17200 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:58am Subject: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Hi, all - After arrival at Wat Greensboro on Thursday and meeting the head monk, Maha Somsak, I was shown my room in the main house, a very comfortable room with several chests, mirrors, and a hide-a-bed sofa, and with easy access to both the kitchen and two bathrooms. A hot water dispenser was also in that room, making tea and coffee easily available. This was already late afternoon, but the head monk cordially offered food to me which I respectfully declined. In the early evening, we left for the other main building which has the meditation hall, a kitchen, a sitting room in which meals are taken, and more. We went to the meditation hall - the head monk, other resident monks, several visiting monks (including Ven. Yanatharo), the two monks-to-be, David's mother, and me. There we engaged in about 45 minutes of chanting (I looked at Dhammarato's chant book) followed by a brief meditation - about 15 minutes. Subsequent meditation sittings, each morning and even, lasted for about the same time as the chanting, 45 minutes. The rest of that evening, until way past midnite was spent in pleasant, animated conversation - primarily Dhamma talk. On Friday a.m., Dhammarato gave a prearranged knock on my door around six a.m. At seven, we were back at the other building for chanting and meditation. Then, after a return to the main house for showering etc, we went over again to the other building for a fish-soup breakfast. Around 11:00 a.m. the main meal of the day was served (the last food for the monks with the exception of possible tea, coffee, or ice cream [an interpretation of ghee]. At the main meal, as was to be expected, the monks ate first, and the rest of us ate of the more-than-adequate food remaining after the monks finished. In the afternoon, we got into cars to drive about 30 miles to get to Wat Lexington, the Wat at which the ordination was to be held. (It was to be held there because at that Wat there was a ring of "sima stones" around the meditation hall, serving to consecrate the enclosed area.) Wat Lexington is another beautiful Wat with an exquisite tree-lined roadway onto the grounds which includes several small and lovely ponds. After parking, we made our way up a rather steep, leaf covered hill at the top of which was the meditation hall. When up there, some of us entered the hall for some purpose that I am unaware of, and outside we took turns clearing the area of leaves and suitably decorating the exterior. Upon return to Wat Greensboro, I took a brief nap, and the rest of the day then went much as the day before, with early-evening chanting and meditation (this time, I had the use of my own chanting sheets kindly photocopied by David), and then followed by pleasant conversation. I went to sleep a bit earlier that day, though, than the previous. (Oh, yes - also on Friday David and Dhammarato received their white robes [to be worn prior to the ceremony], their decorative fans, and their bowls. Oh, and, yes, one more thing happened on Friday: It turned out that Dhammarato's preceptor, who was to officiate at the ordination, had missed his plane, and instead took a bus to Charlotte. So, at midnite, Dhammarato left by car to Charlotte, over 2 hours away, to pick him up. They didn't get back until close to 5 a.m., and, so, neither had any sleep to speak of that night. ) Saturday morning we arose early to go over for chanting and meditation, then to leave at 8:30 for Wat Lexington. We arrived at Wat Lexington a bit late because of a traffic jam due to an accident. After arrival, we entered the meditation hall of one building where we greeted a quite elderly and very sweet monk, and Dhammarato and David donned their white robes. Dammarato gave me his video camera to film throughout the entire ordination and at the meal following. Then we made the trek up the hill, me filming as we went, to the sima-stone-encircled meditation hall. Not only was David's mother there, but so was Dhammarato's and also numerous friends and relatives of each. When a monk ordains, he must be given parental permission. This is done in a ceremonial way, but with both David and Dhammarato, this constituted the most beautiful and touching moments of all for me. The love manifest was so strong and truly moving! (BTW, the previous evening this approval ceremony was carried out as well, back at Wat Greensboro. It happens that Dhammarato's mother wasn't there at the time - so I was asked to stand in for her! ;-)) I had to "give permission", and Dhammarato had to ask me for forgiveness for having mistreated me in any way. He cleverly related this to our history on Dhamma-list!! ;-)) Prior to entering the hall for the ordination, David, Dhammarato, the monks, the family members, and some friends (including me) marched clockwise three times around the hall. I was honored in being allowed to hold one of the decorative fans while circumambulating the hall. After entering the hall, the ordination began. The amount of chanting and responses that the two monks-to-be were responsible for was impressive. More impressive was the aplomb with which they handled it. Dhammarato performed like the experienced monk that he had already been. But for me, David's "performance" was the most impressive. This was a first time for him, and I know he was nervous, but he was marvelous, chanting with a sureness that made others calm! There is so much more detail to provide, but my ignorance in this area is considerable, so I think it might be better to wait until at some point Ven. Dhammarato returns to posting, and we can get the details properly from one who understands them. I also hope at some point to post some photos. Right now, suffice it to say that participating in this wonderful event is something that was a highpoint for me and is an event I will long remember. The next day, Sunday, was the day I left. There was the usual morning chanting and meditation and meals and conversation, but the day was a bit more relaxed. At one point Ven Dhammarato and Ven Piyadhammo took several friends on a walking tour of the beautiful 10 acres of Wat Greensboro. Later on I packed my bags, did a bit more walking around on my own, practiced my t'ai chi form in the shade of a big tree outside the main house, and grabbed a 30-minute meditation. Around 3:30, Ven Yanatharo stopped over to the main house to visit with me before I left for the airport. Around 4:15 Ven Dhammarato and Ven Piyadhammo, and one of the visiting monks - a delightful young monk, Ven Milinda, from Connecticut, drove me to the airport. We exchanged very fond goodbyes, and then I went inside. A delightful dream had ended. 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) 17201 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:06pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? Please help. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > I'll try and bring up the > > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was > some progress, but "the light did not come on". > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17202 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 5:55:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > >I'll try and bring up the > >freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > >proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > >ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > >conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > >this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was > some progress, but "the light did not come on". > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let go*?! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ===================== With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), 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) 17203 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let go*?! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------ > ===================== > With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), > Howard I sense that you are trying to help me and I really appreciate it. My mental state is agitated at this moment and I think that I need some time to reflect on last night's discussion and on your comment. Thank you. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Appreciate your posts on your trip. 17204 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:24am Subject: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi again, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:08:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. > > I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose > to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there > another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? > > Please help. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================= It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. You have a red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can neither swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing but that undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get rid of it!! It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the unmovable?? Ask: "WHO IS IT that must do this?" 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) 17205 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:22:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > >Howard: > > Free will or not, Rob, what would happen if you just *let > go*?! ;-)) > >------------------------------------------------ > >===================== > >With metta (freely willed yet without effort ;-), > >Howard > > I sense that you are trying to help me and I really appreciate it. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you. (Yes, you sense correctly. :-) --------------------------------------------------- > > My mental state is agitated at this moment and I think that I need > some time to reflect on last night's discussion and on your comment. > > Thank you. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > PS: Appreciate your posts on your trip. > > > =========================== 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) 17206 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:46pm Subject: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ============================= > It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. You have a > red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can neither > swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing but that > undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get rid of it!! > It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the unmovable?? Ask: "WHO > IS IT that must do this?" > I know that there is no self. There is no self in the citta, no self in any of the cetasikas and no self in the relations that link all these paramattha dhamma together. The realization that my confusion and restlessness arose only because of conditions, not because of any "free will" has dislodged the "free will" object. The object that is lodged in my throat is the idea that there is only one path that the universe is destined to follow. The fact that I do not have the ability to see this path is not a problem for me; the fact that it exists raises serious issues of accountability, responsibility and ethics. Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee with precision events that would unfold two thousand years in the future (such as the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, but I think that our two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha could anticipate things that would soon happen (i.e. when He intervened to stop Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the past accumulations of each person would allow the Buddha to make reasonable conclusions regarding things that were just about to happen. The Buddha could also forsee general future trends as demonstrated in His analysis of the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. At this point, Ajarn Paul made the valid observation that the Buddha was not a fortune teller. Koans are good for you, if you give them time to work at multiple levels. Let me knaw on this one (pre-destiny) for a while. Metta, Rob M :-) 17207 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Rob, There is clearly right and wrong choice. See Way 24: "The state of mind that is not clearly comprehending commits blunders of judgment in the business of choosing the right means and in avoiding the wrong. The state of mind which is inattentive -- the mental state of absence of mindfulness -- is incapable of laying hold of the right means and of rejecting the wrong means." L: There will be more on choice and sati sampajanna latter in the commentary. Another thing we have to consider though, is varying degrees of ultimacy. A higher ultimate truth than that indicated by this quotation would say there is no choice in citta process. On the other hand, we could say citta process is not an object of satipatthana because it cannot be directly perceived by someone on a mundane path. The really really really real is only nibbana, imo. Larry 17208 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Re: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Rob M, I have struggled with free will for the exact same reason, i.e. the inevitably issues of ethics and accountability, and this is what I have come to terms with. Hope it will helps and love to hear others' views. What we know as "free will" is actually "awareness" or "insight" of what's happening at the moment. When we make decisions (or at least we think we are making decisions), we are not making decisions, but we are rather "aware" of the thought process, "aware" of cittas arising and falling. So essentially we are not making decisions, but we are "conscious" of "decisions" being made. At the same time, depending on the degrees of "insight", we will be aware of the consequences of our actions. So one can say, since I have no control over what I do, I can do whatever I want. Yes, one "can" do whatever he/she wants, but more importantly, one will bear whatever consequences of his/her actions. That, is reality, and that natural consequences IS ethics. THAT is accountability, which happen naturally, regardless of "free will" or not. with metta, Wendy 17209 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:34am Subject: Re: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/26/02 6:47:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > >============================= > > It sounds to me like you are engaged in Zen koan practice. > You have a > >red-hot ball stuck in your throat called "free will" that you can > neither > >swallow nor spit up. Soon your whole world will consist of nothing > but that > >undislodgeable object. You MUST get rid of it, but you CAN'T get > rid of it!! > >It won't go down, it won't come up!! How to move the > unmovable?? Ask: "WHO > >IS IT that must do this?" > > > > I know that there is no self. There is no self in the citta, no self > in any of the cetasikas and no self in the relations that link all > these paramattha dhamma together. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that too. But do we KNOW it??? -------------------------------------------------- > > The realization that my confusion and restlessness arose only > because of conditions, not because of any "free will" has dislodged > the "free will" object. > > The object that is lodged in my throat is the idea that there is > only one path that the universe is destined to follow. The fact that > I do not have the ability to see this path is not a problem for me; > the fact that it exists raises serious issues of accountability, > responsibility and ethics. > > Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee with precision > events that would unfold two thousand years in the future (such as > the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, but I think that our > two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). > > Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha could anticipate > things that would soon happen (i.e. when He intervened to stop > Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the past accumulations > of each person would allow the Buddha to make reasonable conclusions > regarding things that were just about to happen. The Buddha could > also forsee general future trends as demonstrated in His analysis of > the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. > > At this point, Ajarn Paul made the valid observation that the Buddha > was not a fortune teller. > > Koans are good for you, if you give them time to work at multiple > levels. Let me knaw on this one (pre-destiny) for a while. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I think that koans can be very good for us. For the "free will" one, I think it may be useful to ask ourselves exactly what sort of thing free will would actually *be*. Leaving aside for the moment that the Dhamma sees nothing as arising independent of conditions, would will be free if it were random? Would we be willing freely if we could will something *for no reason whatsoever*? Would such "willing" be something to prize? And whatever willing there is, is it not just an impersonal event/operation? Our arm will not rise when not being lifted "externally" except by means of willing. And that is an "internal" lifting. But is it random, uncaused? Isn't the impulse to lift the arm conditioned by the desire to grasp something? The attachment to the object (upadana) conditions the impulse to reach for it and the reaching (bhava), itself, which in turn conditions our birth as the possessor of the object, a rebirth of "self". It's all impersonal, even the creation of the identity as possessor. It's all impersonal and all conditioned. Cetana is part of the process, and that cetana is conditioned by many things, but most especially by our desires. What do people really mean when they say that their will is free. I think they mean little more than that they will to do what they want to do. Well, that's true. What more is there to look for? Is random willing somehow better? I think it seems so to many of us, because we think that this somehow means greater autonomy for the "person". Not being able to accept willing as conditioned is, I believe, itself conditioned by the sense of self, the heart of avijja. -------------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > =========================== 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) 17210 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:06pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Howard, This is a beautiful and insightful rendition of the events as you encountered them. I also see the influences of kamma, forgiveness, humility, and service in your telling--which says as much about you as the events you experienced. I wish my brief `Going Forth' had been as illustrious and supported, but that also is kamma; and I am content and deeply happy to know that proper tradition has not completely vanished. Thank you for sharing so humbly and sincerely your experiences. I, for one, greatly appreciate it. Metta, James 17211 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. > > I have aversion to this way of thinking. I see that I did not choose > to have this aversion; it arose because of conditions. Is there > another option that is not "choice" and not "pre-destiny"? > Please help. >_______________ Dear RobM, Glad to hear of your meeting with Paul and Sarah and Jon. Just got off the phone to Nina (VanG) who arrived in bangkok just this morning. I read over the conversations between you and Howard (and Wendy) and saw some very nice points. I think most of us have struggled with dilemmas related to anatta. It is the hardest part of the Dhamma and some even give up and decide that really there must be a self that can control somethings, somehow. But that is not the way. Both "freewill" and "predestiny/predetermination" are tied up with selfview. I'm just off for my daily swim so if I repast this old letter for now. I know you've read it before but it summarises several points so is worth another look: Someone wrote to me a while back who feels that no control is a dangerous idea.They wanted to stress control and volitional intention which is what they believe that Buddha really taught and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a pernicious belief leading to apathy. "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present moment." the writer said."this is new kamma". I replied: Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new kamma. However, they are also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most important book of the Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 paccaya (conditions). Some of which are past and some present. But even the present ones do not simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because "I" want them to. The processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and there is no "person" who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even the cittas that are arising at this moment are conditioned by previous cittas as well as well as by other conditions that are present at the same time. They further wrote that "we are not just helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is absurd. I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes from the belief that we are a slave to our conditioning." I said "This sounds like the debates that western Philosophy used to have (and still does) about Free-will versus Determinism. The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is the middle path. Thus the statement about "we being helpless automata acting out our old kamma" misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And kamma is not the only condition. Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the deep teachings on anatta, are a condition for understanding. This understanding leads to energy: energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the study and practice of vipassana. . And if understanding grows then there will be detachment from the idea of self and of control. Then there is no more despair about the path - because "I" have been taken out of the equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that we want to be happy, get enlightened , whatever. Then, as the Visuddhimagga says, 'there is a path but no one on the path'." This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it is itself conditioned. What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later they get interested and surpass in understanding those who studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana > are > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > thinking one > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > micchaditthi.... _________________ Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. ____________________________ > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > lack of a > better f-word) "fate"? "" __________________ Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did this that or the other nothing would make a thread of difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. It is true that some are past conditions but there are also present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way and is neither. Robert 17212 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 2 Thank you, James! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/26/02 10:08:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Howard, > > This is a beautiful and insightful rendition of the events as you > encountered them. I also see the influences of kamma, forgiveness, > humility, and service in your telling--which says as much about you > as the events you experienced. I wish my brief `Going Forth' had > been as illustrious and supported, but that also is kamma; and I am > content and deeply happy to know that proper tradition has not > completely vanished. Thank you for sharing so humbly and sincerely > your experiences. I, for one, greatly appreciate it. > > Metta, James > /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) 17213 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:38pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) ---Dear RobM, Still haven't gone for my swim. I thought you might like to read thisold letter from Dan: In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: Hello my dsg friends, It feels great to see you all again, but my stay this time must really be short. Although each moment is an opportunity for studying Dhamma, some livelihoods do not allow for much discussion. I would fit in under "They earn their living by accounting, computation, calculation,[etc.]--the recluse Gotama abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased arts" (DN 1, Brahmajala sutta). He was praised for this moral virtue regarding such "trifling and insignificant matters," but even this trifling virtue I lack. A quick comment about something Erik said: > paramattha sacca is an excellent medicine applied at > the right time (like when stubbing the toe) One problem is that when stubbing the toe, the "YEEEOWCH!" comes before there is time to think about applying any medicine. When satipatthana is viewed as a medicine to apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises, it is impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying medicine. To get beyond "YEEEOWCH", we must first get beyond the idea of satipatthana as a medicine to apply--it takes too long to "apply" anything and this remains true no matter how much one might practice to make it faster. The problem is that the medicine is applied in response to the aversion rather than the pain. It's easy to see aversion as something that needs a remedy, but when there is clear understanding of rupa as rupa and nama as nama, vedana as vedana and dosa as dosa, and no self in any of it, there is no thought of medicines or remedies or anything to apply or anyone to apply it. This is not to say that there is no benefit to thinking about "applying remedies" to unwholesome states of mind. There is great benefit, especially in comparison to the conventional alternative of NOT applying remedies or considering unwholesome states of mind as no different from wholesome ones. Applying remedies is a wonderful practice that can bring good results and should be encouraged. But if we would learn Dhamma, we must be careful to make a clear distinction between the conventional wisdom of "medicines" and the deeper wisdom of anatta, the realization that ultimately there is no one to apply any medicine, no medicine to apply. This doesn't mean that there is nothing to be done, that there is nothing we can do. On the contrary, there is much to be done at every moment, and it is vital that we do so -- every moment working, studying, observing, understanding. More concretely, one thing we can do is to understand that all we do in normal everyday life is run around trying to apply medicine in response to various sensations, mental and physical. "Paramattha sacca" is not just another medicine apply, another technique to assuage pain. The problem of suffering is not that there is this particular instance of suffering to deal with or that instance of suffering to deal with; instead, it is a general problem perpetuated by our eons-long habit of continually aiming a fire extinguisher at any fire that flares up and our view that this fire extinguisher, medicine approach can solve the problem. What