rupa. Nama has one meaning as bending and so because nibbana > > is experienced by magga and phala it 'bends' these cittas towards > > it. > > But to have any idea of nibbana as some sort of awareness is not > > suported by the texts:In the Khandhasamyutta nikaya. XXII. 94 (p949 > > of Bodhi trans.) > > The Buddha said :A corporeal phenomenon, a feeling, a > > perception, a mental > > formation, a consciousness, which is permanent and persistent, > > eternal and not subject to change, such a thing the wise men in > > this world do not recognize; and I also say that there is no > > such thing.{endquote] > > > > Nynatiloka says'One cannot too often and too > > emphatically stress the fact that not > > only for the actual realisation of the goal of Nibbana, but also > > for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable > > preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anatta, the > > egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. > > Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive > > Nibbana - according to one's either materialistic or > > metaphysical leanings - either as > > annihilation of an ego, or an eternal state of existence into > > which an ego or self enters or with which it merges"endquote > > > > Robert 16739 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 9:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" --- Dear James, I'd like to pick up on something you said to Christine: You wrote about how your hands must be clean and several other stipulations such as not lying down before you can study Dhamma. This is of course your choice. And it is good that you have so much respect. But for me there have been so many occasions when I was contemplating or reading a Dhamma book without having especially clean hands and often while lying down. It seemd to me at those times that the respect I felt for the Dhamma was very tangible . Sometimes I think respect can be there without it appearing in physical actions. In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: And > > > eating food is a big no-no. If I eat, I eat. If > > I > > > study the dhamma, I study the dhamma. I don't do > > > both.) >___________ This was a good reminder for me. Sometimes I tend to compartmentalize life. Try to separate "Dhamma" from "mudane". So I eat mostly without study of Dhamma. Absorbed in taste and smell and greed. But with the right reminders there can be energy to study the dhammas that are arising while eating. To consider and test against what has been learned. I think in many ways the real study of Dhamma should occur while we are eating, drinking, lying down or standing up. Just some thoughts. Robert 16740 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 9:22pm Subject: ven yanatharo photograph I hope this one gets to you. Ven. Yanatharo 16741 From: James Mitchell Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 10:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Robert, I received your post while I have been searching high and low for the sutta Christine refers to that I should be able to find in the Samyutta Nikaya, section IX (Christine, I still can't find it...please send me the link where you found it.) I consider this 'study' of dhamma, so my hands are clean, my face is clean, my shoes are off, and I am sitting upright in a chair. I have taken a break a few times to eat Doritos (much against my diet..Oops..) but I did that in the kitchen and then returned to my study room. Like I said, these rules are for me to follow and I do it for a reason. If my hands and face are clean, I am more alert and not sluggish. If my shoes are off I am more peaceful and 'at home'. If I sit up in a chair while reading the dhamma, I am less likely to fall asleep or have my mind wander while I am reading. Really, I think I follow these rules for practicality and not really respect. To show respect, I just make sure I have taken a shower and that I am wearing clean clothes before I visit my Buddhist temple. I also observe certain rules there like bowing to the Buddha statue three times when arriving and when leaving, not putting my feet toward the Buddha statue, not sitting higher than a monk, and waiing to the monks I initially greet (though they see me so much that sometimes they will just stop me from doing that by approaching me and grabbing my hands in greeting). Robert, I think you and I have different definitions of what it means to 'study' dhamma. To me, to study dhamma means that I am reading or listening to the teachings of the Buddha. I don't believe that eating, drinking, lying down or standing up can be related in any way to Dhamma study; those things are Dhamma practice when one practices mindfulness. And though it could be aruged that practice is actually study in it own way, for all practical purposes they are two different things. But try it my way once and see if it makes a difference for you. Next time you read a dhamma book or suttas, wash your hands and face first, take your shoes off, sit upright in a chair, and maybe even light some incense. You may be surprised at how magical and deep the study becomes when you do that rather than just lying in bed reading before you go to sleep. Metta, James ps. You may thing this one is really weird too, but before I meditate, I put my palms together, bring my hands up to my forehead three times in a wai and think to myself, "I take refuge in the Buddha, I take refuge in the Dhamma, I take refuge in the Sangha" And when the meditation is over, I do the same thing but I think to myself, "I give thanks to the Buddha, I give thanks to the Dhamma, I give thanks to the Sangha." I must do this before I meditate or I cannot concentrate my mind. I must do it after I meditate because I spontaneously feel like I want to thank the Triple Gem for the wonderful gift of meditation. Weird but true. --- rjkjp1 wrote: > --- > Dear James, > I'd like to pick up on something you said to > Christine: > You wrote about how your hands must be clean and > several other > stipulations such as not lying down before you can > study Dhamma. This > is of course your choice. And it is good that you > have so much respect. > But for me there have been so many occasions when I > was > contemplating or reading a Dhamma book without > having especially > clean hands and often while lying down. It seemd to > me at those times > that the respect I felt for the Dhamma was very > tangible . Sometimes I > think respect can be there without it appearing in > physical actions. > In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell > wrote: > And > > > > eating food is a big no-no. If I eat, I eat. > If > > > I > > > > study the dhamma, I study the dhamma. I don't > do > > > > both.) > >___________ > This was a good reminder for me. Sometimes I tend to > > compartmentalize life. Try to separate "Dhamma" from > "mudane". So I > eat mostly without study of Dhamma. Absorbed in > taste and smell and > greed. > But with the right reminders there can be energy > to study the > dhammas that are arising while eating. To consider > and test against > what has been learned. I think in many ways the real > study of Dhamma > should occur while we are eating, drinking, lying > down or standing up. > Just some thoughts. > Robert > ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16742 From: Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 6:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/6/02 10:13:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > > --- > Dear Howard, > Of course we can agree to disagree on this matter. I hope you don't > mind me adding some points. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Of course not. -------------------------------------- > > I think to the degree that there is self view latent then > misinterprations about what nibbana is will occur. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know to what extent I have self-view. I do know that I do not *believe* in a self or in any self-sufficiency or own-being in anything. There is no *question*, of course, of how deeply ingrained is the *sense* of personal self and of essence in dhammas. --------------------------------------- So one who sees > > the self as something to get rid of will incline towards an > anihilationist view, while one who sees it as something good will > incline the other way. ----------------------------------------- Howard: There is no self to be gotten rid of. There is however the belief in self to be disabused of and the sense/illusion of self to finally be dispelled with the advent of complete enlightenment. I see the belief in self and the illusion of self, of a self in a person or in any thing, as the chief causes of suffering. I am very uncomfortable with, and believe to be false, both substantialist views and nihilist views. The middle way sees neither essence nor nothingness as the reality of things, as I understand it. To see nibbana as a self/essence/entity is, I believe, error. To see nibbana as nothingness is, I also believe, error. Exactly what nibbana is I can't say, I don't know, and, in fact, I don't think is even meaningful to ask for a genuine description of it. It is indescribable. Nothing can truly be predicated of it. But it is possible to list many things that it is not. One of these, I believe, is nothingness. ------------------------------------------ This can happen of course even while one says > > that they believe that there is no self and that only evanasent > khandas exist. The reason is that selfview is so deeply accumulated. > > That is why examining our ideas about nibbana and khandha parinibbana > can show us some of the more gross clingings to self view. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure. ------------------------------------------------- > _______ > > Howard: "You have asked me whether I see the khandhas, or at least > vi~n~nana, > >as continuing after the death of an arahant. No, I don't think they > do. But I > >don't think they exist for the living arahant either."" > ________ > > I am not sure what this means. There is no arahant in actuality - the > term arahant is merely a useful designation such as human being or > wordling. Howver the khandhas certainly exist - that is what > conditioned phenomena are, what samsara is. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: What I mean is that "reality" for the arahant is a radically transformed reality in which dependent origination is no longer an idea or belief, but is directly experienced, and the khandhas (and the namas and rupas comprising them) are no longer the separate entities of the knowledgeable worldling Buddhists or even of the lesser ariyans. For the arahant, as I see it, nothing arises and nothing ceases. One might ask if that doesn't contradict dependent arising and impermanence. It *sounds* like eternalism. I say that it does not contradict dependent arising and impermanence and is not eternalism. Dependent arising itself implies the emptiness of all dhammas, their lack of own-being and separate existence, so that no self-existent thing ever arises or ceases. What, then is reality? Well, perhaps some day we will "see" it, and then we'll know. Of course, "we" won't be there there for the occasion! ----------------------------------------------- > > Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) > "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change: this > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > exists. Feeling...perception..volitional > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, they exist. They are not nothing. But they don't self-exist. They are things-in-relation, aspects of reality separated out and reified by us. ------------------------------------------------ > > You suggest that I see the goal of Buddhism from a nihilist > perspective. That may or may not be. If you said I believed that the > Buddha taught the annihilation of Dukkha you would not be wrong. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. --------------------------------------------------- > And what is Dukkha is the five khandhas. These include even the most > rarefied state of existence such as the plane of neither preception > or non-perception. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: The five khandhas, and all their elements, are dukkha when craved, hated, or clung to. The five khandas, when attached to, are unsatisfactory. Without the craving, aversion, and attachment, they are not dukkha. And with the complete abolishment of ignorance, they are no longer even the same five khandhas. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Samyutta. XXII. 30 > ""Hence the annihilation, cessation and overcoming of > corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, and > consciousness: this is the extinction of suffering, the end of > disease, the overcoming of old age and death."" (endsutta) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: These are already gone in the living arahant. For the arahant, no entities remain at all. Entities are only for those afflicted with the atta disease. ------------------------------------------------------ > > Anguttara. III. 32 > ""This, truly, is Peace, this is the Highest, namely the end of > all Karma formations, the forsaking of every substratum of > rebirth, the fading away of craving. detachment, extinction, > Nibbaana." > > There are two types of nibbana. The one where an arahant is still > alive and the one upon his death: > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > ""This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > thus have I heard: > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > with the groups of existence still remainin > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > groups of existence still remaining. > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > remaining.""" endquote > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: You've mentioned this sutta before, Robert, and I commented on it before. Let us look at the key parts carefully: ******************* What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him (until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining. And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining. ************************ What are the "groups of existence still remaining" through which feelings are experienced, and which become extinct at death? The five sense organs. Not the *six* sense organs. The *five*. Why the omission of the mind? Was it meant, but not said? Since when was the Buddha not precise? It seems quite possible that the already radically transformed mind (mental functioning, not a self) of the arahant, already indescribable, liberated (from all defilements), and untraceable, is *not* annihilated at death, but is further liberated - finally and completely liberated, by the extinction of the five senses. This would be exactly "vi~n~nanam anidassanam anantam sabbato paham"; that is, "discernment, non-manifestive, infinite, accessible from all round". --------------------------------------------------------- > For commentary notes see > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/9420 > Robert > > ============================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 16743 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 11:29pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Hi Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Thanks for the info on rupa elements. How would > you interpret this > sentence: > > "the character of contemplating the collection of > primary and derived > materiality is comparable to the separation of > the leaf covering of a > plantain-trunk, or is like the opening of an empty fist." I think what this means is: 1) What do you find when you peel of all the leaves covering the plaintain-trunk? 2) What do you find in an empty fist when you peel off all the fingers? When panna penetrates (thoroughly, well-roundedly) the characteristics for the elements that appear, I think it will find that there is nothing but the conditioned elements which are impermanent, suffering, whose brief existence depends on all sorts of conditions, and are utterly empty of self. > > L: Also, there seems to be a difference between > kaya and rupa. Kaya > includes the various parts of the body and rupa. > Would you agree? The > intention of 'anupassana' seems to be to break > down any apparent whole > (concept) into its parts. The Kayanupassana Sattipatthana section does mention many body parts (still concepts) as objects of the conciousness. When we talk about the rupas in the 18 elements, the kandhas, the ayatanas, they are all paramatha dhammas, however. There are two sorts of breaking down the wholes (that I see): 1) Breaking a body into its body parts (the 32 body parts) 2) Breaking what we see as a whole into the only existence that can be proven to exist. For 1, we can truly see what we take as beautiful body isn't so beautiful: if this is seen with kusala states, it calms the mind, and can be an object of samatha development. For 2, we can truly see what we take as a whole, as a self (either this self or other selves) are nothing but elements, kandhas, ayatanas, and can be an object of vipassana (and samatha) development. > The phrase "contemplate the body in the body" is > said in order to > isolate body from feeling, citta, and dhamma. So > the contemplation of > the elements of rupa here must be different from > contemplating rupa as a > khandha in dhammanupassana. Any thoughts on this? Ahhhhh, it doesn't fit so neatly for me either. Maybe others will comment... kom 16744 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 11:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 --- Dear Howard, You write: " > "It seems quite possible that the already radically transformed mind > (mental functioning, not a self) of the arahant, already indescribable, > liberated (from all defilements), and untraceable, is *not* annihilated at > death, but is further liberated - finally and completely liberated, by the > extinction of the five senses. This would be exactly "vi~n~nanam anidassanam > anantam sabbato paham"; that is, "discernment, non-manifestive, infinite, > accessible from all round"."" So in a few words I think you are saying that upon the death of the arahant the five sense organs cease but somehow, in some way, a transformed vinnana (consciousness)of undescribable purity etc. continues on. You suggest that the sutta I quoted from the Itivuttaka allows this interpretation. A while back Jim Anderson researched the commentary to this sutta and translated it for us. Here is the relevant part: Itv-a I 167> siitibhavissantii ti accantavuupasamena sa"nkhaaradarathapa.tippassaddhiyaa siitalii bhavissanti, appa.tisandhika-nirodhena nirujjhissantii ti attho. na kevala.m vedayitaani yeva sabbepi pana khii.naasava-santaane pa~ncakkhandhaa nirujjhissanti. vedayitasiisena desanaa kataa. Roughly translated: "will become cool" -- will become cool with absolute calm, with the tranquillization of the anxiety of the formations, the meaning is: 'will cease with the non-rebirth-linking-cessation'. Not just the sensed alone but all the five aggregates in the continuum of a canker- waned one will cease also. A teaching with the 'sensed' as head is made."end translation. ---------- Thus your question: "What are the "groups of existence still remaining" through which > feelings are experienced, and which become extinct at death? The five sense > organs. Not the *six* sense organs. The *five*. Why the omission of the mind? > Was it meant, but not said? Since when was the Buddha not precise?" The five aggregates mentioned in the commentary above include all six sense organs thus when the Itivutaka said "And what is the Nibbana- element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining.""" I think it is clear what is meant: vinnana and all conditioned phenomena ceases upon khandha parinibbana; the long, long round of birth and deaths is finally ended. Robert 16745 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 6, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Sarah, thanks