mind arises right now? What are its characteristics? What is rupa? What is nama? What is vedana? Sañña? Sankhara? Viññana? What are kusala and akusala? When these questions are considered seriously, there is no thought of "medicine", a concept rooted in an the idea of an atta who directs. "This director usually makes the wrong decisions, so we just need to train him to make the right decisions. He's so powerful that once we get him trained right, voilá! Liberation." This atta can indeed be trained, and in the training, there is benefit. But liberation is effected by understanding anatta, and not by a well-trained atta. Dan --- End forwarded message --- 17214 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:42pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Free Will (again) Dear Rob, > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > because of free will and choice." > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > abyss? That sounds like a pretty good example (to me) that, because of those conditions, this happens. All realities, including confusion, restlessness, and thoughts are conditioned by other realities (and non-realities). If you study patthana, then you can see that the conditioning of a reality is very complexed: it has too many variables that point to uncontrollability. Panna and fears also condition. By listening to the Buddha teachings, we begin to know it for ourselves, at all sort of levels, what's good and what's bad, and the causes and effects of things. Would you "choose" to do something if you think it isn't useful? When panna knows that kusala states are useful (and necessary to reach nibbana), then one begins to follow the path that is wholesome. When panna knows that akusala states are ugly, have many faults, then one avoids (or some of the time!!!) the path that is unwholesome. Panna has many different conditions: what has been accumulated in the past, the suitability of this life to accumulate panna, being associated with a wise person, listening to the true dhamma, skillful attention, etc. When panna leads, many different kusala states follow, but all because of conditions, not us, not you, and not me. kom 17215 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:54pm Subject: Free Willy!! :-) [was: Free Will (again)] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > I'll try and bring up the > > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. > Seeing > > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. > > Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I > knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the > first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean > by free will?". Rob M, Howard, Wendy, Larry, Kom, and All, Wow! I have read these posts with great interest. I must salute Rob M for his unflinching honesty about his spiritual dilemma concerning non-self and free will. That is a level of honesty I don't see too often and I highly respect it. Please allow me to throw my radical viewpoint to this fray…as usual :-). From my perspective, most of the `knowledgeable' Buddhists in the world are so attached to the teaching of `Non-Self' that they have created in their psyches a replacement self. I call it the: `Self- Non-Self'. It is a `self' that doesn't exist as `self', but does exist as `non-self'. It is a `Non-Self' that is just as much `Self' and the original `Self', but is viewed as `Non-Self'. Is such contradiction possible in the human psyche? YOU BET IT IS!!! Is this what the Buddha intended with his teaching of "Non-Self"? Heck No! He taught it so that people would abandon the sense of self (and the garbage attached) and then have nothing left. But that is not what most Buddhists have done. Many have replaced the original 'self' with a warped and twisted new concept of self. The inescapable result will be deep angst and confusion as one lives with a `Self-Non-Self' that most definitely exists in the psyche, but is not supposed to exist. Howard explained it the best I think, but unfortunately in a very choppy and disjointed way over several posts: Both `Self' and `Non- Self' should be dropped. Holding them is like having a hot ball (shot-putt?) stuck in the throat. They won't go up and they won't go down. My input: Anatta is a concept to be developed slowly through meditation…not a concept to be discussed over dinner in Bangkok. How does Free Will correspond with Anatta? Who cares??!! Enjoy Bangkok before your vacation is over already! The answers will come later…maybe at the pool with Dan. :-) My opinion. Metta, James 17216 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:54pm Subject: Re: Free Will (again) DearRobM, Back from my swim. Just off to Thai language class so only have time for one more repost. This was a letter to Christine almost exactly one year ago. BTW great to hear you met with her too in Hongkong - I'll be seeing her for the first time on Friday. _________ I really don't want to believe that > I am just a 'process' who seems to be a living puppet that > everything happens to, things (mental states) arise as an intrusion, > without permission, or without being intended or evoked....the problem is, of course, that I don't want it to be so.....anatta, and > no control. +++++++ Dear Christine, It is very nice that you can admit the difficulty you're having with 'getting' anatta. Sometimes we talk about about this most profound truth rather easily, and so it might seem that it should be like ABC. But is the deepest aspect of life and thus it is incomparably difficult to grasp let alone fathom. I like what you said about 'the living puppet', it reminds me of the Bhikkhuni-samyutta where Mara approaches the Bhikkhuni Sela "Then Mara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhuni Sela, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse: "By whom has this puppet been created? Where is the maker of the puppet? Where has the puppet arisen? Where does the puppet cease?"[24] Then it occurred to the bhikkhuni Sela: "Now who is this...? This is Mara the Evil One... desiring to make me fall away from concentration." Then the bhikkhuni Sela, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses: "This puppet is not made by itself, Nor is this misery made by another. It has come to be dependent on a cause, When the cause dissolves then it will cease."endquote Things do indeed, as you said, happen "without permission or without being intended or invoked". When I first started to see that this is really the way things are it scared me alot, and I wanted to turn away and try to believe that it was otherwise. But, you know, this is what dukkha really is. We can't stop seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, feeling, knowing, thinking; these dhammas are not ours and they arise by conditions. They oppress by continually arising and ceasing. The amazing thing is that the more we look into this, and the more obvious dukkha thus becomes, the happier we become. And paradoxically the more we see that there is no control the more freedom we have. The more we see that right effort is a conditioned phenomena the more vigor there is - because we are not wasting energy trying to have what can't yet be had. Other parami are needed too - patience and wisdom should develop together. Could I recommend yet another book - a short one - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment , which explains the ten parami (much easier than the patthana). You can read it at http://www.abhidhamma.org best wishes robert 17217 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:01pm Subject: RE: Another Approach Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Dear Rob, > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Last night, I asked if the Buddha could foresee > with precision > events that would unfold two thousand years in > the future (such as > the World Trade Centre bombing). I'm not sure, > but I think that our > two moderators had different opinions (gasp!). > > Here is my opinion. It was clear that the Buddha > could anticipate > things that would soon happen (i.e. when He > intervened to stop > Angulimalla from killing his mother). Seeing the > past accumulations > of each person would allow the Buddha to make > reasonable conclusions > regarding things that were just about to happen. > The Buddha could > also forsee general future trends as demonstrated > in His analysis of > the 16 dreams of King Pasendai. How about predicting exactly another Buddha 4 aeons from now? That is way longer (incomparable) than a few thousand years... On the other hand, this Buddha is said to have made a resolution to become a Buddha by thought, and words, for 16 aeons (plus the next 4 aeons [by thought, words, and deeds] making 20 aeons and 100,000 kappas). This Buddha was predicted by 24 sammasam-buddha that appeared in the last 4 aeons. Why didn't the Buddhas before that? kom 17218 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:03pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Dear Rob, I think you replied in response to the discussions you had! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 3:06 PM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) > > > Hey, don't blame me for that last posting. > Conditions arose, I had > no choice. I had to write that message. It was > predestined to > happen. Your reply or lack of reply is also pre-destined. 17219 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:16pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi Stephen, It's very difficult to discuss the Dhamma if we can't agree on what the Dhamma is. The Abhidhamma and the Commentaries make it clear that the eight factors of the Ariyan Path are mental factors (cetasikas). In a moment when Nibbana is the object of consciousness, those eight mental factors arise as part of the five khandhas (part of the sankhara-khandhas). Likewise, it is made clear that whenever five or six of those factors (including one, at most, of the three abstinences), are present in their mundane forms, then that is a moment of satipatthana. You reject those texts and I think you reject that the eight Path factors are cetasikas; but perhaps you could say where, in the remainder of the Tipitaka, it is stated that they are "steps." Kind regards Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > > Hello Ken > > >Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the > >Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the > >Noble Ones. > I'd say we all practice it, the Noble Ones have realized it. > >I wonder if the author agrees that the > >method that worldling disciples can follow is the > >five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. > That's Samma Sati. Add 7 other steps. > (Don't forget effort, which requires doing things/free choice, and samadhi, > defined as the four jhanas ;-) > metta, stephen 17220 From: Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 7:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Ken, >It's very difficult to discuss the Dhamma if we can't >agree on what the Dhamma is. Yes. (The suttas are a sectarian compilation that incorporate much abhihamma; at this point there as good as we have — the agamas being equal — but they can't be regarded as the original teaching. We simply have to pick our best interpretation.) Perhaps the difference between us is that I'm open to many views. >You reject those texts and I think you reject that the >eight Path factors are cetasikas; but perhaps you could >say where, in the remainder of the Tipitaka, it is stated >that they are "steps." Analyzing the khandha of sankhara as 52 cetasikas isn't very plausible or useful to me; if it works for you, great. Using the word "steps" was a poor choice in the context of my original post. I should have simply said that there are 8 factors to be practiced. However, if it's steps you'd like ;-) try MN.iii 72 to 78, the Mahacattarisaka Sutta. metta, stephen 17221 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:43am Subject: Reply to ????? Dear James: Thank you for the letter you sent me. I know I waswrong to call you adults "guys", but it was just a sense of humor! I had learnt a lot about Buddhism from your letter,and I think it is my turn to answer your question. Being like a child means that we got to think like a child. We would have to believe in God because you believe in him, and because he is the creator. Child's thoughts are clean and honest, and we have to be like this to go to heaven. Are the Buddhas optimistic? Do you have any more advice? (I thought it was funny that you were like me!!!) Please write back! Yours sincerely, Philip 17222 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:47am Subject: Reply to Kom Dear Kom: Thank you for writing. After reading your letter, I have learnt a lot more about Buddhism. But there are one or two things I still don't understand, and I hope you can help me: 1. You said that Buddhas also teach us bad things,like killing, stealing, lying, saying bad things......But Buddhas are Gods, surely they won't teach us to do those things!?? Thanks again for writing. If you have any questions about Christianity, don't hestitate to tell me. Yours sincerely, Philip 17223 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:49am Subject: Surprise! I'm Sandy Dear Kiana, I'm Sandy! Are you a Buddhist? Do you know anything about Buddhism? Life and death- What happens after death? Can you find the people who are reborn in the future? Please reply to me. Sandy 17224 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:55am Subject: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words Dear Dhamma friends How are you? The following is my reply to the facinating thread regarding Stephen's post "Is Buddhadhamma pessimistic?". Coincidently, I have recently translated Section 49, Catunipaata Paali, Anguttarakikaayo. The statements of the Buddha in that Section 49 seem to be describing what Buddhadhamma really is in the Buddha's own words. When I read these statements of the Buddha, they support the understanding of Brian and Jack while they seem to contradict the views of Stephen, James, Beth and Joyce (due to her Maya quote). But, no big deal! Appreciation of the Buddha's teachings is a slow, gradual and (often painful) process. Now, I also sound pessimistic as I wrote "(often painful) process". As there are Pali scholars and students on this list, I also included the original Pali passages so that they can perform "Syntax Walk- through" on my translations and trace Pali terms and their counterparts in English. Please view the following literal translation. -------------------------------------------- VIPALLAASA SUTTAM "Cattaarome, bhikkhave, saññaavipallaasaa cittavipallaasaa di.t.thivipallaasaa. katame cattaaro? anicce, bhikkhave, niccanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; dukkhe, bhikkhave, sukhanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; anattani, bhikkhave, attaati saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso; asubhe, bhikkhave, subhanti saññaavipallaaso cittavipallaaso di.t.thivipallaaso. ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro saññaavipallaasaa cittavipallaasaa di.t.thivipallaasaa. "Cattaarome, bhikkhave, nasaññaavipallaasaa nacittavipallaasaa nadi.t.thivipallaasaa. katame cattaaro? anicce, bhikkhave, aniccanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; dukkhe, bhikkhave, dukkhanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; anattani, bhikkhave, anattaati nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso; asubhe, bhikkhave, asubhanti nasaññaavipallaaso nacittavipallaaso nadi.t.thivipallaaso. ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro nasaññaavipallaasaa nacittavipallaasaa nadi.t.thivipallaasaa"ti. ABERRATIONS Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations of view. What are the four? Monks, taking permanence in impermanence is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking pleasure in misery is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking self in selflessness is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking beauty in ugliness is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations of view. Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness and sanities of view. What are the four? Monks, taking impermanence in impermanence is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking misery in misery is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking selflessness in selflessness is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking ugliness in ugliness is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness and sanities of view. The above Suttam is Section 49, Catunipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. According to the VIPALLAASA SUTTAM, the Buddha did not mince his words. He called any views aberrant that deviate from four characteristics of body and mind (misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness). If you regard the Buddha's description of real phenomena as misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness - as pessimism, then you may perhaps need a lot of Buddhist psychotherapy to rid yourselves of aberrations (VIPALLAASAA). With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 17225 From: Star Kid Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:57am Subject: Hi. Dear Jan, Hi, Jan. My name is Ki Yong Kim and I am thirteen years old. I was born in Seoul, Korea. I go to West Island School in Hong Kong. My hobbies are playing computer games and playing football. I am a home alone kid, because my mom lives in Korea with my elder brother who has to go to university next year. Wish him luck, hehe. I know your brother well. Kane... Our lesson is boring without him. Hehe I read your letter Jan. Its really surprising when someone you know dies unexpectedly. If someone dies by disease or they get too old, you can just think thats the way he/she had to go, but if someone died by terrorist attacks, its really hard to understand. I never had that kind of experience before, but I still know how you'd feel. Bali Bombing killed a lot of people and it made a lot of harms to people. I can't believe Mr. Wash-till was one of the victims. Some tourist guides quit their jobs and many shops near the tourism places were closed. This world is such a mess. I don't why people kill each other. I hope there will be peace soon. In your letter I learnt that you had your own religion and Buddhism people belives in reincarnation. I have a different opinion Jan. Because I am Catholic, I belive in heaven and the under world also known as hell. I hope Mr Wash-till is having a peaceful life in heaven. I have some questions about Buddhism Jan. I am just wandering when do you have to go to the temple? In Catholic we go to church Saturday or Sunday. Can every monks do Shaolin? They are cool. Hehe... Hm... I think I have no more questions. Please excuse me if there are grammar mistakes. I am not really good at English because I don't try(??). Have a good time, and you don't have to reply me if you can't. See ya. Sincerly, Ki Yong KIM _ 17226 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:02am Subject: Re: Hi. Hi Kim, After reading your letter, i would like to share something, my own story! ^^ i'd been a vegetarian for 11 yrs, i know its not easy for u to know what had happened 13yrs ago, but i will try to let u know anyway! ^_~ in June of 1989, many many ppl got killed in China, and i started to think,,, why? why so many ppl got killed at the same time? what caused them to die at the same time? Kamma? if yes, how can so many ppl were having the same situation???? on 3 july 1989, i started to be a vegetarian, and everyday after work, i just keep reading books. no movies, no tv-program, no sport, everything stopped. i kept spending my spare time like that for 2 yrs. during that period, i found out that there r 2 kinds of kamma, one is individual, another one is common. [there should be a special term, but sorry, i dont know! :p] For example, from the early morning when u woke up, u brush ur teeth, having ur breakfast, get change, then go to school. althought all ur school-mates r doing the same, but u may not getting up at the same time, not having the same breakfast, no using the same transpotation to go to school, thats what i called the individual kamma. Then, all of u sitting in the same class, thats what i called the kamma in common. im not sure if any of u can understand what im trying to say, but since we have so many good dhamma friends here, i know they will help me to explain that! hehehee --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear Jan, > > Hi, Jan. My name is Ki Yong Kim and I am thirteen > years old. I was born in Seoul, Korea. I go to West > Island School in Hong Kong. My hobbies are playing > computer games and playing football. I am a home alone > kid, because my mom lives in Korea with my elder > brother who has to go to university next year. Wish > him luck, hehe. I know your brother well. Kane... Our > lesson is boring without him. Hehe > > I read your letter Jan. Its really surprising when > someone you know dies unexpectedly. If someone dies by > disease or they get too old, you can just think thats > the way he/she had to go, but if someone died by > terrorist attacks, its really hard to understand. I > never had that kind of experience before, but I still > know how you'd feel. Bali Bombing killed a lot of > people and it made a lot of harms to people. I can't > believe Mr. Wash-till was one of the victims. Some > tourist guides quit their jobs and many shops near the > tourism places were closed. This world is such a mess. > I don't why people kill each other. I hope there will > be peace soon. > > In your letter I learnt that you had your own religion > and Buddhism people belives in reincarnation. I have a > different opinion Jan. Because I am Catholic, I belive > in heaven and the under world also known as hell. I > hope Mr Wash-till is having a peaceful life in heaven. > > I have some questions about Buddhism Jan. I am just > wandering when do you have to go to the temple? In > Catholic we go to church Saturday or Sunday. Can every > monks do Shaolin? They are cool. Hehe... Hm... I think > I have no more questions. > > Please excuse me if there are grammar mistakes. I am > not really good at English because I don't try(??). > Have a good time, and you don't have to reply me if > you can't. See ya. > > Sincerly, Ki Yong KIM 17227 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 5:46am Subject: RE: [dsg] Reply to Kom Dear Philip, > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > > > 1. You said that Buddhas also teach us bad things,like > killing, stealing, lying, saying bad things......But > Buddhas are Gods, surely they won't teach us to do > those things!?? That's very good, Philip. The Buddha teaches that doing bad things (bad kamma) bring bad results (results of kamma). Because of doing bad things, one might suffer lives in unhappy planes of existence, like being in hell, being a hungry ghost, being animals, or at the very least when being a human, suffers things that we don't like. A Buddha (according to my understanding) is not a god. He is a human who has accumulated wisdom and compassion for others for a very long period of time, over many lives. By knowing things that should be known (by wisdom), he has achieved true happiness, and by his compassion, he teaches what he knows so that other may also achieve true happiness as well. > > Thanks again for writing. If you have any questions > about Christianity, don't hestitate to tell me. Thanks for writing, and for the offer to explain about Christianity. I do not have any questions at the moment, and if I do, we will have to do this off-list. Many folks here are parts of this group to learn about what the Buddha teaches, so we don't normally discuss things that aren't related on the group. I hope you write again. kom 17228 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:04am Subject: Re: Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: > ABERRATIONS > > Monks, these four are aberrations of memory, aberrations of > consciousness and aberrations of view. What are the four? Monks, > taking permanence in impermanence is aberration of memory, aberration > of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, taking pleasure in > misery is aberration of memory, aberration of consciousness and > aberration of view. Monks, taking self in selflessness is aberration > of memory, aberration of consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, > taking beauty in ugliness is aberration of memory, aberration of > consciousness and aberration of view. Monks, these four are > aberrations of memory, aberrations of consciousness and aberrations > of view. > > Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness > and sanities of view. What are the four? Monks, taking impermanence > in impermanence is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and > sanity of view. Monks, taking misery in misery is sanity of memory, > sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking > selflessness in selflessness is sanity of memory, sanity of > consciousness and sanity of view. Monks, taking ugliness in ugliness > is sanity of memory, sanity of consciousness and sanity of view. > Monks, these four are sanities of memory, sanities of consciousness > and sanities of view. > > The above Suttam is Section 49, Catunipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. > > > According to the VIPALLAASA SUTTAM, the Buddha did not mince his > words. He called any views aberrant that deviate from four > characteristics of body and mind (misery, impermanence, selflessness, > and ugliness). Dear Suan, How are you? With all due respect, I find your interpretation of this sutta lacking. Where is the Buddha saying that the four characteristics of body and mind are: misery, impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness? I don't see him saying that. I believe you have misunderstood his message. First, he is talking about aberrations of view, memory and consciousness, not "official" characteristics of mind and body. In other words, he is speaking about incorrect perception in regards to the mundane and the transcendent. Allow me to use an analogy to explain how I interpret this sutta: Let's say you are standing in front of a fun house mirror that radically distorts your image. Some people (the majority) will look at that image and think, "That is me." These are the people who take permanence for impermanence, pleasure for misery, etc. And a few wise people will look into the mirror and know, "That is not me." They are the ones who take impermanence for impermanence, misery for misery, selflessness for selflessness, etc. But, and this is the important thing, the 'you' being reflected, your Buddha Nature, is not the image in the mirror. Rejecting the fun house mirror of distorted view, consciousness, and memory isn't pessimistic...it is liberating and joyful. This is my interpretation and I could be mistaken while you are correct. Importantly, my interpretation and optimist outlook works for me...that's all that matters. Take care. Metta, James > > If you regard the Buddha's description of real phenomena as misery, > impermanence, selflessness, and ugliness - as pessimism, then you may > perhaps need a lot of Buddhist psychotherapy to rid yourselves of > aberrations (VIPALLAASAA). > > > With kind regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 17229 From: nidive Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas Hi James, Oh well whatever... I know that I am 'correct' and you know that you are 'correct'. For personal reasons, I know I am 'correct' that contemplation of rupas will lead to insight in conjunction with contemplation of nama. For personal reasons, I know that it is possible to know rupas as rupas are and namas as namas are. I don't take the view that rupas are to be disregarded since they can't be known exactly as they are (simply because I know that rupas can be known exactly as they are). With metta, NEO Swee Boon 17230 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:58am Subject: Re: Reply to ????? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James: > > Thank you for the letter you sent me. I know I > waswrong to call you adults "guys", but it was just a > sense of humor! > > I had learnt a lot about Buddhism from your letter,and > I think it is my turn to answer your question. Being > like a child means that we got to think like a child. > We would have to believe in God because you believe in > him, and because he is the creator. Child's thoughts > are clean and honest, and we have to be like this to > go to heaven. > > Are the Buddhas optimistic? > > Do you have any more advice? (I thought it was funny > that you were like me!!!) > > Please write back! > > Yours sincerely, > > Philip Hi Star Kid Philip! Thank you for the apology and admitting you went too far with your `sense of humor'. Yes, you and I are very similar. I also often go too far with my sense of humor. Will either of us be able to completely stop doing that? Should we? My answer to both questions is: no. Some things can't be completely changed. What we both need to do is to apologize freely and frequently. I am glad you have learned this already. I have business cards with "I'm sorry" printed on them that I often give out. Makes the process quicker! :-) Just kidding! Thank you for your answer about Christianity. I agree with you. We all must try to keep our thoughts `clean and honest'. It is funny that you ask about the optimism of Buddhas because I have had some discussion about that recently on the Internet. Philip, I believe you will get different answers depending on whom you ask and how they interpret the meaning of the word `optimist'. I believe that many misinterpret that word and think it means something that it doesn't mean. `Optimist' means someone who is hopeful, enthusiastic, and dedicated; but many people seem to think that `Optimist' means someone who is deliriously happy, silly, and foolhardy. With my interpretation of the word, I would have to say that I think any Buddha is 100% an Optimist. People view Buddhism, just as they view life, in different ways depending on their personalities. Are you familiar with the `Winnie The Pooh' stories? Well, in those stories you will see how the different animals represent different types of people in the world. Eeroy the donkey is a pessimist, Tigger is a happy-go-lucky fool, The Owl is an intellectual, Piglet is a paranoid, Kinga is motherly, and Winnie the Pooh is an optimist. I think Winnie the Pooh is the most like a Buddha. Winnie the Pooh always tries to help others, he doesn't judge, he doesn't do too much or too little, he knows and accepts his limitations, when he is tired he sleeps and when he is hungry he eats, and he has hope and the knowledge that everything will turn out just fine (even when it appears that things won't.) We should all try to be as much like Winnie the Pooh as possible. The only advice I can give you Philip is to do your best in school; try to understand where other people are coming from; and MOST IMPORTANTLY, don't let anyone tell you that you are not a good person and you should be someone else. Each star in the universe shines in a different way. You just keep shining Star Kid!! Love, James 17231 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:15am Subject: Re: Free Will (again) Robert, You are seeing yourself as nama-rupa. And since nama-rupa is conditioned, you conclude that there is no control. Seeing oneself as nama-rupa is a self-view, and the view "there is no control" is derived from the self-view of seeing oneself as nama-rupa. Metta, Victor > so is worth another look: > > Someone wrote to me a while back who > feels that no control is a dangerous idea.They wanted to stress > control and volitional intention > which is what they believe that Buddha really taught > and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a pernicious > belief leading to apathy. > > "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present > moment." the writer said."this is new kamma". > > I replied: > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > kamma. However, they are > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > important book of the > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > paccaya (conditions). > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > present ones do not > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > "I" want them to. The > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > there is no "person" > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > the cittas that are > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > cittas as well as well as > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > They further wrote that "we are not just > helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is > absurd. > I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes > from the belief that we are a slave to our > conditioning." > > I said "This sounds like the debates that western > Philosophy used to have (and still > does) about Free-will versus Determinism. > The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is > the middle path. Thus > the statement about "we being helpless automata acting > out our old kamma" > misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And > kamma is not the only > condition. > Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the > deep teachings on anatta, > are a condition for understanding. This understanding > leads to energy: > energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the > study and practice of > vipassana. . And if > understanding grows then there > will be detachment from the idea of self and of > control. Then there is no > more despair about the path - because "I" have been > taken out of the > equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that > we want to be happy, > get enlightened , whatever. Then, as the > Visuddhimagga says, > 'there is a path but no one on the path'." > > This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is > not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in > one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in > another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it > is itself conditioned. > What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the > Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of > merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so > interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban > interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention > to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it > unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it > just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later > they get interested and surpass in understanding those who > studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for > all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. > > You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except > nibbana > > are > > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > > thinking one > > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > > micchaditthi.... > > _________________ > Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the > idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self > view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good > intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees > the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that > arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into > self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or > towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. > > ____________________________ > > > > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > > lack of a > > better f-word) "fate"? "" > __________________ > Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did > this that or the other nothing would make a thread of > difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing > would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not > get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the > Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. > It is true that some are past conditions but there are also > present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism > and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who > can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way > and is neither. > Robert 17232 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) Hi Kom, I think you are confusing conditionality with uncontrollability. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Rob, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > > > > I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some > > discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I > > replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking > > aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are > > javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be > > restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not > > because of free will and choice." > > > > I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me > > now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I > > say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I > > take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to > > do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". > > > > Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the > > abyss? > > That sounds like a pretty good example (to me) that, because of those > conditions, this happens. All realities, including confusion, restlessness, > and thoughts are conditioned by other realities (and non- realities). If you > study patthana, then you can see that the conditioning of a reality is very > complexed: it has too many variables that point to uncontrollability. > > Panna and fears also condition. By listening to the Buddha teachings, we > begin to know it for ourselves, at all sort of levels, what's good and > what's bad, and the causes and effects of things. Would you "choose" to do > something if you think it isn't useful? When panna knows that kusala states > are useful (and necessary to reach nibbana), then one begins to follow the > path that is wholesome. When panna knows that akusala states are ugly, have > many faults, then one avoids (or some of the time!!!) the path that is > unwholesome. > > Panna has many different conditions: what has been accumulated in the past, > the suitability of this life to accumulate panna, being associated with a > wise person, listening to the true dhamma, skillful attention, etc. When > panna leads, many different kusala states follow, but all because of > conditions, not us, not you, and not me. > > kom 17233 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/26/02 10:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > kamma. However, they are > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > important book of the > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > paccaya (conditions). > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > present ones do not > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > "I" want them to. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, there is no "I" to do *anything*. However, there *does* arise wanting, and wanting, in turn, conditions other activity. To the extent that wanting/willing is a condition for dhammas to arise there is what is misinterpreted as a self exerting control. ---------------------------------------------------- The> > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > there is no "person" > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > the cittas that are > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > cittas as well as well as > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of impersonality? ========================== 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) 17234 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/26/02 10:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new > > kamma. However, they are > > also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most > > important book of the > > Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 > > paccaya (conditions). > > Some of which are past and some present. But even the > > present ones do not > > simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because > > "I" want them to. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, there is no "I" to do *anything*. However, there *does* arise > wanting, and wanting, in turn, conditions other activity. To the extent that > wanting/willing is a condition for dhammas to arise there is what is > misinterpreted as a self exerting control. > ---------------------------------------------------- > The> > > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > > there is no "person" > > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > > the cittas that are > > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > > cittas as well as well as > > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of > impersonality? > ========================== > With metta, > Howard 17235 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 5:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/27/02 12:39:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================= That's a loaded question, Victor! ;-)) Conventionally speaking, of course I do things, and writing a post today was one of them. Conventionally speaking there are also such things as troubles and efforts and capacities. But I've never literally seen any of them. Victor, there are (at least) two ways to talk about things. Our ordinary speech is a mix of these two modes, literal and conventional. This is just fine so long as the mix doesn't take us in. The example of such conflation that I like is that of someone asking a farmer whether a sprout has the capacity to grow to a plant; when the farmer answers in the affirmative, the next question is where in the sprout can one find the capacity! The farmer, of course, looks at the questioner as if he were out of his mind - which he would be if he thought that speaking of capacities was to speak of "things". Conventional speech is *perfectly* useful, meaningful, and correct so long as it isn't conflated with literal speech. 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) 17236 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi Howard, How should one understand what you mean by "there is no 'I' to do 'anything'", if there is anyone to understand it at all? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - > > In a message dated 11/27/02 12:39:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > There is no "I" to do "anything"? Did you write a post to DSG today? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > > > > ======================= > That's a loaded question, Victor! ;-)) > Conventionally speaking, of course I do things, and writing a post > today was one of them. Conventionally speaking there are also such things as > troubles and efforts and capacities. But I've never literally seen any of > them. Victor, there are (at least) two ways to talk about things. Our > ordinary speech is a mix of these two modes, literal and conventional. This > is just fine so long as the mix doesn't take us in. The example of such > conflation that I like is that of someone asking a farmer whether a sprout > has the capacity to grow to a plant; when the farmer answers in the > affirmative, the next question is where in the sprout can one find the > capacity! The farmer, of course, looks at the questioner as if he were out of > his mind - which he would be if he thought that speaking of capacities was to > speak of "things". Conventional speech is *perfectly* useful, meaningful, and > correct so long as it isn't conflated with literal speech. > > With metta, > Howard 17237 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:12pm Subject: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that too. But > do we KNOW it??? > -------------------------------------------------- Excellent point! Three days ago, I "knew" that there was no self and could argue the point from an academic perspective; "No self in any of the five aggregates, no self in conditions, therfore no self at all." Three days ago, I was trying to reconcile the idea of no-self with "free will". I clung to the concept of "free will" because I felt that "free will" was necessary as a foundation of responsibility, accountability and ethics. Two days ago, when Jon asked me (when discussing another issue) about my current mental state, I answered, "confusion and restlessness". This triggered one of those "ah-ha" moments and I realized that these states did not arise because of "free will" but could only have arisen because of conditions. This led me to understand that there could not be "free will", that there could not be a self in the thought process. I went from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self". I went one step closer to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one step towards an understanding of anatta. With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. Howard, you likened my dilemma to a koan. My first practice was Zen. I remembered the koan "does a dog have a Buddha-nature" and my answer of "it doesn't matter". With reduced clinging to responsibility, accountability and ethics, I can now swallow the ball of pre-destiny and wash it down with a helping of "it doesn't matter"; pre-destiny doesn't matter because it is beyond my ability to understand the workings of kamma. I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that there there is no self". I now have the rather mundane concern of, "How am I going to explain this to my class?" I will probably just take a shot at it and go through the logic a first time. This will undoubtedly condition a lot of confusion and restlessness. I will then grasp the moment to ask them the source of their own confusion and restlessness. It helped me (thanks Jon, for being a condition :-) ), perhaps it will help some of them. I also want to thank all of you who have become engaged in this discussion (especially you, Howard) for helping me along. I really hope that I can return the wonderful favour some day. Lots of Metta, Rob M :-) 17238 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:20pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > > Yes, I know that you "know" there is no self. I "know" that > too. But > > do we KNOW it??? > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Excellent point! > > Three days ago, I "knew" that there was no self and could argue the > point from an academic perspective; "No self in any of the five > aggregates, no self in conditions, therfore no self at all." > > Three days ago, I was trying to reconcile the idea of no-self > with "free will". I clung to the concept of "free will" because I > felt that "free will" was necessary as a foundation of > responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > Two days ago, when Jon asked me (when discussing another issue) > about my current mental state, I answered, "confusion and > restlessness". This triggered one of those "ah-ha" moments and I > realized that these states did not arise because of "free will" but > could only have arisen because of conditions. This led me to > understand that there could not be "free will", that there could not > be a self in the thought process. I went from "I know that there is > no self" to "I Know that there is no self". I went one step closer > to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic > position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and > confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one > step towards an understanding of anatta. > > With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my > Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny > in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts > of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose > their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, > without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good > or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" > to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my > attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > Howard, you likened my dilemma to a koan. My first practice was Zen. > I remembered the koan "does a dog have a Buddha-nature" and my > answer of "it doesn't matter". With reduced clinging to > responsibility, accountability and ethics, I can now swallow the > ball of pre-destiny and wash it down with a helping of "it doesn't > matter"; pre-destiny doesn't matter because it is beyond my ability > to understand the workings of kamma. > > I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this > self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further > reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that > there there is no self". > > I now have the rather mundane concern of, "How am I going to explain > this to my class?" I will probably just take a shot at it and go > through the logic a first time. This will undoubtedly condition a > lot of confusion and restlessness. I will then grasp the moment to > ask them the source of their own confusion and restlessness. It > helped me (thanks Jon, for being a condition :-) ), perhaps it will > help some of them. > > I also want to thank all of you who have become engaged in this > discussion (especially you, Howard) for helping me along. I really > hope that I can return the wonderful favour some day. > > Lots of Metta, > Rob M :-) 17239 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:32pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". I agree that I am not anywhere close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". Please help me see that I am being misled. Metta, Rob M :-) 17240 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If one commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others. Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead your class with your current understanding. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". > > I agree that I am not anywhere close to understanding what the > Buddha taught on "anatta". > > Please help me see that I am being misled. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17241 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:30pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Free Will (again) Dear Victor, I appreciate the response, although I disagree. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: yu_zhonghao [mailto:yu_zhonghao@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 8:25 AM > Subject: Re: [dsg] Free Will (again) > > > Hi Kom, > > I think you are confusing conditionality with uncontrollability. > > Metta, > Victor > 17242 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhadhamma In The Buddha's Own Words Hi Suan, Thanks for this translation. I was having trouble understanding the difference between sanna, citta, and ditthi, so I did some searching and found an article by Ledi Sayadaw in which he said these were like three degrees of deception by an ordinary person, a magician, and a demon, respectively. So I guess that means each of the four vipallasa has three levels of depth. Correct? Do you know where this simile came from? Ledi Sayadaw, or his translator, renders "citta" as "thought", so it seems to me that we should understand "ditthi" as something like "deep seated belief". Here is an interesting snippet I have a question on: "In this world all our mistaken ideas as to what comes within the field of our observation, are due to the action of the hallucination of thought which is deeper and more unfathomable than that of the perception, since it deludes us by making false things seem true. However, as it is not so firmly rooted as the latter, it can easily be removed by investigation or by searching into the causes and conditions of things." L: Do you, or anyone, know if there is a similar succinct 'fix' to sanna and ditthi vipallasa? Is "citta" the weakest link? How are sanna and ditthi eradicated? Obviously the 4 satipatthanas correspond to the 4 vipallasas but I was wondering if there were special instructions related to sanna and ditthi. What is meant by "sanna" and "ditthi" if "citta" is "thought"? thanks, Larry "Manual of Insight" by Ledi Sayadaw http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html 17243 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:52pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether > you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If one > commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. > > You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no > self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not > responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences > is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to > others. > > Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead your > class with your current understanding. > I see your line of reasoning. The way that I see it, starting with the conventional concepts of "responsibility" and "accountability" and deducting the concept of self, leaves behind the natural law of kamma. In other words, the appreciation of the law of kamma is strengthened, not weakened, by the elimination of the self-view. Above, you wrote, "The idea that one is not responsible and accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others." I see a lot of "self-view" in these statements. How would these statements be re-written without any reference to self? I am now having second thoughts about presenting this idea to my class. There are many in my class with an extraordinarly strong attachment to self-view and they could easily misinterpret what I was saying as a denial of the law of kamma rather than a reinforcement of the law of kamma. To use Howard's imagery, I want to move from "know" to "KNOW". As mentioned below, I feel that I have taken a first step and perhaps I can capitalize the first letter; I have moved to "Know". I notice that the remaining letters to be capitalized spell out another word, "now". Somehow I feel that there is something symbolic in this, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe this is pointing to the fact that there is nothing but the now to know. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17244 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first concept to get the ax is progress. Larry :)) 17245 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first concept > to get the ax is progress. > > Larry :)) Here is one way of visualizing my path "progressing": - know: taking the self out of the 5 aggregates / conditions - now: taking the self out of the thought process / perception - no: taking the self out of the understanding of kamma - o: taking the self out of the concept of progress - : understanding anatta Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17246 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/27/2002 2:14:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > How should one understand what you mean by "there is no 'I' > to > do 'anything'", if there is anyone to understand it at all? > > Metta, > Victor ======================= Victor, I'd like you to know that my grandmother would have exclaimed "Oy, vey!!" ;-)) Understanding occurs, Victor. That's it. An event occurs. With metta, Howard 17247 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 4:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob, It occured to me that this "knowing" question probably has something to do with the three levels (?) of vipallasa: sanna, citta, & ditthi. Do you know anything about this? Larry ps: also there is the Path of Purification formula which includes various insight knowledges I know nothing about; but Purification of View is understanding of nama and rupa and concomitant (I think) with understanding (realizing ?) anatta. 17248 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:55pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Robert, I don't think you really understand what a self-view is. Reference to self in a statement does not necessarily imply self-view. Likewise, statements without reference to self does not necessarily imply it is free of self-view. Instead of teaching your class Abhidhamma, why not teach your class the verses in Dhammapada 12? I think they will benefit more from your teaching if you teach them those verses. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Robert, every action of yours will have a consequence, and whether > > you like it or not, you and only you are accountable for it. If > one > > commited murder, he or she will always suffer its consequence. > > > > You are not going anywhere by moving from "I know that there is no > > self" to "I Know that there is no self". The idea that one is not > > responsible and accountable for his or her actions and > consequences > > is a wishful, immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to > > others. > > > > Regarding your concern, I would suggest that you don't mislead > your > > class with your current understanding. > > > > I see your line of reasoning. > > The way that I see it, starting with the conventional concepts > of "responsibility" and "accountability" and deducting the concept > of self, leaves behind the natural law of kamma. In other words, the > appreciation of the law of kamma is strengthened, not weakened, by > the elimination of the self-view. > > Above, you wrote, "The idea that one is not responsible and > accountable for his or her actions and consequences is a wishful, > immature thinking. It leads to harm to self and to others." I see a > lot of "self-view" in these statements. How would these statements > be re-written without any reference to self? > > I am now having second thoughts about presenting this idea to my > class. There are many in my class with an extraordinarly strong > attachment to self-view and they could easily misinterpret what I > was saying as a denial of the law of kamma rather than a > reinforcement of the law of kamma. > > To use Howard's imagery, I want to move from "know" to "KNOW". As > mentioned below, I feel that I have taken a first step and perhaps I > can capitalize the first letter; I have moved to "Know". > > I notice that the remaining letters to be capitalized spell out > another word, "now". > > Somehow I feel that there is something symbolic in this, but I can't > quite put my finger on it. > > Maybe this is pointing to the fact that there is nothing but the now > to know. > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17249 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 7:22pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- Dear RobM, Thanks so much for showing us your contemplations over the last few days. As you see increasing acceptance of anatta and conditionality doesn't suddenly lead to wanton behaviour. In fact because kamma is one of the main conditions it has to be understood- to the degree that this is possible- and understanding kamma properly strenghtens understanding of anatta, while also refining the understanding of what sila really is. Mike made some comments a while back :"This is such a fine and crucial point. I think that it's relatively easy to embrace anatta on a conceptual level, because, with a little understanding, it's easy to see how much unhappiness springs from the illusion of self (among other reasons). So we can reject atta out of plain old dosa... The idea of 'freedom'--meaning 'freedom of choice'--is MUCH harder to relinquish--especially (ironically) among those of us for whom 'liberation' is the central issue. I think this line of thinking usually goes something like this: "If 'I' can't choose patipada over pariyatti, or pariyatti over panyatti, If 'I' can't choose vipassana- over samatha-bhavana, If 'I' can't choose to investigate dhammas rather than to ignore them, to hear buddhadhamma rather than not to hear it, If 'I' can't choose to think, speak and act* in a wholesome way, then 'I' can never cultivate the eightfold path and attain liberation. So, 'I' don't mind giving up the idea of self, just so long as 'I'm' allowed to choose to do so (and receive the credit)...! Whether pariyatti or patipada or panyatti arises, whether samatha or vipassana bhavana is cultivated, whether dhammas are investigated or not, or buddhadhamma listened to or ignored, even whether kusala or akusala kamma is committed, NO ONE IS THERE in the arising, or the cultivation, or the investigation, listening, ignoring, thinking, speaking or acting. If there is no chooser, how can there be, or have been, a choice? Just wisdom or ignorance, in any possible situation, tipping the scale one way or the other depending on how much of each has accumulated. So it really doesn't make much sense to argue about whether we'll meditate or not, or study abhidhamma or not, or contemplate our breath rather than aggregates or bases or elements. 'We' will do what conditions, internal and external, allow us to do, and not otherwise--ever. If sufficient wisdom has accumulated for us to think, say and do intelligent things, and not to think, say or do stupid things, that's just wisdom at work--not 'us'."" Mike Robert I went one step closer > to "I KNOW that there is no self". Rather than taking an academic > position on the issue, I could now argue with strong conviction and > confidence that there could not be a self. I feel that this was one > step towards an understanding of anatta. > > With "free will" in the dustbin (I will also be taking it out of my > Class Notes), I was now stuck with the red hot ball of pre-destiny > in my throat. Again, I felt that pre-destiny undermined the concepts > of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > > I have now realized that responsibility and accountability lose > their relevance if there is no self. I have no realized that, > without a self, ethics becomes a sterile classification method (good > or bad), nothing more. Moving from "I know that there is no self" > to "I Know that there is no self" has allowed me to lessen my > attachment to concepts of responsibility, accountability and ethics. > >> I now look around and start to see how ubiquitous and insidious this > self-view is; it distorts almost everything. Perhaps with further > reflection, I will be able to take the next step up to "I KNow that > there there is no self". > > 17250 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Victor - Well, I guess that settles that!! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/27/02 4:22:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Robert, > > I am afraid that you are being misled, that you are not anywhere > close to understanding what the Buddha taught on "anatta". > > Metta, > Victor > /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) 17251 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 2:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/27/02 6:25:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Larry, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > >No now Rob. I think you have gone from know to gnough. The first > concept > >to get the ax is progress. > > > >Larry :)) > > Here is one way of visualizing my path "progressing": > - know: taking the self out of the 5 aggregates / conditions > - now: taking the self out of the thought process / perception > - no: taking the self out of the understanding of kamma > - o: taking the self out of the concept of progress > - : understanding anatta > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ I'm not sure that trying to gauge one's "progress" is a very useful activity. Until we really know what's going on we'd probably be mistaken anyway! ;-) Thinking over things is definitely useful, but is only a little piece of the practice. Lots of guarding the senses - as consistently as posssible, regular formal meditation, and ongoing mindfulness, all carried out in a manner as consistent with the Buddha's teaching as possible, constitute the core of the practice as I see it. And we should try to engage in this with as little anticipation or expectation of "progress" as possible, for that is just a craving-trap. No doubt others here will se this matter quite differently from me, but this is my take on it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17252 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:02pm Subject: Re: 2Getting closer to Anatta --- Dear RobM and all, As you have noted one of dilemmas that occur (Wendy brought this up too) when learning about anatta is that of choice and decisions and ethics. Jon wrote this letter to a friend back in 1976 Dear Friends, '......I got the impression you may be worried about making the right decision, or doing the right thing. In fact, of course, there is no 'right' decision or thing to do, nor in any absolute sense is there a 'better' decision or thing to do. Decisions are made according to our accumulations. We can, however, appreciate the importance of having kusala citta at any moment and of developing sati at any moment. Worry is akusala, so is fear, regret and all shades of uncertainty and unease. No doubt you have in mind that you would like to be sure that what you do will be the best for your study and practice of Dhamma (as well as suiting/satisfying other less noble purposes). But how do you know what circumstances may eventuate? How can you make that situation happen? We cannot foresee the long-term course of events that our past kamma will condition as result. In fact we cannot even know the more immediate plans that our kamma has for us. In ignorance we wonder about what will be the result if...? Not realizing that next month's or next year's vipaka is the result of action already performed, not the result of today's decisions. We forget the importance of developing understanding of the realities of the present moment. How valuable it is to have just a moment of sati, to see just for a moment a little more clearly one of the realities of this moment. Do you remember the sutta when the Buddha talks about a fingersnap of awareness? We spend a lot of time wondering about what we should be doing, or thinking about what we would like to do, or worrying about what we are not doing, but we have no understanding of what is actually happening at the present moment....seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and a lot of mind-door activity. The decisions we make are just another moment of thinking, conditioned by our accumulations to do many other things too. Then we may act, but this is quite another moment, with a different moment of intention, and different realities appearing.' (end quote) 17253 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > It occured to me that this "knowing" question probably has something to > do with the three levels (?) of vipallasa: sanna, citta, & ditthi. Do > you know anything about this? > My understanding is that the Suttas talk of two types of knowledge (can't remember the reference); mundane knowledge and bright knowledge. Mundane knowledge is intellectual understanding and bright knowledge comes from direct experience. As an analogy, if I am standing by the side of the river wondering if I could jump across and I see another person accomplish the task, I have mundane knowledge that it can be done. Once I have jumped over the stream myself, I can look back with bright knowledge that it can be done. I believe that vipallasa has to do with "perversions" or "distortions" that are uprooted (not merely surpressed) by attainment of maggas. The difference between uprooting and supressing is important. Imagine a pot of boiling water. Forcing a lid on the pot will supress the steam being produced. Turning off the steam (no more conditions for the steam to arise) is analgous to uprooting. If an akusala accumulation is supressed, it can continue to exist as a latent defilement; it is always possible that it can arise in the future. Attaining a magga allows the uprooting of defilements so that they can never arise again. The four vipallasa are: - To regard what is impermanent as permanent (anicca) - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) - To regard what is without a self as a self (anatta) - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) They talk of four "types" of vipallasa (citta / sanna / ditthi). I'm not sure if "level" is the best term, but I am also not sure that "types" is a better term. For this discussion, let's call them C-type, S-type and D-type. The first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots: - To regard what is impermanent as permanent (anicca) [C-type, S- type and D-type] - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) [D- type only] - To regard what is without a self as a self (anatta) [C-type, S- type and D-type] - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) [D-type only] The third magga (becoming an anagami) uproots: - To regard what is unsatisfactory as hapiness-producing (dukkha) [C- type and S-type] The fourth magga (becoming an arahant) uproots: - To regard what is unpure as beautiful (akusala / kusala) [C-type and S-type] The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 3-5) explains the difference between sanna, citta and panna by way of a simile. Sanna is like the mere perception of a coin by a child who does not know its value. Citta is like the villager who knows its value. Panna is like the money- changer who penetrates its true characteristics. This simile uses panna because it is from a kusala perspective. Vipallasa are akusala, so therefore it is probably valid to substitute ditthi (which is usually taken taken to mean "wrong view" unless written as samma-ditthi) for sanna. Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17254 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 7:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------- > The> > > processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and > > there is no "person" > > who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even > > the cittas that are > > arising at this moment are conditioned by previous > > cittas as well as well as > > by other conditions that are present at the same time. > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's that speed business again! ;-)) How did it add to the point of > impersonality? > ========================== >Dear Howard, The three characteristics are related to each other in various ways. With regard to aniccum (impermanence) this is far deeper than the impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so fast. You see we think it is the same me that decided to walk over to get a glass of water. But even while that thought (to have a drink)was in its incipient stage, just some slight urge building, countless number of cittas have arisen and fallen away. All of these are conditioned. How could any of them be controlled . To relate this to anatta this is one of my favourite quotes: The burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) xxvii writes about this: "Because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four imaginary characteristic functions of being have bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions" . Robert 17255 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 8:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will (again) > impermance that everyone witnesses in daily life. The anicca of the > tilakkhana is the rise and fall of nama and rupa and that is happening so > fast. Speed is irrelevant. 17256 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Stephen, You wrote: > Perhaps the difference between us is that I'm open to many views. > That could be it. I don't see how two conflicting views could both be right; the only understanding of the Dhamma worth having is the right one. How to find the right one? Well, there is the oldest recorded version, the Pali Canon. Admittedly, it can be interpreted in many ways but, I think very few ways could be consistent with it in its entirety. The ancient commentators have a version that is totally consistent, why look any further? Why prefer any other version over theirs? Whatever we do, let's not prefer our own, instinctive versions. By definition, we worldlings have wrong views -- let's not read them into the Buddhadhamma(!). I can't pretend to have a definitive understanding of the sutta you cited (the Mahacattarisaka-sutta), but may I ask you to read it again? This time, try to see it as a description of the supramundane mental factors. They are cetasikas that accompany moments of Path-consciousness and therefore, they are exclusive to the ariyans (referred to in the sutta as learners and arahats). They are the culmination of the ultimately real form of the Buddha's teaching (satipatthana), and they arise all together, not as single steps. Kind regards Ken H 17257 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:51pm Subject: Re: 2Getting closer to Anatta Wow! Jon has been this clever for more than 25 years! Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Dear Mods, I know that I should snip this post, but I was really impressed by it's content. Please forgive me. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- Dear RobM and all, > As you have noted one of dilemmas that occur (Wendy brought this up > too) when learning about anatta is that of choice and decisions and > ethics. Jon wrote this letter to a friend back in 1976 > Dear Friends, > > '......I got the impression you may be worried about > making the right decision, or doing the right thing. > In fact, of course, there is no 'right' decision or > thing to do, nor in any absolute sense is there a > 'better' decision or thing to do. Decisions are made > according to our accumulations. We can, however, > appreciate the importance of having kusala citta at > any moment and of developing sati at any moment. > Worry is akusala, so is fear, regret and all shades of > uncertainty and unease. > > No doubt you have in mind that you would like to be > sure that what you do will be the best for your study > and practice of Dhamma (as well as suiting/satisfying > other less noble purposes). But how do you know what > circumstances may eventuate? How can you make that > situation happen? We cannot foresee the long-term > course of events that our past kamma will condition as > result. > > In fact we cannot even know the more immediate plans > that our kamma has for us. In ignorance we wonder > about what will be the result if...? Not realizing > that next month's or next year's vipaka is the result > of action already performed, not the result of today's > decisions. We forget the importance of developing > understanding of the realities of the present moment. > How valuable it is to have just a moment of sati, to > see just for a moment a little more clearly one of the > realities of this moment. > > Do you remember the sutta when the Buddha talks about > a fingersnap of awareness? We spend a lot of time > wondering about what we should be doing, or thinking > about what we would like to do, or worrying about what > we are not doing, but we have no understanding of what > is actually happening at the present moment....seeing, > hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and a lot of > mind-door activity. > > The decisions we make are just another moment of > thinking, conditioned by our accumulations to do many > other things too. Then we may act, but this is quite > another moment, with a different moment of intention, > and different realities appearing.' (end quote) 17258 From: robmoult Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 9:57pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Victor, Perhaps you can help my understanding. Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. Thanks. Metta, Rob M :-) 17259 From: Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Rob, You are right that the complete eradication of vipallasa only occurs during a path moment, and, as such, eradication of self view is only the beginning. However, what I was really interested in was the 3 manifestations: sanna, citta, ditthi, and Ledi Sayadaw's comment that citta was easier to penetrate than sanna because it was just a matter of investigation. This implies to me that sanna and ditthi require more than satipatthana. Is that right? If so, can you fill in the blanks? Alternately, "investigation" might mean something other than (less than) satipatthana or only one aspect of satipatthana. I'm waiting to hear from Suan on this. If you missed that email, here's the link to Ledi Sayadaw's comment: http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL01.html I would be interested in what you have to say on this. Do you think penetration of sanna, citta, and ditthi could be considered as progress of insight? If panna is the antidote for ditthi, what is the antidote for sanna? What would be an example of self view manifested as sanna, as citta, and as ditthi? It looks like we might be drifting toward sila, samadhi, panna as a solution, but I don't see how sila would work here and samadhi as "investigation" is a bit of a stretch. Maybe there is something in the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary that would relate to these 3 manifestations. How about body, speech, and mind? Larry 17260 From: James Date: Wed Nov 27, 2002 11:20pm Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Perhaps you can help my understanding. > > Can you explain kamma / rebirth works without a self. > > Thanks. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Rob M. Well, I am not Victor, but I would like to answer this question. First, as I have written many times on the Internet and tried to explain to fellow Buddhists, often to no avail, but I will try again: I, you, Howard, Kom, etc., everyone on this list and everyone in the world (probably), has a 'self'. The only person who doesn't have a 'self', who has anatta or non-self instead, would be a Buddha . What is the difference? We all have the desire for existence/non- existence, but a Buddha doesn't. Desire for existence or non- existence is what creates the 'self', and that created 'self' is what experiences kamma and rebirth. A Buddha will not experience kamma or rebirth because the desire for existence has been removed, therefore the false sense of a permanent self has been removed , and therefore there is nothing to experience kamma or rebirth. The Buddha taught that ultimate reality for humans is `non-self', but he accepted that a `false sense of self' is very real in all of us non-Buddhas. Why is figuring out anatta so difficult? Because we don't have it yet. How can you know non-self when you have a `self` blocking your insight? When non-arahants go around talking about how they have `no-self', and tell other people that they have `no-self', they are being quite silly. I do have a self that will be reborn and experience kamma. It isn't until I destroy the last five fetters, of which the desire for existence/non-existence is one, that I will finally lose that pesky `self'. Intellectualizing the teaching of anatta won't get me there, and I shouldn't pretend I am there already. I have a self, but when I abandon that self and achieve anatta, only then will I say I have no-self. I hope this explanation answers your question. Take care. Metta, James 17261 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 0:15am Subject: Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi James, Thanks for your message. Something to think about. I just called up my recent message to Larry on vipallasa which said that the first magga (becoming a sotapanna) uproots the perversion / distortion that regards what is without a self as a self (anatta). This works at all levels (citta level, the sanna level and ditthi level). The other vipallasa to be uprooted (at the anagami and arahant stage) have nothing to do with anatta. Please help me reconcile your message with this information which was taken from Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary of Terms and Concepts. Metta, Rob M :-) 17262 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 28, 2002 3:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: Getting closer to Anatta Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > What I was really interested in was the 3 > manifestations: sanna, citta, ditthi, and Ledi Sayadaw's comment that > citta was easier to penetrate than sanna because it was just a matter of > investigation. This implies to me that sanna and ditthi require more > than satipatthana. Is that right? If so, can you fill in the blanks? > Alternately, "investigation" might mean something other than (less than) > satipatthana or only one aspect of satipatthana. Let me give it a shot. I start by considering the nature of citta, sanna and ditthi. Citta ===== Citta is awareness; it is "on the surface". It arises because of the presence of an object. Ledi Sayadaw used the analogy of mistaking a tree-stump to be a person at night as an example of citta. He makes the point that simple investigation is enough to dispel the illusion. I believe that he was using the term "investigation" in a very conventional sense in this context, not in a "satipatthana sense". I suspect that uprooting citta manifestation of vipallasa requires mindfulness (yoniso manasikara). The development of yoniso manasikara is done though satipatthana. Sanna ===== Sanna is recall; it is "just below the surface". It arises because of previous "marking". Ledi Sayadaw used the analogy of the deer and the scarecrow to illustrate the superficial nature of sanna. Vis. XIV 130 uses the analogy of the blind men touching an elephant to illustrate the superficial nature of sanna. In my earlier message, it was clear that citta manifestation of vipallasa and sanna manifestation of vipallasa are grouped together. This leads me to suspect that yoniso manasikara (satipatthana) is also what is requried to uproot sanna manifestation of vipallasa. Ditthi ====== Ditthi is a wrong view; it can be deeply embedded. It arises because of accumulations. Ledi Sayadaw makes the point that wrong views (ditthi) are deeper and more firmly established than citta manifestation. It is clear that uprooting ditthi requires more than yoniso manasikara (satipatthana), it requires sotapanna-magga. In my earlier message, I noted that a sotapanna only uproots the ditthi manifestations of dukkha and akusala / kusala. It takes a higher level of sainthood to uproot the citta and sanna manifestations of these vipallasa. Uprooting the ditthi manifestation is a necessary pre-condition to