for these details. I'm curious to learn more but I have > enough stuff floating around in my head. Maybe later. .... I think I only read this part of yr message before w'out seeing the p.s. ..... > ps: why does sense restraint = purification of virtue? what is the > meaning of sense restraint and purification of virtue? thanks L. > --------------- >Sarah: 1.awakening factors:bojjhanga - enlightenment factors 2.virtues of the > holy state: tapa - ascetic practices of the bhikkhu nec. for jhana > realizations > 3. restraint and relinquishment: sense-restraint, i.e purification of > virtue and sabbanissagga (relinquishing all)-"everything comprised in > formations is relinquished" > > "Besides the wakening factors of the truth, > Besides the virtues of the holy state, > Besides restraint and relinquishment full, I see nothing that can bless > living beings." .... Look like you had a quick change of mind;-) From the commentary note to the sutta: "Even though the development of the enlightenment factors is mentioned first and restraint of the sense faculties afterwards, sense restraint should be understood first. For when this is mentioned, the fourfold purification of virtue is implied. Established on this a bhikkhu undertakes the ascetic practices, here called austerity (tapa), enters a forest, and by developing a meditation subject he develops the enlightenment factors together with insight. Then the noble path arises in him with Nibbana as its object; the latter is what is meant by relinquishing all (sabbanissagga)." ***** Larry, I believe the 'The fourfold purification of virtue'refers to catuparisudhi-sila): 1) restraint with regard to Patimookha for the monks, 2)indriya-samvara-sila (restraint of the senses), 3) purification of livelihood, 4)Morality with regard to the 4 requisites. In particular, many suttas refer to restraint of the senses and this links back to the Satipatthana sutta. If there is 'guarding' of the sense doors, i.e awareness of seeing, hearing and so on and also of their objects, this is the way for the clinging and aversion on account of what is seen, heard and so on to diminish gradually. In a similar way, the patimokkha (disciplinary code for monks) can be a reminder for us all about sense restraint and sila. The highest sila, as referred to in the verse, is that accompanied by highly developed right understanding and other enlightenment factors. Sarah ====== Quote from Nyantiloka's dictionary: ***** "The 4 kinds of morality consisting of purification (catupárisuddhi-síla) are: (1) restraint with regard to the monks' Disciplinary Code, (2) restraint of the senses, (3) purification of livelihood, (4) morality with regard to the 4 requisites (of the monk) . (1) Restraint with regard to the Disciplinary Code (pátimokkha-samvara-síla). "Here the monk is restrained in accordance with the monks' Disciplinary Code, is perfect in conduct and behaviour, and perceiving danger even in the least offences, he trains himself in the rules he has taken upon him" (A . V, 87,109 ,114, etc. ) . (2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with the mind, he neither adheres to the appearance as a whole, nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses" (M 38). (3) Purification of livelihood (ájíva-párisuddhi-síla). It consists therein that the monk does not acquire his livelihood in a way unbefitting to a monk. (4) Morality with regard to the 4 requisites (paccaya-sannissita-síla). It consists therein that the monk is guided by the right mental attitude when making use of the 4 requisites: robes, almsfood, dwelling and medicine. "Wisely reflecting he makes use of his robes ... merely to protect himself against cold and heat, etc. Wisely reflecting he makes use of his almsfood... merely as a prop and support to this body.... Wisely reflecting he makes use of his dwelling... merely to keep off the dangers of weather and to enjoy solitude.... Wisely reflecting he makes use of the necessary medicines, merely to suppress feelings of sickness that arise, and to reach perfect freedom from suffering" (cf. M. 2). About these 4 kinds of morality, Vis.M. I gives a detailed exposition." ***** 16746 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Larry, You wrote: “Thanks for the kind words. I was just trying to be ecumenical. I don't really see a problem wth A. Sujin's approach except that it seems to make some efforts to invalidate any other method. There really can't be a problem with 'self' view in practicing satipatthana whether one practices for 2 hours at a time or off and on throughout the day because 'self' view can't arise with sati. And if one says I choose not to practice a certain way, that is making a choice. We have to go forward from where we are, baggage and all. We can't wait until we are arahants to take a step.” ..... Hmmmm. You make several useful points to consider. I think the main one is that “'self' view can't arise with sati”.Like Kom said, often it seems you’re saying the opposite to perhaps what he or I would understand, but then you clarify and it turns out there is a lot of common ground. Just as you say here, “We have to go forward from where we are, baggage and all. We can't wait until we are arahants to take a step.” So whether we turn left or right, whether we sit on a cushion for two hours or go to a yoga class/teach/assist a bhikkhu, awareness has to begin to be aware of realities and understanding has to know them for what they are. Similarly, moments of wrong view of self and other kilesa are bound to arise at any of these times, but can also be the object of sati. So I don’t think anyone is suggesting that there is anything to be avoided with regard to ‘practice a certain way’. However, as Jaran and others are discussing, the more rt understanding develops, perhaps the less tendency there will be to see right practice as anything other than a particular kind of citta, accompanied by specific factors, especially right understanding. ***** You also wrote: “I was a little confused about what you said about why we can't choose to look for a self. We are many months from getting to this topic (dhammanupassana) in the commentary and I haven't read ahead but I have heard that looking for a self is a good way of finding that there isn't one. This would apply to any compound or apparent whole whether a person or something else like the 'self' (identity) of a carriage. "Self" is actually a concept and can't be experienced. This is a good reason to understand, at least tentatively, what can and cannot be experienced (concept & reality). Experience = reality. But it is a little tricky seeing what exactly we are experiencing.” ..... I don’t think this relates anymore to dhammanupassana than to the study of any other aspects of satipatthana.Just as you say, there is no self to be found because it is merely a concept which cannot be experienced. We’re in complete agreement here, Larry. When there is the looking or thinking about it, the concept is a concept and the reality which can be known is the thinking. I really like the rest of your comments. As you suggest, it is essential to understand the distinction between what can and cannot be experienced. So what is being experienced now? The 5 khandhas,i.e namas and rupas, i.ethe 4 satipatthanas only. A little tricky due to limited sati and panna, but understanding as you explain here is the important fuel for them to grow. Sarah ====== 16747 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 0:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Robert, > > IIf my hands and face are clean, I am more > alert and not sluggish. If my shoes are off I am more > peaceful and 'at home'. If I sit up in a chair while > reading the dhamma, I am less likely to fall asleep or > have my mind wander while I am reading. Really, I > think I follow these rules for practicality and not > really respect. ____________ This makes sense. In the satipatthana sutta atthakatha it notes that cleaning the body and surroundings is supportive of the development wisdom . Then again if we cling to this we might avoid reading Dhamma books just before going to sleep at night. > > Robert, I think you and I have different definitions > of what it means to 'study' dhamma. To me, to study > dhamma means that I am reading or listening to the > teachings of the Buddha. I don't believe that eating, > drinking, lying down or standing up can be related in > any way to Dhamma study; those things are Dhamma > practice when one practices mindfulness. And though > it could be aruged that practice is actually study in > it own way, for all practical purposes they are two > different things. >_______ I think my teachers have always emphasised that study and practice shouldn't be separated out. If we see them as different things we might see the Abhidhamma as something to think about, like chemistry, rather than descriptions of what is happening now, dhammas to be directly insighted. While we are reading a Dhamma book there is seeing and visible object, there is feeling, there is sanna, sankhara and many other realities as explained in the satipatthana sutta. They can be known there and then. Likewise when there are activities like urinating, talking, laughing, crying there are the same realities that we read about in the Dhamma. There to be 'studied'. Of course no rules that we have to do this or that, or see it this way or that way. I much appreciate your respect for Dhamma, James. Robert 16748 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 1:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" James, There are 2889 suttas in the Samyutta Nikaya but very few are on-line at ATI or anywhere else. The Sutta I am referring to is not on-line. This sutta where a group of monks kill themselves (or get others to kill them) is in the Mahavagga Ch. X Anapanasamyutta 'Connected Discourses on Breathing'. The Anapanasamyutta has 20 Suttas but ATI only has one on-line. ('Ananda Sutta'). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html#Maha The one you are looking for is 9 (9) 'At Vesali' and is on page 1773 of a hard copy translation of "The Connected Discourses of the Buddha" A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya by Bhikkhu Bodhi. This comes in two volumes 2074 pages in total. (Wisdom, 2000). I am happy to type it out for you if you can't borrow a copy of the Samyutta and photocopy or scan it. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Robert, > > I received your post while I have been searching high > and low for the sutta Christine refers to that I > should be able to find in the Samyutta Nikaya, section > IX (Christine, I still can't find it...please send me > the link where you found it.) 16749 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Parenthetical Citations Hi James & Chris & All, --- James wrote: > Hello Friends, > > I have a question for this group of scholars. I am quite confused > about the uniform way to cite Buddhist scripture in parenthetical > citations. For example, I went to the Buddhist Dictionary Antony > hyperlinked and I found this type of parenthetical cite: > (See A. VI, 102; A. VII, 48; Ud. IV, 1; S. XXII, 102) .... I'm not a scholar, but I don't mind adding a note;-) I saw Chris gave a reference to the text abbreviations. in addition, unless otherwise specified, I think you'll find most references are to the pali texts themselves which are always included in hard copies and in most on-line ones. This doesn't always work as with the first ref I tried here;-( Next, I'd try Bk of 6s, section 102. and come up with "Without Reserve" about the 6 advantages to establish the und of impermanence about all phenomena.....I don't know if it's right. Usually I check with the context or key words to be sure which I don't have here. To complicate matters, some references are very sloppy (we had a lot of trouble tracking down some in footnotes in 'What the Buddha Taught' I remember) and Thanissaro's numbering can be quite different from other translations without any pali reference. Also as B.Bodhi mentioned, different translators use different titles. ***** When I have time I'm looking forward to trying out the search tips which you and Chris kindly shared. Rob M copied the entire archives onto disc for his own use and Jon tells me he uses the same search method as you to find useful material in the DSG archives. I've only ever used a search engine a few times. In my post to you on the vinaya, what I did was to just relax for a couple of days and reflect on what I know (or don't know) , mostly learnt from a deceased monk, who Nina, Jon & Azita will remember, had the finest and most detailed knowledge of vinaya. Indeed he gave up many 'rains' to re-ordain when he found out his original ordination ceremony had not been conducted in correct Pali as prescribed. He also once gave me a lecture on the very points you mentioned - I was learning by my mistakes. On the other hand, he would listen to a lay person speak dhamma, would write letters, whilst keeping aloof and I'm sure would see the benefit of contributing comments to DSG, though possibly not directly participating - I'm not sure. So after having an idea of where I think my reply is likely to be heading, I have fun pulling out (in this case) several vinaya texts on the floor (or dare I say it, in bed -oops) and either go straight to what I'm looking for or use an index. I make it fun and usually get as side-tracked as Chris does on google. The small book that I referred to as being particularly useful in this case was "The Entrance to the Vinaya - Vinayamukha vol1". my copy is over 30yrs old and was published in Bkk by King Maha Makuta's Academy. It has the rules and a lot of useful info. Perhaps Sukin or Rob K could try to pick up a copy for you if it's still available and we could then both study more from our armchairs (or floor in my case). I've always found all aspects of the vinaya very useful to reflect on and relevant to daily life as well as helping me to understand the monk's lfe. I was reflecting on some of the rules and doing my best to be mindful of what was appropriate as I collected B.Bodhi and accompanied him to see Dr Ma this morning. There were plenty of tests along the way - in the taxi, crossing roads, walking up flights of stairs, sitting in the waiting room and so on. It was a delightful experience and we managed to have some brief but pleasant discussion on 'luminous mind', his trip to China, the value of discussing dhamma with different understandings calmly and pleasantly, and so on. He's always very considerate. Fortunately, Dr Ma is very optimistic about the treatment too. Look forward to hearing more internet study tips or how others work here too. Sarah ====== 16750 From: abhidhammika Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 2:52am Subject: Nibbana Has No Love And Compassion: To James Dear James How are you? You wrote the following in reply to WL, "..and the peace, love, compassion of Nibbana..." Nibbana is NOT a sentient being. Therefore, it does not have any qualities and attributes that we have such as love or compassion which are, by the way, emotions. I think that you seem to mistakenly be equating Brahma/God (Sentient Beings) with Nibbana that is totally devoid of any sentientness. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Dear WL, > > Yes, I think we are after the same things, just > looking at them from different angles. For example, I 16751 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 3:44am Subject: On Luminous Mind (from Bhikkhu Bodhi) This is a letter from Bhikkhu Bodhi in reply to DSG posts on this topic ************************************************************************ Dear Jonothan and Sarah, Here follow a few thoughts on the controversial passage about the ?pabhassaram cittam? (luminous mind), which occupied the attention of your DSG last year. First of all, the expression should not be translated as ?pure mind,? which a number of the participants in that discussion (including, somewhat surprisingly, Nina) hastily assumed. Pure mind would be ?visuddham cittam?.Usually the word ?pabhassaram?, in relation to ?cittam?, occurs in descriptions of the fourth jhaana, as e.g. in the sutta at AN III 100 (in the PTS?s faulty edition). To my knowledge, the generalized statement about the ?luminous mind? occurs, in the Nikayas, only at AN I 10, in two suttas on the same page (of the Pali text): one without qualification, the other with a brief expansion. A cautious principle that I follow is to avoid constructing novel interpretations of the Dhamma on the basis of a few isolated canonical passages, particularly those in verse (not the case here). It is always best to build one?s interpretations upon those ideas that are found repeatedly in the Nikayas, and then to assume that any apparently deviant statement can somehow be interpreted in a way consistent with these main ?building blocks? of interpretation. Thus I would be reluctant to see in the statement about a luminous mind the recognition of some kind of absolute subjective reality hidden within the ordinary citta, a forerunner of the ?tathagata-garbha? of later Mahayana thought. On the other hand, I would also be hesitant to utilize concepts from the later, technical Theravada system (particularly a relatively late Abhidharmic concept like the bhavanga) to make sense of such an apparently non-technical and generalized statement found in the suttas. I can?t give a definitive interpretation of the ?luminous mind?, one that can be supported beyond doubt by other passages from the Nikayas, but ? assuming that the statement does not refer to the mind clarified by the fourth jhana ? I would tentatively interpret it something like this: In its own nature, on all occasions of experience (even in unwholesome acts of consciousness), citta possesses a certain luminosity which enables it to ?illuminate? the objective field. Just as a lamp can illuminate a room, or as the sun illuminates the world, so the citta illuminates its objective field. This luminous capacity is always present in any citta, but in the rcase of akusala cittas, the ?adventitious defilements? (aagantuka upakkilesa) rdim that luminosity and prevent it from illuminating objects ?as they really rare? (yathaabhuuta). The noble disciple has seen the possibility of eradicating rthe defilements right down to the level of latent tendency, and thus knows rthat the citta is not intrinsically corrupted by the defilements. Such a rdisciple knows that with suitable mental development, the defilements can rbe uprooted, and when this occurs the citta will shine forth in its intrinsic rluminosity no longer dimmed by the mental defilements. This does not imply rthat the citta is a metaphysical absolute, an indestructible core of subjectivity; reach citta too is subject to arise and pass away, but now the cittas shine rforth brightly on each occasion of their arising. P.S. There was an inquiry in one letter about where the bhavanga first appears rin Buddhist texts. I believe it is referred to in the Pa.t.thaana, but only rin a few passages. Most the names for the cittas that we are familiar with rcome from the commentaries. In canonical Abhidhamma, the cittas are usually rdesignated according to the older system of nomenclature: e.g., a rmanovi~n~naa.nadhaatu rof such and such qualifications. Long ago I read an article by Lance Cousins r(new president of PTS) entitled something like ?The Pa.t.thaana and the rConcept of the Bhavanga? ? it was in a PTS Journal, perhaps 1980 or 1981. rIf you check the PTS website, they have the contents of the old journals rlisted, and you should be able to find it there (our web connection is repeatedly rbreaking after a couple of minutes, hence I won?t search for it now). Metta, Bhikkhu Bodhi 16752 From: James Mitchell Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 6:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana Has No Love And Compassion Dear James How are you? You wrote the following in reply to WL, "..and the peace, love, compassion of Nibbana..." Nibbana is NOT a sentient being. Therefore, it does not have any qualities and attributes that we have such as love or compassion which are, by the way, emotions. I think that you seem to mistakenly be equating Brahma/God (Sentient Beings) with Nibbana that is totally devoid of any sentientness. With kind regards, Suan Hi Suan, I am doing great. How are you? Well, I guess you are going to throw the big question at me: What is Nibbana? You are quick to tell me what it isn’t, but you don’t tell me what it is. And I have been reading the other thread related to this and it seems like I am missing something. There are a lot of words in those posts but little I can see as answers. ??? So, anyway, I am going to answer the question: What is Nibbana? (From my perspective) I am going to address Nibbana on the conventional level and the ultimate level. Conventional: What did the Buddha say we all should cultivate, without distinction, without categorization, without limit, without condition? Answer: Peace, Love, and Compassion. What did the Buddha say was without distinction, without categorization, without limit, without condition? Answer: Nibbana. Suan, can’t you take a hint from the Buddha? It only stands to reason that Nibbana, which is real, would manifest itself in our minds in various ways. It is with the mind that one sees Nibbana. Mind and Nibbana are linked. Ultimate: Nama is impermanent and conditioned. Rupa is impermanent and conditioned. Nibbana is permanent and unconditioned. So what is Nibbana? It seems to me that Nibbana is both Nama and Rupa. Looking at the atomic level, we see that our universe is composed of the same Neutrons, Protons, and Electrons in various combinations. These combinations are impermanent and conditioned. But the sub-atomic particles are permanent and unconditioned. Nibbana is at the atomic level, the elemental level, the material level, and the cosmic level. With Metta, James ps. I removed my name from the subject line. There shouldn't be any personal messages for me...anyone can answer. ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16753 From: Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 3:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana1 Hi, Robert - A couple comments from me near the end, Robert. In a message dated 11/7/02 2:59:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > > --- > Dear Howard, > You write: " > > "It seems quite possible that the already radically > transformed mind > >(mental functioning, not a self) of the arahant, already > indescribable, > >liberated (from all defilements), and untraceable, is *not* > annihilated at > >death, but is further liberated - finally and completely liberated, > by the > >extinction of the five senses. This would be exactly "vi~n~nanam > anidassanam > >anantam sabbato paham"; that is, "discernment, non-manifestive, > infinite, > >accessible from all round"."" > > So in a few words I think you are saying that upon the death of the > arahant the five sense organs cease but somehow, in some way, a > transformed vinnana (consciousness)of undescribable purity etc. > continues on. > > You suggest that the sutta I quoted from the Itivuttaka allows this > interpretation. > > A while back Jim Anderson researched the commentary to this sutta and > translated it > for us. Here is the relevant part: > > Itv-a I 167> siitibhavissantii ti accantavuupasamena > sa"nkhaaradarathapa.tippassaddhiyaa siitalii bhavissanti, > appa.tisandhika-nirodhena nirujjhissantii ti attho. na kevala.m > vedayitaani > yeva sabbepi pana khii.naasava-santaane pa~ncakkhandhaa > nirujjhissanti. > vedayitasiisena desanaa kataa. > Roughly translated: > "will become cool" -- will become cool with absolute calm, with the > tranquillization of the anxiety of the formations, the meaning > is: 'will cease with the non-rebirth-linking-cessation'. Not just the > sensed alone but all the five aggregates in the continuum of a canker- > waned one will cease also. A teaching with the 'sensed' as head is > made."end translation. > ---------- > Thus your question: "What are the "groups of existence still > remaining" through which > >feelings are experienced, and which become extinct at death? The > five sense > >organs. Not the *six* sense organs. The *five*. Why the omission of > the mind? > >Was it meant, but not said? Since when was the Buddha not precise?" > > The five aggregates mentioned in the commentary above include all six > sense organs thus when the Itivutaka said "And what is the Nibbana- > element with no groups remaining? In > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > remaining.""" > I think it is clear what is meant: vinnana and all conditioned > phenomena ceases upon khandha parinibbana; the long, long round of > birth and deaths is finally ended. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is *not* clear to me. What has *already* ended for the arahant is the discernment of separate, self-existent entities and also any sense of an agent and experiencer. With death, the realms of sight, sound, taste, touch, and smell are no longer available for being discerned at all. One might use a silly, modern metaphor as follows: Samsara consists of a sentient TV set which moves constantly from channel to channel, no one of them being satisfactory, something always hopefully better somewhere else, and each of them being taken to be a "reality". With the advent of nibbana with remainder, the shows on the various channels still play, but there it no longer matters which one plays, for they are all just mock shows. With the advent of nibbana without remainder, nothing is broadcast any longer. The trouble is, the metaphor is no good, because the TV set appears as kind of agent. Actually, the set, itself, is one of the channels, and nothing real or self-existent! There is no agent, and, in fact, nothing separate or substantial is to be found anywhere, neither as subject nor object. What reality is can be pointed to by many metaphor-fingers, but all of them are seen, upon careful analysis, to be off the mark and to to point crookedly. One of the worst metaphors, I believe, is that reality is absolute nothingness. That metaphor-finger is the finger of nihilism, which widely misses the middle way, as does the corresponding finger on the other hand, the metaphor-finger of substantialism. The fact that no one can come up with an adequate metaphor for the way things are should not be taken by us as justification for pointing with either of these crooked fingers. ----------------------------------------------------- > Robert > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 16754 From: James Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:16am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Christine, It is very nice to offer to type it out for me but I wouldn't want to bother you with that. I will go to the public library or university library this weekend and see if I can find it. I would like the entire Pali Canon on CD. Is that available? Maybe Santa will be good to me this year! :-) Thanks. Metta, James 16755 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, anupassanaa, contemplating Dear Larry, Kom answered you about the four great Elements and derived rupas. I could add: visible object does not float around by itself, it needs solidity, the other great Elements and derived rupas. But only one rupa can impinge on the eyesense, ayatanas (bases) are associating, so that there can be seeing. A harsh sound can hurt our ears, or even destroy a building. There is solidity which can hurt, but only sound arising together in a group of rupas can impinge on earsense, ayatanas are associating so that we can hear. Your other questions: L: Is the fine discrimination of all the various dhammas in the abhidhamma really necessary? Or could we just see whatever arises as foul, painful, impermanent, or not self? N: Let the study of Abh come naturally, it is not necessary to start at the beginning of the book and go in order, but it depends on someone's interest what he studies. When you are interested in a particular subject and look this up you will see: from one thing comes another. Most important is to really consider what you study and see its relevance in your own life. It is helpful to understand some basic notions, what nama and rupa are, knowing something about processes. Otherwise you may wonder how sati can be aware of akusala, since sati cannot arise in the same process, but, it can be aware of the characteristic of akusala which has just fallen away. It is good to know what akusala is and what kusala, and to verify this right now. You ask: Or could we just see whatever arises as foul, painful, impermanent, or not self? N:This is the result of a long process of developing understanding, stumbling along, wondering what sati is, when it arises, with ups and downs. Understanding grows, but it may hardly be perceptible, it has its own tempo. It is not as rapidly growing as we wish. "L: So seeing consciousness as impermanent, perception and formation as not self, feeling as pain, and internal materiality as foul is, in brief, the sum total of the vipassana aspect of satipatthana. Correct?" N: As Jaran said, all conditioned dhammas have these characteristics, but we should not expect to know them in the beginning. Jaran reminds us that we should realize how deeply engrained the idea of self is. Realizing this is a beginning of understanding. As Jaran writes, And: Jaran reminds us to be brave and face any reality, even akusala, to be brave and honest with ourselves. Thus, the attitude is so important, right from the beginning. L: Also, I was > wondering about the word "anupassanaa". Is the meaning something like > 'minutely observing'? N: passanaa, from passati, to see, to realize. We have this root also in vipassana. Jim once wrote about the name of the Bodhisatta Vipassii: A reminder: vipassana is the development of understanding. The particle anu: it can mean: along, towards or in conformity with, following after. Kaayaanupassii: the long i at the end can indicate: continuously, habitually. Later on in the Co you will see how one should contemplate: it is not just thinking, or concentrating, it is the understanding of the true nature. But before we are at that level, it is necessary to thoroughly investigate the characteristic of the dhamma appearing now. You say minutely observing: but not with an idea of, "I have to observe". BTW, you asked: Assaadassa, this is the genitive form of assaado: meaning, of enjoyment. It is a description of lobha, not of piti. Nina. > 16756 From: James Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Parenthetical Citations Sarah, So kind of you to offer for the book. Let me do some searching and see if I can come up with it on my own; if not, I will contact you off list and you can type the book out for me...just kidding ;-). I found your post very interesting. And I only have one comment: "Silly Rabbit, beds are for sleeping!" :-) Metta, James 16757 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 0:10pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Has No Love And Compassion Hello Suan, and All, I am reading the Useful Posts on Nibbana (25 of them) and also the discussion between RobK and Howard and am learning a lot. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Would you be able to post something over the next couple of days about what Nibbana could be, and what it isn't, please? Only if you have the time, of course. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > Dear James > > How are you? > > You wrote the following in reply to WL, > > "..and the peace, love, compassion of Nibbana..." > > Nibbana is NOT a sentient being. Therefore, it does not have any > qualities and attributes that we have such as love or compassion > which are, by the way, emotions. > > I think that you seem to mistakenly be equating Brahma/God (Sentient > Beings) with Nibbana that is totally devoid of any sentientness. > > With kind regards, > > Suan > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > > Dear WL, > > > > Yes, I think we are after the same things, just > > looking at them from different angles. For example, I 16758 From: Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 3:19pm Subject: Way 22, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on "Here, Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." In this body, apart from the above mentioned collection, there is seen no body, man, woman or anything else. Beings engender wrong belief, in many ways, in the bare groups of things mentioned above. Therefore the men of old said: What he sees that is not (properly) seen; What is seen, that he does not (properly) see; Not seeing (properly) he is shackled clean; And he, the shackled fool, cannot get free. [Tika] "What he sees" = What man or woman he sees. Why, is there no seeing of man or a woman with the eye? There is. "I see a woman," "I see a man." -- these statements refer to what he sees by way of ordinary perception. That perception, owing to wrong comprehension, does not get at the sense-basis [rupayatana] in the highest sense, philosophically, through the falsely determined condition of material form [viparita gahavasena miccha parikappita rupatta]. [T] Or the meaning is: the absence of perception which is called the seeing of primary and derived materiality, beginning with things such as the hair of the head, owing to non-cognizability of the collective nature of an object like a man or woman by eye-consciousness [kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam ditthi na hoti acakkhuviññana viññeyyatta]. [T] "What is seen that he does not properly see" = He does not see, according to reality by the eye of wisdom, the sense-basis which exists, the collection of primary and derived materiality beginning with hair of the head and the like [yam rupayatanam kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam dittham tam pañña-cakkhuna bhutato na passati]. [T] "Not seeing properly he is shackled" = Not seeing this body as it actually is, with the eye of wisdom, he thinks: "This is mine, this am I, this is my self," and is bound with the fetter of defilement [imam attabhavam yathabhutam paññacakkhuna apassanto etam mama esohamasmi eso me attati kilesa bandhanena bajjhati]. 16759 From: Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 4:38pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Hi Kom, Thanks for your elucidations. A couple of things that occured to me as well: 1. Contemplating the collection of the elements of rupa reveals that there is nothing inside. In the suttas 'emptiness' always refers to an empty container. In this case the container is the collection of elements. So if anyone may wonder, 'emptiness' is not the same as nibbana. 2. I was wondering about the relationship between foulness and tranquility. The one doesn't seem to lead to the other in my limited experience. For one thing, foulness is unpleasant and tranquility is pleasant. So to resolve this conflict I thought maybe foulness could be classified as the insight aspect of kayanupassana. However, I don't really have much experience with contemplating foulness so who knows where it would lead beyond to not clinging to the body. 3. As to what is different about rupa in kayanupassana and in dhammanupassana, rupa is isolated in 'body' but included with the other khandhas in 'dhamma'. Rupa is contemplated as a collection of elements in 'body' and (possibly?) as one part of the collection of khandhas in 'dhamma'. One might think rupa is foul because there is nothing inside or one might see that rupa is not self because of what? impermanence? I suppose this will be explained in the 'dhamma' section. Larry 16760 From: Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 5:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Sarah, Thanks for the notes on purification of virtue. The only thing I would add to your comments on temperaments is that mindfulness of body, feeling, consciousness, and dhamma amounts to perceptions of ugliness, suffering, impermanence and not self, respectively, as per the section on why 4 satipatthanas. Also, tranquility is cultivated in body and feeling while insight is cultivated in consciousness and dhamma. I'm understanding these as being useful ways of understanding and using the 4 satipatthanas but not as rigid necessities. Each satipatthana and each of the 21 satipatthana practices could be a complete path to lokutarra magga (this is a little speculative), but I'm sure we will learn more about all of this as we go along. Larry 16761 From: Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 5:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 21, anupassanaa, contemplating Dear Nina, Thanks for your detailed explanation and sensible advice. One question. Could you give me a little pali lesson? I thought the 'anu' that means little or small was the 'anu' in anupassanaa and that it therefor meant contemplation of details. But apparently this is wrong. Could you explain? Thanks Larry 16762 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 9:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Dear Larry, It is useful to consider many aspects of satipatthana. In the section on satipatthana in the Abhidhamma the commentary the "Dispeller of Delusion" PTS) p 137 paragraph 564 says "In respect of the classification of the Foundations of Mindfulness. And this also takes place in multiple consciousness in the prior stage (prior to supramundane). For it lays hold of the body with one consciousness and with others feeling etc." We can check if this is the way things are in life. Is it sometimes that feelings are predominant and at the next moment rupa or attachment etc? Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for the notes on purification of virtue. The only thing I would > add to your comments on temperaments is that mindfulness of body, > feeling, consciousness, and dhamma amounts to perceptions of ugliness, > suffering, impermanence and not self, respectively, as per the section > on why 4 satipatthanas. Also, tranquility is cultivated in body and > feeling while insight is cultivated in consciousness and dhamma. I'm > understanding these as being useful ways of understanding and using the > 4 satipatthanas but not as rigid necessities. Each satipatthana and each > of the 21 satipatthana practices could be a complete path to lokutarra > magga (this is a little speculative), but I'm sure we will learn more > about all of this as we go along. > > Larry 16763 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:16pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Has No Love And Compassion Dear Christine, Do you have the translation of the Udana by Peter masefield? Sarah gave some notes about the Udana before where a good description of nibbana is given. Nibbana is the antithesis of conditioned phenomena. Udana VIII.1 > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, .................... S: I may not have made it clear, that in the Masefield translation and Com notes which I'm using, base is used instead of dimension (as here) in `There is, monks,that base' (tadayatanam) ******************** (p.1012 Udana com): "...The Lord, having thus indicated, face to face, the existence, in its highest sense, of the unconditioned element, next says `Wherein there is neither earth, nor water' and so on so as to indicate its own nature via an elimination of things that are the antithesis thereof. Just as nibbana is nowhere (to be found) amidst conditioned (sankhata) things, since it has as its own nature that which is antithetical to all formations(sankhara), so are all cvonditioned things (not to be found) therein either, for the collection of things conditioned and unconditioned is (a thing) not witnessed......there is neither the earth element whose characteristic is that of hardness, nor the water element whose characteristic is that of oozing, nor the fire element whose characteristic is that of heat, nor the wind element whose characteristic is that of distending......absence therein of the four great elements, the absence of all derived materiality....absence..of any becoming associated with (the world of) sense desires and (the world of) form.....Even though its own nature is one in which there is an absence of forms, there is next said, so as to indicate the absence within nibbana of any of the states belonging to becoming in the formless (sphere), `Nor that base consisting of endless space......nor that base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception'."endquote Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Suan, and All, > > I am reading the Useful Posts on Nibbana (25 of them) and also the > discussion between RobK and Howard and am learning a lot. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > Would you be able to post something over the next couple of days > about what Nibbana could be, and what it isn't, please? Only if you > have the time, of course. > > metta, > Christine > angles. For example, I 16764 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Hi James and Christine, I really do not disagree that love, compassion, good will is deep within heart of Buddhism. But really I just want to pose a hard question for the seekers of truth: If one can ahead of time know that the path to truth will ultimately leads to something other than love and compassion, even if it leads to undifferentiated peace, then you will choose not to seek for truth, and would rather live in self-deception? Some more thoughts while reading your posts: James said that "Suffering is extremely easy to see for everyone". Well, I know a lot of people, including myself, so often do not see suffering, or mindful of it. That's why so many of us continue to cling on and succumb to the same way of meaningless busy living day after day. Even when we are mindful, many including myself look for quick answer and quick solution to end the suffering. Some even choose to commit suicide, some choose to deny or give up the path. Or even if they know the path is right, they give themselves all kinds of excuses to stay out of it. Antony's post really served as a rude awakening also for myself, I appreciated it. I have no intention to discourage him from taking the path, if it sounded that way. But I have seen his posts before, and thought that he would not be turned away because of what I said, and I hoped he understood my intentions. If my post was addressed to Star Kid, please be rest assured that I would not use the same approach. With metta, WL 16765 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 10:57pm Subject: Escribe & Trimming (moderator message) Dear All, 1. ESCRIBE =========== Escribe has been inaccessible for most of the last week or so for all lists. We wrote a couple of notes to the admin people but got no reply. We were able to access it twice briefly two days ago and were encouraged to see all the messages had been updated. Hopefully it'll return to normal soon and continue to be a useful search engine for DSG posts and messages by particular writers as well as a back-up of the archives. 2. TRIMMING OF POSTS ==================== The archives now have a fixed limit (imposed on all lists by yahoo) and a couple of people receiving posts in digest form or printing out messages have commented recently on the number of untrimmed posts. We'd appreciate cooperation from everyone. If it's more than an occasional slip, Kom or Sarah may give you a prompt off-line. To keep this simple for us, for members to date, it'll probably just be a subject heading of 'Trim!' or similar with no message. We haven't worked out the penalty for these 'Trim' tickets yet - maybe a photo for the album? Jon & Sarah P.S. comments to Moderator messages off-list only thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------- 16766 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Nov 7, 2002 11:11pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Way 21, Comm. Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > 2. I was wondering about the relationship between > foulness and > tranquility. The one doesn't seem to lead to the > other in my limited > experience. For one thing, foulness is unpleasant > and tranquility is > pleasant. So to resolve this conflict I thought > maybe foulness could be > classified as the insight aspect of > kayanupassana. However, I don't > really have much experience with contemplating > foulness so who knows > where it would lead beyond to not clinging to the body. This is why it is impossible to develop tranquil meditation without the wisdom: 1) To differentiate between kusala and akusala states 2) To know the conditions that cause kusala states arise, and the condition that causes akusala states to arise. The tipitakas mentioned 40 different objects of tranquil meditation. One object doesn't work for everybody. One's accumulation (this life, previous lives) dictates when we see a foul object, if when the citta arises, there is sati mindful of the kusala states. When you hear of death, espeically of a person that you know, you may cringe and feel agitated. However, if you consider that this beloved body too, will soon reach that state: this may bring calm for some people. When you feel happy and attached to your loved ones, if you also think, those too, will soon reach their death. This may bring calm too, for some. This may also bring more energy to develop kusala whenever one can. A. Sujin suggested that when we hear about the Buddha's teaching, we should listen and apply it to ourselves. For example, you may have heard about the story in the commentaries (this story was posted in the past, I believe) about a monkey who was trapped by the glue used by the monkey hunter. The monkey was lured by baits provided by the hunter. When we hear this story, we may feel sorry for the monkey, or we may be amused about the monkey not knowing the trick of the hunter and the potency of the glue. On the other hand, we may also compare the monkey to ourselves, that just like the monkey, we are trapped in samsara by our attachments, and being ignorant, we go about all the wrong way to get away from suffering. > > 3. As to what is different about rupa in > kayanupassana and in > dhammanupassana, rupa is isolated in 'body' but > included with the other > khandhas in 'dhamma'. Rupa is contemplated as a > collection of elements > in 'body' and (possibly?) as one part of the > collection of khandhas in > 'dhamma'. One might think rupa is foul because > there is nothing inside > or one might see that rupa is not self because of > what? impermanence? I > suppose this will be explained in the 'dhamma' section. I think to see that elements are truly foul is panna of the highest degree. Only an Anagami (and Arahants) have escaped from thinking and marking elements as being beautiful. I think (emphasis) that if one truly sees the impermanence of all elements, one can start to understand that they are foul. Until then, we can search the texts of the reason why this is said, or we speculate on.... kom 16767 From: James Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 5:54am Subject: [dsg] Re: to appreciate Buddhist goal of parinibbana Dear WL, I don't think I have accused you of being uncompassionate or unloving in regards to Buddhism or anything else in life. If I implied that, I apologize. I have known all along that this is a theoretical discussion with nothing personal; any discussion about the nature of nibbana by non-arahants is purely theoretical, if not laughable. J But it is fun, keeps the mind sharp, and perhaps inspires one to continue practice (just from the interest garnered, not the knowledge). I don't believe anyone should follow Buddhism because they are looking forward to nibbana or Parinibbana, Antony or otherwise. Buddhism is best suited for those who can appreciate the journey rather than the destination. But, in regards to what you say about the nature of nibbana, I don't think we are in disagreement now. I don't see any differences between peace, love, and compassion. These are things that are at the conventional level and the ultimate level. I think Howard summarized this whole area of discussion best when he said, to paraphrase, that the nature of nibbana can't be known, but we know that it must contain a certain `consciousness'. After all, if it didn't, the Buddha couldn't have known it or described it even a little. According to the scriptures, one reaches nibbana when nibbana is all the mind knows; when the mind resides in nibbana like a perfect pearl of knowing. If nibbana had no quality of consciousness, that experience would be quite brain dead. But the Buddha knew it, had been there, and said that it is knowable. He didn't describe it as having the qualities of peace, love and compassion, so perhaps I am wrong, or perhaps the Buddha didn't want to describe it that way so that it wouldn't become overly 'alluring' to the bhikkhu and became the sole focus of practice. There were many things the Buddha didn't teach that he knew, by his own admission. And the subsequent arahants kept pretty tight lips also about what they knew. There must be a reason for that. ??? As far as `suffering', I was referring to mundane suffering. We all know death, sorrow, sickness, famine, loss, etc, but if you are referring to the `ultimate suffering', the suffering inherent in all aggregates/conditioned phenomenon, I would agree that that is difficult to see. As non-arahants who practice Buddhism (I`m sure there is some impressive Pali word to insert here, but darned if I know it…), we know that level of suffering only a little bit, and usually not at all, actually. Metta, James 16768 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 7:56am Subject: Re: Nibbana Has No Love And Compassion Dear Christine, Robert Kirkpatrick, Sarah, WL, and All How are you, Dhamma friends? As Robert quoted Sarah's post on Udana description of nibbana, I won't be duplicating it here. If you do not mind my personal speculation (attanomati), I could have a go at it as follows. Our sentient existence has three characteristics in terms of change, misery, and selflessness. As long as we take part in the loop of sentient existence (Samsaara), we are subject to change and misery. As long as change and misery do not bother us, the concept of liberation from sentient existence is beyond us and will remain meaningless for us. But, we somehow come to the stage of becoming bored with change and misery. With this boredom, the search for escape from change and misery has also begun. Some escape thinkers offered a heaven with a creator God as a place where we would not suffer change and misery. Some escape thinkers offered the bodiless existence (destination of aruupa jhaana) as the solution. some escape thinkers offered the memoryless and mindless existence (destination of asañña jhaana) as the solution. The above three kinds of escape thinkers offered liberation (mokkha) within the position of sentient existence and with firm belief in self. Then, Gotama the Buddha appeared with his unique revolutionary approach to the solution of change and misery. He had discovered that the sentience existence has not only the characteristics of change and misery, but also that of selflessness (anatta). With the discovery of selflessness, the Buddha hit upon the first ever loophole from the multi-layered shell of sentient existence. This loophole is a kind of parallel universe that has no characteristics of matter and mind. In other words, the loophole is the matterless sentienceless state. The Buddha calls it nibbana. Without the proper understanding and realization of selflessness, the concept of matterless sentienceless state will always evade our comprehension. This matterless sentienceless state is beyond sentience existence (apariyaapanna). Only a practitioner of the Noble Eightfold Path who has attained the First Path Insight (Sotaapanna Maggañaa.na) as the minimum, can experience this matterless sentienceless state which will gradually dismantle the support structures for the practitioner's personal sentient existence. This matterless sentienceless state is something for the path practitioner to discover and experience until the moment of the Fourth Path Insight (Arahatta Maggañaa.na) and before support structures for sentient existence run out (anupaadisesa nibbana). After that the path practitioner transcends sentient existence. As the path practitioner can experience the matterless sentienceless state only while he or she has sentient existence, once the support structures for sentient existence run out, he or she no longer needs to undergo change and misery again. In other words, one sentient being has successfully achieved the ultimate sentient extinguishment. This sentient extinguishment of one sentient being who was time- bound, however, does not affect the matterless sentienceless state that is nibbaana, which is timeless. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" Hello Suan, and All, I am reading the Useful Posts on Nibbana (25 of them) and also the discussion between RobK and Howard and am learning a lot. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Would you be able to post something over the next couple of days about what Nibbana could be, and what it isn't, please? Only if you have the time, of course. metta, Christine 16769 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 10:01am Subject: subco bhikkhu Dear Larry and all, here is the subco passage about bhikkhu, to Way 19. It is uncorrected, but I thought it suitable, since we have just now many posts on the bhikkhu. Good to consider the role of the bhikkhu, his position in the Sangha. bhikkhugocaraa ete dhammaa, yadida.m kaayaanupassanaadayo. N: These dhammas are the field (object) of the bhikkhu, namely, contemplation of the Body, etc. tattha yasmaa kaayaanupassanaadipa.tipattiyaa bhikkhu hoti, tasmaa ``kaayaanupassii viharatii''tiaadinaa bhikkhu.m dasseti, bhikkhumhi ta.m niyamatoti aaha ``pa.tipattiyaa bhikkhubhaavadassanato''ti. N: Here, in as far as he is a bhikkhu by the practice of contemplation of the Body, etc., therefore, with the words, "he abides in contemplation of the body", etc., he shows him as a bhikkhu. Then, he says bhikkhu with this definition, saying, "because of the excellence of the bhikkhu state by way of practice". satthu cariyaanuvidhaayakattaa sakalasaasanasampa.tiggaahakattaa ca sabbappakaaraaya anusaasaniyaa bhaajanabhaavo. N: Since he follows the practice of the Teacher, and accepts the entire dispensation, he is fit to receive manifold instruction. sama.m careyyaati kaayaadivisamacariya.m pahaaya kaayaadiihi sama.m careyya. N: He should practise with calm (evenly), this means, after he has abandoned contrarious behaviour through the body etc., he should practise with calm through the body, etc. raagaadivuupasamena santo. indriyadamena danto. catumagganiyaamena niyato. N: He is calm because of the extinguishment of attachment etc. He is tamed by the restraint of the faculties. He is assured by way of the four Paths. se.t.thacaritaaya brahmacaarii. kaayada.n.daadioropanena nidhaaya da.n.da.m. N: By the best practice he is a person leading the divine life. Because of laying down (abandoning) violence through the body, etc. he is peaceful (having laid down the stick). ariyabhaave .thito so evaruupo baahitapaapasamitapaapabhinnakilesataahi braahma.no sama.no bhikkhuuti veditabbo. Immovable in the ariyan nature, since akusala is removed and calmed and defilements eradicated, he should in this way be known as a brahmin, a recluse. 16770 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Respect Dear Sarah and James, I have the same copy here of the Entrance to the Vinaya. I can join you and James in the study. I appreciate his respect for the monks. James, it is not weird to pay respect to the Triple Gem, we can do this also before getting the E mail, because, is it not all for the sake of Dhamma? But we can also become attached to the idea of paying respect, it feels so good, I catch myself. Therefore, the best respect is with mindfulness of nama and rupa. If it is not in that way we get caught up with lobha without realizing it. We are trying to concentrate with attachment, trying to hold on to something we like, a special feeling or to confidence, saddhaa. Whereas when we pay respect with awareness of any reality, such as sound, or akusala citta, we do not fix our attention with attachment to one reality. So many different realities arise in between while paying respect. I appreciated Rob K's reminder: < While we are reading a Dhamma book there is seeing and visible object, there is feeling, there is sanna, sankhara and many other realities as explained in the satipatthana sutta. They can be known there and then.> I am so engrossed in study, especially in Pali (it is so difficult) that I forget this. I am so glad Dr Ma can do something for Ven Bodhi. I appreciate your help to him, Anumodana, Nina. op 07-11-2002 10:18 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > The small book that I referred to as being particularly useful in this > case was "The Entrance to the Vinaya - Vinayamukha vol1". my copy is over > 30yrs old and was published in Bkk by King Maha Makuta's Academy. It has > the rules and a lot of useful info. Perhaps Sukin or Rob K could try to > pick up a copy for you if it's still available and we could then both > study more from our armchairs (or floor in my case). I've always found all > aspects of the vinaya very useful to reflect on and relevant to daily life > as well as helping me to understand the monk's lfe. 16771 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 10:01am Subject: luminous, pure . Dear Sarah and all, I read the post from Ven. Bodhi with great interest. He did not agree with the use of pure. I do not know exactly the context he is referring to, but I would just like to quote from the passages about luminous etc. from the co, I translated. This is the translation in part, about the bhavangacitta, and we see that the word parisuddha, pure, is used. Pabhassara.m, pa.n.dara.m and parisuddha.m are used here together. Pabhassarasutta.m with the a.t.thakathaa & Dhammapaala's .tiikaa and translations. AN 1.49 < @at.t.hakathaa 49. navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m. ki.m pana cittassa va.n.no naama atthiiti? natthi. N: As to the ninth ,² luminous². Luminous is clear, pure. citta is the life-continuum. But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, it does not. niilaadiina~nhi a~n~natarava.n.na.m vaa hotu ava.n.na.m vaa ya.mki~nci parisuddhataaya ``pabhassara''nti vuccati. N: For anything which may be a certain colour, beginning with blue, or without colour, is called luminous because of its purity. idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti pabhassara.m. ta~nca khoti ta.m bhava"ngacitta.m. N: It is also pure, because it is unsoiled (by defilements); thus luminous. That indeed, meaning, that life-continuum. aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkha.ne uppajjanakehi. N: ³ by oncoming ³(defilements). by those that are not conascent with it, but arise later at the moment of impulsion (javana). > The Tiika: 49. navame pabhassaranti pariyodaata.m sabhaavaparisuddha.t.thena. tenaaha--'pa.n.dara.m parisuddhan'ti. N:> With reference to the ninth sutta, „luminous¾ , means very pure because of its natural purity. Therefore he said , . Then there are long passages where pure, parisuddha.m is used. It is interesting that pabhassara.m, pa.n.dara.m and parisuddha.m are used together. As we recently discussed, the Patisambid. states: each citta, also akusala citta is pandaram. As Jaran quoted: it comes from bhavanga, like the river from the source. Ven. Bodhi writes: I agree with the fact that all cittas are luminous in so far as their function is: clearly knowing an object. Here I do not think of knowing realities as they are, yathaabhuuta, that is the function of pa~n~naa. Also akusala citta clearly knows or cognizes an object. The passages on being soiled by adventitous defilements are, in the above quoted co and subco, used for bhavangacittas which are defiled by the javana cittas. I agree with Ven. Bodhi that we should not take isolated passages from texts and then draw conclusions. Ven. Bodhi writes: