17600 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:21pm Subject: Re: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Hi Rob, Andrew and all, Glad to see Azita's and Jon's replies to the first post in this thread. On another tack, there is a note attached to the verse on Wrong Livelihood in MN 117 - note 1110 (Bodhi) says 'These are wrong means for bhikkhus to acquire their requisites; they are explained at Vsm I, 61-65. MA says that those mentioned in the sutta are not the only kinds of wrong livelihood, which included any mode of earning one's living that involves transgression of the precepts. At AN 5:177/iii.208 the Buddha mentions five kinds of wrong livelihood for lay people: dealing in arms, beings, meat, intoxicants, and poisons. So apart from the five kinds of wrong livelihood listed above, it is 'not transgressing the Precepts' that determines the mode of working within any other livelihood. Andrew - I don't know much about the profession of Law, but isn't there something in the Ethics of a Solicitor that if they *know* (perhaps by private confession) their client is guilty they can withdraw service? A bit like the 'First, Do no harm' of the Medical profession, except the lawyer themselves is included in the assessment of who can be harmed. Isn't the division into specialties e.g. property, litigation, criminal etc an attempt at controlling not only the quantity of work but also the type of case one deals with, usually for reasons of expertise? Couldn't this be used as a skilfull means not to deal with types of cases more likely to have ethical concerns for the individual solicitor/barrister? i.e. seek training and employment if an ethically safer specialty? In my own case, as a hospital social worker - it *seems* to be a profession of Right Livelihood. But there are daily dilemmas. I cannot refuse to see any patient at the hospital in need (and would not). I have had to work out (within the legal framework of the state, and the policies and work instructions of my employer) how I deal with, for example, women seeking abortions, in a way that does not leave the woman in distress, but considers kamma and vipaka including that of the little one, the woman, myself, and the clinicians who would perform the procedure. As well, I need to take care that I am not imposing my religious values on someone who does not hold the same view. I also cannot refuse (and would not) to see perpetrators of violent or sexual crimes against children who are distressed over that (or not) or over another matter. (And who am I to set myself apart from these persons anyway - that is just mana - perhaps somewhere in Samsara I, too, was such a one.) So would it be fair to say that a Buddhist should look at Word of the Buddha first in choosing a livelihood, but after that it is it is not the "who" or the "what", but the "how" of practising of the Dhamma in daily life. And this presupposes one is lucky enough to have a choice of livelihood. Sometimes in this world there is no choice other than of one particular type of work or starvation. metta, Christine --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi All, > > What about somebody in marketing or sales (I am not talking about > the "used car salesperson" here). Is that wrong livelihood as well? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > 17601 From: James Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:26pm Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Swee Boon, > > I was answering from a layperson's perspective because I am pretty > sure that there is a Vinaya rule that prohibits monks or nuns from > discussing their attainments. > > I believe that during the Buddha's time, it was common for monks or > nuns to go to the Buddha (or the Buddha would go to them) to confirm > that they had attained a certain stage. Being able to see this type > of thing, the Buddha could tell the monk / nun if they were on the > right path. In other words, it was part of the way in which the > Buddha instructed the monks / nuns. I have the impression that it > wasn't a casual chat, but might even have been a structured ceremony. > > Perhaps someone closer to the Vinaya can help me out here. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Rob M, A monk or nun can disclose the attainment of a certain stage of insight to anyone, but to lie about such knowingly is one of the highest offenses, a Parajika offense, and is cause for permanent expulsion from the Sangha. The rule is as follows: "Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, boast of a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision as present in himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he -- being remorseful and desirous of purification -- might say, "Friends, not knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see -- vainly, falsely, idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no longer in communion." Metta, James 17602 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:28pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Peter, I agree with you. Just ruefully wishing there was an easy certain method of gaining liberation, instead of having to find it for oneself through all the meandering paths and dead end streets of daily life. It seems so very difficult, so much at stake, and no guarantees that one won't slip backwards for many lives. Sometimes I'm torn between living the dhamma 'as if my hair was on fire' and 'just going with the flow'. metta, Christine --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > I thought that was what the path was all about. Seeing the nature > of doubt, confusion and various other kinds of Dukkha: seeing them > just as they are. The quotes from K. Sujin in other recent posts > seem to me to be pointing at this too: well at least including this > possibility. > > Cheers > Peter 17603 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Dear Kom and all, Thanks Kom. Most of us do find humour in embarrassing things happening to others. There is even a weekly T.V. program called 'Funniest Home Videos' which consists of unexpected, usually embarassing, things happening people which their families and friends send in. I wonder if anyone has ever done an analysis of exactly what humour is - often it shows up the incongruities in daily life, but, as well, laughter seems to be a 'symptom of relief' that whatever is happening is happening to someone else and not to me. Thanks for the great reminders of the Buddha's teaching on Right Speech, and the importance of kindness as a measuring stick. metta, Christine --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: <>> "I am sometimes inspired by the Buddha's teaching of good speeches. He said, he wouldn't himself speak unless 5 factors are met: 1) Truthful 2) Useful, inclining toward the dhamma 3) Appropriate for the time (Inappropriate speech renders the speech non-useful) 4) With well-spoken words 5) With kindness Do we speak with kindness all the time, even among friends in Dhamma? Sometimes we joke because it entertains us, sometimes because it entertains others, and sometimes it gives other happiness. Even if we cannot be like the Buddha, but that doesn't really prevent us from learning the benefit of good speeches, spoken with kindness." 17604 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:29pm Subject: Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and vipaka? Hi Christine --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I agree with you. Just ruefully wishing there was an easy certain > method of gaining liberation, instead of having to find it for > oneself through all the meandering paths and dead end streets of > daily life. My wish too. > It seems so very difficult, so much at stake, and no > guarantees that one won't slip backwards for many lives. Yep, with you there too. > Sometimes I'm torn between living the dhamma 'as if my hair was on > fire' and 'just going with the flow'. > A bit like swings and roundabouts! What ever it takes to get back to the balance. Or as James would say, finding our centre. > metta, > Christine > Cheers Peter > 17605 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... > There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of which we can > think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. (Actually, even the > notion of a single such stream is conventional.) To think of namarupic streams of experience (whatever that is) as a person, as what you are is to fall into self-view. Metta, Victor 17606 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:49pm Subject: The Three Abstinences Dear Group, (especially those in the Right Livelihood, and Wrong Speech corners) Just another thought after browsing the notes that KenH sent me of the w/e SEQ.dsg meeting. There was some discussion about the three abstinences (virati- cetasikas). These are not often mentioned on dsg. (?) Actually I couldn't find anything on a search of the archives - abstinence from wrong speech, abstinence from wrong action, abstinence from wrong livelihood. Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' has arisen.' e.g. 'biting one's tongue' and defeating a desire to reply to an insult by using scintillatingly devastating Wrong Speech, or, 'catching and transporting the cane toad to where it can't poison the dog's water rather than clobbering it with a cricket bat' (abstinence from wrong action)? metta, Christine 17607 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:58pm Subject: Re: A 'Funny' Question Hi Rob, James and all Due to the severity of the Parajika offence outlined by James above, most Bhikkhus won't even discuss the subject of their attainments in any manner with lay people, though they will quite happily let a lay person talk about their own. Amongst themselves monks often talk about it in general terms using anecdotes as well as their own experiences for reference where it would be relevant, and some of these stories can be very funny. But as regards path stages and attainments, it is almost always usual for a more junior monk to seek out the Abbott on such matters. "... unless it was from over-estimation,..." This is an escape clause that the Buddha allowed, but most Bhikkhus are so keen to avoid any doubt at all in the minds of their supporting communities that it is almost never invoked, in that they just don't say anything at all about any kind of attainment whatsoever. Cheers Peter --- "James " wrote: > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Swee Boon, > > > > I was answering from a layperson's perspective because I am pretty > > sure that there is a Vinaya rule that prohibits monks or nuns from > > discussing their attainments. > > > > I believe that during the Buddha's time, it was common for monks > or > > nuns to go to the Buddha (or the Buddha would go to them) to > confirm > > that they had attained a certain stage. Being able to see this > type > > of thing, the Buddha could tell the monk / nun if they were on the > > right path. In other words, it was part of the way in which the > > Buddha instructed the monks / nuns. I have the impression that it > > wasn't a casual chat, but might even have been a structured > ceremony. > > > > Perhaps someone closer to the Vinaya can help me out here. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Rob M, > > A monk or nun can disclose the attainment of a certain stage of > insight to anyone, but to lie about such knowingly is one of the > highest offenses, a Parajika offense, and is cause for permanent > expulsion from the Sangha. The rule is as follows: > > "Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, boast of a superior > human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision as present in > himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that > regardless of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later > occasion, he -- being remorseful and desirous of purification -- > might say, "Friends, not knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said > I see -- vainly, falsely, idly," unless it was from over- estimation, > he also is defeated and no longer in communion." > > Metta, James 17608 From: bodhi2500 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:47pm Subject: Re: Out of Cooran - Metta is first "developed" towards oneself :) Hi Sarah --- Sarah wrote: ..... Sarah: Would you kindly in turn give me some refs as to where it (Sabbattataaya) occurs w/r to the brahmaviharas? .... Steve: As far as I can tell "Sabbattataaya" only occurs with reference to the Brahmavihara's, usally in the stock discription (and a few slight variants,(Mahagovinda Sutta D.19) of the development of the Brahmavihara's. > "He abides pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with loving- kindness(compassion,mudita,upekkha),likewise the 2nd,likewise the 3rd,likewise the 4th;so above,below,around,and everywhere, and "to all as to himself"(Sabbattataaya) he abides pervading the all encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness (compassion,mudita,upekkha),abundant,exalted,immeasurable,without hostility and without ill will." Equally(saabattataaya):to all classed as inferior,medium,superior,friendly,hostile,neutral, etc. just as to oneself (attataa); equality with oneself(atta-samataa) without making the distinction "This is another being" in what is meant. or alternatively equally (sabbattataaya) is with the whole state of ones mind; not reserving even a little ,is what is meant. "Sabbattataaya also occurs in the Appamannavibhango in the Vibhanga quite a few times, but it seems always in the same context(I dont have a eng. translation) --------------------- Sarah: I'd also be glad for the Pali (and yr literal translation) for key phrases in the Visud. which are so often quoted. In fact when you've collected all the relevant terms, perhaps you may add them with expanatory comments we can refer to as needed. --------------------- Steve: I'll try to find the relevant Pali passages, but as for a translation and explanation, I think I better leave that up to someone who has a better understanding of Pali and Dhamma than me. Vis. IX8> First of all it should be developed only towards oneself,doing it repeatedly thus: 'May I be happy and free from suffering' or 'May I keep myself free from enmity, affliction and anxiety and live happily'. Pali> Sabbapa.thama.m pana 'aha.m sukhito homi niddukkho'ti vaa, 'avero abyaapajjo aniigho sukhii attaana.m pariharaamii'ti vaa eva.m punappuna.m attaniyeva bhaavetabbaa. ..... A.K. Warders intro to Pali has > Sabbattataa - > non-discrimination (all-self-ness) considering all beings as like > oneself, putting oneself in the place of others. ..... Sarah ..or treating others as we would like to be treated?? ..... Steve: yes, I think so ..... Sarah: I just went to an earlier post I wrote to look at whether this term in used in the Udana verse (quoted in the Vism) and commentary notes and would like to give a link to this post as some of the comments may be useful to consider for other relevant threads such as conceit and discouragement and self-attachment too: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m5476.html ------------ Steve: I dont think the term is in the Udana or its commentary.(perhapes a variant of it may be,I'm not sure) ----------- Sarah: This is the extract with the actual commentary notes: ***** After King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one dearer than themselves, the Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5- 1, `Dear' (Masefield trans): `Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.' The commentary adds: `.....One would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place (n'ev'ajjhagaapiyataram attanaa kvaci): whatever man, seeking out with every endeavour someone else (more) excessively dear than the self, would neither attain nor behold (such) in any place, anywhere in the (ten) quarters.Thus is the self dear separately to others (evam piyo puthu attaa paresa.m): thus is the self alone dear separately, severally, to this and that being, by way of the non-discovery of anyone dearer than the self. Therefore one desiring self should not harm another (tasmaa na hi.mse param attakaama): since each being holds the self dear in that way, is one desiring happiness for that self, one for whom dukkha is repulsive, therefore one desiring self, in wanting well-being and happiness for that self, should not harm, should not kill, should not even antagonise with the hand....and so on, another being, upwards from and including even a mere ant or (other) samll insect. for when dukkha is caused by oneself to some other, that (dukkha) is, after an interval of time, observed in one's (own) self, as though it were passing over therefrom. for this is the law of karma.' ****** Steve, really appreciating your participation. As Christine said, this is a thread that never dies (or sth like that), so will appreciate anything you find or quote too. Sarah ====== Thank-you. Steve 17609 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:00pm Subject: nibbana Dear group, I have been trying to figure out the difference between the experience of nibbana during a path moment and the rest of the life of an ariyan. It seems like when a stream enterer, for example, experiences nibbana it must be something like the absolute certainty that he will never again be interested in formulating an opinion or believing in anything. That experience is temporary but its truth is not. Subsequently, the stream enterer can at any time notice that he is not interested in forming an opinion but the particular experience of "never again" is rare and takes special conditions to experience it. That is why the meditative attainment of cessation is not nibbana, because it is temporary. There is no finality to it. All this leads me to believe that nibbana is a mere cessation. The defilements that have ceased for a stream enterer have simply ceased and that is his portion of nibbana. There is nothing more to it. When an arahat dies the kind of consciousness necessary to generate a new life cannot arise because that kind of consciousness is a defilement that no longer arises. So that's the end of the arahat, kaput, nothing beyond. Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere cessation must find that otherness in the ariyan's life because the cessation of defilements is nibbana and that cessation is lived with. What do you think? Larry 17610 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:23pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, (especially those in the Right Livelihood, and Wrong > Speech corners) > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' > has arisen.' e.g. 'biting one's tongue' and defeating a desire to > reply to an insult by using scintillatingly devastating Wrong Speech, > or, 'catching and transporting the cane toad to where it can't > poison the dog's water rather than clobbering it with a cricket bat' > (abstinence from wrong action)? > > metta, > Christine Hi Christine At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful and teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. Cheers Peter 17611 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Re: nibbana Hi Larry, I'm weak in this area, but let me put my two cents worth in. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear group, > > I have been trying to figure out the difference between the experience > of nibbana during a path moment and the rest of the life of an ariyan. > It seems like when a stream enterer, for example, experiences nibbana it > must be something like the absolute certainty that he will never again > be interested in formulating an opinion or believing in anything. That > experience is temporary but its truth is not. Subsequently, the stream > enterer can at any time notice that he is not interested in forming an > opinion but the particular experience of "never again" is rare and takes > special conditions to experience it. That is why the meditative > attainment of cessation is not nibbana, because it is temporary. There > is no finality to it. > > All this leads me to believe that nibbana is a mere cessation. The > defilements that have ceased for a stream enterer have simply ceased and > that is his portion of nibbana. There is nothing more to it. When an > arahat dies the kind of consciousness necessary to generate a new life > cannot arise because that kind of consciousness is a defilement that no > longer arises. So that's the end of the arahat, kaput, nothing beyond. > Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere cessation must > find that otherness in the ariyan's life because the cessation of > defilements is nibbana and that cessation is lived with. > > What do you think? ========= During a path moment and during fruit moments, nibbana is the object of the citta. What makes a path moment special is that it has the function of uprooting defilements (uprooting only needs to happen once): - Stream entry eradicates wrong view, envy, avarice and doubt - Once returning doesn't eradicate anything, it just weakens - Non-returning eradicates sensual greed, hatred and worry - Arahant eradicates delusion, shamelessness, recklessness, restlessness, other forms of lobha (clining to existence), conceit, sloth and torpor Any further cittas after the path citta that also take nibbana as an object will be fruit cittas (until the next cleansing, vodana, occurs). Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17612 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine, --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to do' > has arisen.' There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) Does this answer the question? Metta, Rob M :-) 17613 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" H Rob, Thanks for your reply. You didn't answer the question do good intentions always produce good results, never bad results. The reason I ask is because intentionality doesn't usually figure into conventional understanding of cause and effect. So cause and effect and kammic cause and result seem to be operating in different realms but somehow together. Correct? You say rootlessness isn't good by definition but I would say it is ultimately good just because it causes no harm. What is your reasoning that memory and accumulations are different and only javana cittas are accumulated? Is learning javana cittas or resultant? Does sanna play a role in remembering accumulations in connection with kamma resultant consciousness and thence coordinating with intention and root (kamma causing) consciousnesses? Thanks for your help. Larry 17614 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 4:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Rob, What's the difference between the experience of nibbana and the living of nibbana? Larry 17615 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/10/2002 7:34:49 PM Pacific Standard Time, Bodhi2500@a... writes: > Both voidness and empty are contemplation on not self. Nibbana is both the > ultimate voidness but it is not empty? > > Steve > Hi Steve. In this context I interpret the word empty to mean:--"empty of satifaction." In this case I believe "empty" is being used as a basic evaluation rather than a statement of ultimate meaning. Support for that conclusion is based on the listing in the Patisambhidamagga that describes "conditions as empty" and the "unconditioned as not empty." Since a large part of this list is evaluation oriented, and it only seems to make sense to interpret it this way, I think it is likely a correct interpretation. TG 17616 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 0:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? In a message dated 12/10/2002 9:30:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Thanks Steve, > > Ritta and sunna seem like synonyms. Any ideas on in what sense nibbana > is not empty? > > Larry > Hi Larry Check out my response to Steve and see what you think. :) TG 17617 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:04pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Peter, Thanks for telling us such a satisfying story! I catch the cane toads in plastic shopping bags (so I don't have to touch them or their poison glands) and take them up the road to the only street light in the area (attracts a food source of moths etc.) and release them. Though I now wonder about the poor moths and my responsibility in their deaths. The dog and local moths vs the moths up the road .... And I DO understand the sensitivity of Aussie Environmentalists to not eradicating this introduced pest which is devastating to small fauna. But it is another Being, and our individual behaviour is covered by the Dhamma, so what is one to do? metta, Christine > Hi Christine > > At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like > mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, > kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to > get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful and > teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on > alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and > the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. > > Cheers > Peter 17618 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:07pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi RobM, This is v.interesting. Could you give me a reference to look up about the momentary, temporary, permanent bit? Thanks, Christine :-) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to > do' > > has arisen.' > > There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): > - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) > - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) > - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) > > Does this answer the question? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17619 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG Thanks. Yes that makes sense to me. I was also thinking how Nibbana is not-empty, seeing that Nibbana is a paramattha Dhamma and all Paramattha Dhamma's have there own charateristics, then Nibbana is not-empty of it own charateristics. But I know that idea doesnt gel with the Patisam. quote ie. the Khandha's are not-empty of their own charateristics as well. Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own charateristics(sabhava??)? Thanks Steve TGrand458@a... writes: > > Hi Steve. > > In this context I interpret the word empty to mean:--"empty of > satifaction." > In this case I believe "empty" is being used as a basic evaluation rather > than a statement of ultimate meaning. Support for that conclusion is based > > on the listing in the Patisambhidamagga that describes "conditions as > empty" > and the "unconditioned as not empty." Since a large part of this list is > evaluation oriented, and it only seems to make sense to interpret it this > way, I think it is likely a correct interpretation. > > TG > Bodhi2500@a... writes: > Both voidness and empty are contemplation on not self. Nibbana is both the > ultimate voidness but it is not empty? > > Steve > 17620 From: peterdac4298 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:28pm Subject: Re: Freewill is out?!;-)?!:-) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > --- "peterdac4298" > "...Cover > story: > > > > In simpler terms, would this period of clear reviewing (should it > > ever arise) be as useful as similar periods of either cultivation > or > > investigation? Presumably it would depend on such things as the > > degree of clarity and compassion accompanying it, etc. > > I'm not sure that I would make that conclusion. At this point, the > Buddha was already enlightened, so there was no need for further > purification. > > However, for those of us who are not enlightened, I belive that > contemplating on the Dhamma (or Abhidhamma) is probably kusala > (depending on the motivation). > > Hard to make comparisions of the relative value of "one hour of > cultivating jhana" vs. "one hour of vipassana" vs. "one hour of > studying the dhamma". In general, the kammic weight depends on the > strength of the volition. > > Hope that I understood and answered your question. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Thanks Rob This is well worth reflecting on. Seeing it expressed in the words of another certainly makes for much better clarity. Cheers Peter 17621 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:48pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine, From Nina's book, "Cetasikas" p301: There are different degrees of abstinence and the Atthasåliní (I, Book I, Part III, Chapter VI, 103, 104) distinguishes between three kinds: abstaining "inspite of opportunity obtained", abstaining because of observance (of precepts) and abstaining by way of eradication. There is more in this book as well as additional references. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi RobM, > > This is v.interesting. Could you give me a reference to look up > about the momentary, temporary, permanent bit? > > Thanks, > Christine :-) > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > > > --- "christine_forsyth > > " wrote: > > > Would it be fair to say that Abstinence means more than just 'not > > > doing', it means 'choosing not 'to do' when the opportunity 'to > > do' > > > has arisen.' > > > > There are three degrees of Abstinence (in increasing order): > > - Abstaining in spite of opportunity obtained (momentary) > > - Abstaining because of observance of precepts (temporary) > > - Abstaining by way of eradication (permanent, for ariyans) > > > > Does this answer the question? > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17622 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:00pm Subject: Re: The Power of Kusula Hi RobertK (Frank) and all, Thanks for this reply. I did wonder how we were ever going to get out of Samsara if there wasn't a different weighting of kusala and akusala moments. It is a relief to have it confirmed. :) This also answers something Frank asked in his great post on "Forgiveness" dsg post no.17380 3) "right effort" - two parts that strive to eliminate arisen defilements, and unarisen defilements! Eliminating unarisen defilements is especially interesting. How does one do this? (left as an exercise to the reader." Did you mean to say "silabataparamasa (clinging to SILA and wrong practice)" ? I thought it was 'attachment to mere rules and ritual'. metta, Christine --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: > Ken H has a good memory and thanks for bringing this up Christine, > The quote: "Kusa grass cuts a part of the hand with both edges. Even so > kusala cuts off both sections of passions - those that have arisen and > those that have not arisen" (abhidhammathasangaha). > It can seem discouraging once we realise that the moments of akusala in > a day far outnumber the moments of kusala. If it was simpoly a matter of > each being of equal power then it would be impossible to ever end > samsara. However the moments with right view have an extraordinary > strength to be able to eliminate akusala. > For example one might have some type of clinging to ritual. An extreme > case: one thinks that by washing in the river and chanting or praying one > is purifying oneself. This is a strong delusion but if one hears the right > Dhamma one will give up such practice like dropping a hot rock. It won't > be practiced again (at least in this life). > In the same way insight can understand that all that arises is anatta and > by that wrong views are increasingly subliminated until maggacitta > permenently eradicates wrongview. > I think it should be understaod that the sense desire cannot be eliminated > at all before all wrong view and silabataparamasa (clinging to sila and > wrong pratice) is gone. Hence the most important type of kusala is that > associated with the insight into the conditioned nature of dhammas. I think > one may still be mired in sense desire, still have greatly more akusala > cittas arising than kusala but be lessening the clinging to self and that will > lead gradually toward freedom. > Robert 17623 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > You didn't answer the question do good intentions > always produce good results, never bad results. The reason I ask is > because intentionality doesn't usually figure into conventional > understanding of cause and effect. So cause and effect and kammic cause > and result seem to be operating in different realms but somehow > together. Correct? I gotta be careful about my definitions; I am defining "good" as meaning kusala, a citta with alobha, adosa and perhaps even amoha (panna). Using this definition, the cittas which are good include: 1. Sense sphere wholesome (i.e. javana cittas) 2. Sense sphere resultant (i.e. Bhavanga cittas for most humans / Devas; disabled humans and earth bound Devas can have rootless bhavanga cittas and also registration cittas) 3. Sense sphere functional (i.e. javana cittas for arahants) 4. Rupavacara / Arupavacara / Lokutara Vipaka cittas, except those included under item 3 above (i.e. "what happens to us") are called akusala / kusala to identify the type of javana that was their seed. What happens to us is not inherently "good" or "bad", these types of vipaka cittas have no roots. To put it another way, a kusala javana citta can only lead to a "kusala" vipaka citta (this is true by definition). The only difference between a kusala vipaka citta and an akusala vipaka citta is the source. A kusala vipaka citta and an akusala vipaka citta have the same possible set of cetasikas. There is no inherent difference between the two. A vipaka citta arises (either kusala or akusala, it doesn't matter which) in the thought process. Our accumulations condition our javana citta in the thought process (javana cittas are inherently good or bad, except for an arahant). > > You say rootlessness isn't good by definition but I would say it is > ultimately good just because it causes no harm. > According to my definition above, "causing no harm" is not enough to be called "good". > What is your reasoning that memory and accumulations are different and > only javana cittas are accumulated? Is learning javana cittas or > resultant? Does sanna play a role in remembering accumulations in > connection with kamma resultant consciousness and thence coordinating > with intention and root (kamma causing) consciousnesses? Let's leave the realm of Abhidhamma for a moment and consider the difference between accumulations and memory. I am drawn to study the Abhidhamma (while others are not) because of accumulations. Some people are quick to get angry (while others are not) because of accumulations. I remember my wife's beautiful face because I have seen it before. I remember the way to the office because I have driven there before. To me, accumulations and memories seem completely separate. Javana cittas are active. Other cittas are passive. When a javana citta arises, cetana causes the seed of a vipaka to be created. Cetana also creates an impression or deepens an impression in the accumulations (something like a habit is created or reinforced). I see learning as a combination of memory and accumulations working together. If we remember accumulations; then the object of the citta is a concept (the concept of accumulations), not the accumulations themselves. When I remember that I have a tendency to get angry, sanna is marking and remembering the concept of "a tendency to get angry". I hope that this is helpful. Metta, Rob M :-) 17624 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:48pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi Steve; --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > > Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own > charateristics(sabhava??)? I can't remember where I noted this down from, but: Characterisitc: Tranquility Function: Non-ceasing Manifestation: Being without symbol Proximate Cause: None Is this what you were looking for? Metta, Rob M :-) 17625 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Hi TG & Steve, "Empty of satisfaction" could work in the sense of not desireable. So nibbana is not undesirable while impermanence _is_ undesirable. I think Howard's reading of "not ceased" also makes sense. The main problem with a double negative is that it comes close to attributing a positive quality to nibbana, but there is no strong indication that nibbana has positive qualities. Here is something from Vism. XVI 66: It [Nibbana] has peace as its characteristic. Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; or it is manifested as non-diversification. Larry 17626 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Larry, I understand Nibbana as an object of a citta (i.e. this explains "experiencing Nibbana"; I don't know what it might mean to "live Nibbana" except to dwell on the experience for an extended period (seven days maximum, I understand). Metta, Rob M :-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob, > > What's the difference between the experience of nibbana and the living > of nibbana? > > Larry 17627 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:13pm Subject: Re: The Power of Kusula Hi all, As Christine, Steven and Andrew have already reported, the weekend at Cooran was very pleasant and rewarding. The quality of our discussions improves with every meeting: I didn't need to prod anyone back `on-topic' and Christine, with her mountain of reference books, made the difference between Dhamma discussion and uninformed speculation. I've been suffering my usual fear of message-posting which is lamentable, especially when so many of you have shown interest and willingness to help with our questions. It's been inspirational to read all your helpful comments. I'm glad to see that Azita plans to join us one day; and what a pity it is that we came so close to but missed out on, a visit from Robert K. If any dsg people are planning to visit Brisbane or its near North Coast, we'll be only too happy to schedule our meetings to suit. Rob K, I see that the `power of kusala' question I've been meaning to ask you since 8th August 2002, has been asked on my behalf (everything's rush, rush, rush these days :-)), and that you have answered it, thank you. I appreciate your explanation of how just a momentary insight can result in the dropping of a strong delusion (e.g., in the efficacy of ritual bathing and prayer). On the subject of prayer, here's an extract from "What the Buddha REALLY Taught" by David Maurice: "The Buddha taught that it was of no use to pray to any `God' to help one. There was a custom at the time that when a man died his friends and relatives would gather and pay priests who would say prayers for the departed, praise him highly and `speed him heavenward.' The Buddha said it would be of no use casting a huge rock into a deep pool and with joined palms praising it and saying: `Rise up, good rock, float ashore, good rock!' And in similar manner, it was of no use praising a man who had been a killer, a thief, a slanderer, one given to bad sexual practices and so on and expecting that to help him to heaven. Conversely, if a man led a good life, nobody could keep him, when reborn, in a low state. (Samyuttanikaya: Salayatanasutta)" Kind regards Ken H 17628 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Rob, By living nibbana I mean that a sotapanna's entire life as a sotapanna is living without certain defilements. No more ditthi, for example. That is the nibbana of ditthi, a mere cessation. It is nibbana element because it is a finality. There will never again be a ditthi in his continuum. Seeing that as a finality is the experience of nibbana in a path moment. There is no difference between the two experiences, life experience and path moment, in terms of the cessation of ditthi, but the path moment cannot be experienced during life experience without special conditions. Correct? Larry 17629 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Re: Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > > Andrew - I don't know much about the profession of Law, but isn't > there something in the Ethics of a Solicitor that if they *know* > (perhaps by private confession) their client is guilty they can > withdraw service? That's right. A lawyer cannot accept instructions to mislead the court or defeat justice. The legal profession does have high ethical standards that I think are generally consistent with sila. However, in practice, the ethical aspects can sometimes be easily overlooked. Some litigation lawyers go all out for a "win", perhaps not the best result from a "justice" point of view. That puzzled me for a long while, actually. Does Dhamma have a concept of "justice"? In my experience, most clients consider justice to be "getting what I want"!! I decided that justice per se was not a part of Dhamma. > > So would it be fair to say that a Buddhist should look at Word of the > Buddha first in choosing a livelihood, but after that it is it is not > the "who" or the "what", but the "how" of practising of the Dhamma > in daily life. Yes, I agree with your conclusion. Rob M asks about salespeople. What about bankers, too. Usury is said to be wrong livelihood. Anybody work in the credit card dept of a bank? (joke) 17630 From: Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [determing stage" Thanks Rob, I think I will wait for further accumulations before I can understand these issues. Thanks for your help. Larry 17631 From: James Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hey All, I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth for comic effect. Metta, James 17632 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own > charateristics(sabhava??)? >_______________ Dear Steve, From A Survey of Paramattha Dhamma by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para2.htm "Nibbåna paramattha dhamma can be classified according to three characteristics: voidness, suññatta signlessness, animitta desirelessness, appanihita Nibbåna is called voidness, suññatta, because it is void of all conditioned= realities (saòkhåra dhammas). It is called signlessness, animitta, because it is void of "signs", characteristics, of conditioned realities. I= t is called desirelessness, appanihita, because it is without any basis of desire, namely, conditioned realities. "endquote Robert 17633 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:37am Subject: Posts slow in appearing Dear Group, Don't know if anyone else is having this problem - posts from Oz have been taking an hour or two to appear on the List despite getting the message 'your message has been posted'. So far I've resisted the impulse to send twice, spared you all that at least. :-) metta, Christine 17634 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:31pm Subject: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Dear All, Thank you for all the helpful reminders on right speech and the other discussion topics from the weekend gathering of the SE Qld branch;-). When my brothers and I were small and counted our cherry stones, the fear was that we might end up as a ‘beggarman or thief’. On DSG it might be a ‘lawyer or used car salesman’;-) Like the lads in Cooran, when I’m with my brothers (which is not often) we laugh and tease each other and it’s usually kindly and affectionately intended. To change our ways of interaction would seem most unnatural, just as it would to my students to be forced to be serious all the time;-( I think the greatest error in understanding when we consider right speech, action and livelihood relates to conceptual and conventional ideas of ‘situations’ without any understanding of momentary consciousness which changes rapidly as we know. We forget completely that these 5fold or 8fold factors refer to the 3 viratis (abstinences). I’m not sure it’s therefore useful in any way to consider being a hospital worker or teacher, for example, as any more ‘right’ as a way of livelihood than being a used car salesman or any other livelihood. There are a mass of opportunities in a day for good and bad intentions and deeds regardless. ***** I’d like to type out the following section from B.Bodhi’s CMA (Abhidammatthasangaha)p.88 with brief comments in between sections: QUOTE #6 The Abstinences (virati) -3 1) Sammavaacaa 2)sammaakammanto 3)sammaa-aajiivo caa ti tisso viratiyo naama 1) Right Speech, 2) right action, and 3)right livelihood: these three are termed abstinences. Guide to #6 The abstinences: The viratis are three beautiful mental factors which are responsible for the deliberate abstinence from wrong conduct by way of speech, action, and livelihood. In mundane consciousnes, the viratis are operative only on an occasion when one intentionally refrains from a wrong mode of conduct for which an opportunity has arisen. When a person refrains from evil deeds without an opportunity for their performance arising, this is not a case of virati but one of pure moral conduct (sila). The commentators distinguish three types of virati: 1)natural abstinence; 2)abstinence by undertaking precepts; and 3)abstinence by eradication.” **** Details of the three types are given in the text. Whether it is ‘natural’ abstinence or abstinence by following the precepts, it is the momentary restraint that is referred to. The only way that any kind of sila will really be developed is when it is accompanied by wisdom which can understand the value and distinction between moments of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and which will lead to the eradication of the tendency to perform unwholesome deeds. I don’t understand it to be a matter of choosing the ‘right’ job, refraining from laughter and fun (unless one is a monk) or otherwise trying to ‘fix’ the situation in an unnatural manner. ***** QUOTE “The viratis comprise three distinct mental factors mentioned in the text: right speech, right action, and right livelihood. 1) Right Speech (sammaavaacaa): Right speech is the deliberate abstinence from wrong speech: from false speech, slander, harsh speech, and frivolous talk. 2) Right action (sammaakammanta): Right action is the deliberate abstinence from wrong bodily action: from killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct. 3) Right livelihood (sammaa-aajiiva): Right livelihood is the deliberate abstinence from wrong livelihood, such as dealing in poisons, intoxicants, weapons, slaves, or animals for slaughter. The three viratis have the respective charactaristics of non-transgression by bodily misconduct, by wrong speech, and by wrong livelihood. Their function is to shrink back from evil deeds. They are manifested as the abstinence from such deeds. Their proximate causes are the special qualities of faith, shame, fear of wrongdoing, fewness of wishes, etc. They should be regarded as the mind’s aversion to wrongdoing.” ***** Whatever our lifestyle - whether working with people, accounts, testubes or surfboards, whether eating, sitting, walking, talking or watching the ‘footie’, there are countless moments of lobha, dosa and moha in a day. There are many opportunites for unwise speech or action. Understanding the various phenomena when they appear for an instant is the way that sila will become firmly established naturally and without ‘forcing’. We know, for example, there is a lot of lobha when we eat or watch TV; the solution is not to stop eating or stop watching TV. I’ll sign off with a sobering reminder I find helpful which Nina quotes in ‘Cetasikas’: QUOTE “The Visuddhimagga (1, 154) mentions the following dangers of failure in virtue: ‘....Furthermore, on account of his unvirtuousness and unvirtuous person is displeasing to deities and human beings, is uninstructable by his fellows in the life of purity, suffers when unvirtuousness is censured, and is remorseful when the virtuous are praised.....’ “ ****** May we all be ‘instructable’ by our ‘fellows in the life of purity’. Looking forward to further comments. Sarah ===== 17635 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:04am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Dana with things that are precious to us Dear Ven Yanatharo, --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, as many of you in the list, you people follow the books but > very > little you guys know about the really life of Bikkhus. ..... With all respect, I understand that Peter and some other members on the list have been bhikkhus and appreciate the difficulties and value in following all the rules. I also believe it is useful to discuss the Vinaya and its importance. This may be one of the few places on the net where it is possible. It is an integral part of the Tipitaka after all. While it is skilful and wise not to cause offence if it can be helped, the Sangha also have a very special opportunity to educate the public with regard to the vinaya and all aspects of the Tipitaka. I hope these comments do not seem disrespectful and are not intended as such. Sarah ====== 17636 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:14am Subject: Re: Posts slow in appearing Hi Christine, I am tempted to make a derogatory comment about Australians, but I realize that there are many of you out there :-) In any case, it would be akusala, wrong speech. If it makes you feel any better, posts from China are taking just as long; I suspect it is a Yahoo! problem. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Dear Group, > > Don't know if anyone else is having this problem - posts from Oz have > been taking an hour or two to appear on the List despite getting the > message 'your message has been posted'. > So far I've resisted the impulse to send twice, spared you all that > at least. :-) > > metta, > Christine 17637 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 11, 2002 11:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James, To me it just seems that the Buddha was trying to speak to this man on a level he would understand. I think it would be an area that the Buddha was familiar with - a good understanding of the breeding and training of horses would have been a requirement of the ruling and warrior classes which I understand the Buddha came from. It was something he had in common with Kesi, a skillful means of joining with him, and isn't that where all communication starts? It is natural that people talk in the terms used in their everyday work when discussing other matters. I have a number of dairy farms and horse properties in my area. In conversation, these people often sprinkle their speech with terms like "keeping a tighter rein on the young filly" i.e. supervise their teenage daughter more closely, or, "time to put the old bull out to pasture" i.e. teasing the husband about growing older. They are just using descriptive language that even I understand. An untrainable horse IS killed. It would have been a well known fact. Kesi would have understood the simile, which would not have seemed very strange or startling in that society. I see no untruths or jokes, but rather a great sensitivity to and a use of language that would be familiar and meaningful to Kesi. metta, Christine --- "James " wrote: > Hey All, > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > for comic effect. > > Metta, James 17638 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: nibbana Hi Larry, My understanding is that when the Sotapanna magga citta arises, it wipes out the accumulations which can allow wrong view to arise. During the life of a Sotapanna, there are still gazillions of kammic seeds which given the right conditions could spring into wrong view (from past kammic actions), but without the accumulation to provide the condition, they can't arise. Those particular kammic seeds become inoperative (ahosi). I am not sure of your phrase "the nibbana of ditthi". I thought that Nibbana is an object of a citta, nothing more. I don't understand how Nibbana can be applied to anything. Am I wrong? Is Nibanna more than just the object of a citta? Metta, Rob M :-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob, > > By living nibbana I mean that a sotapanna's entire life as a sotapanna > is living without certain defilements. No more ditthi, for example. That > is the nibbana of ditthi, a mere cessation. It is nibbana element > because it is a finality. There will never again be a ditthi in his > continuum. Seeing that as a finality is the experience of nibbana in a > path moment. There is no difference between the two experiences, life > experience and path moment, in terms of the cessation of ditthi, but the > path moment cannot be experienced during life experience without special > conditions. Correct? > > Larry 17639 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:10am Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Sarah and Group, --- Sarah wrote: "I think the greatest error in understanding when we consider right speech, action and livelihood relates to conceptual and conventional ideas of `situations' without any understanding of momentary consciousness which changes rapidly as we know. We forget completely that these 5fold or 8fold factors refer to the 3 viratis (abstinences). I'm not sure it's therefore useful in any way to consider being a hospital worker or teacher, for example, as any more `right' as a way of livelihood than being a used car salesman or any other livelihood. There are a mass of opportunities in a day for good and bad intentions and deeds regardless." -------------------------------------- C: Now this is where I have a problem with understanding. I don't think anyone was suggesting a hospital worker or teacher was a more "right" livelihood than a used car salesman. Andrew merely mentioned the used car salesman as a joke. However I think the Vanijja Sutta clearly indicates there are some jobs that are more "wrong" than others. Anguttara Nikaya V.1777 'Vanijja Sutta' Business (Wrong Livelihood)"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in living beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison. "These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not engage in." C: "Should not engage in" seems quite definite to me. A question for me is, are these the only wrong livelihoods or was this list just an indicator of types of livelihoods that lay disciples should not engage in? And if we are seriously trying to live according to the Teachings, shouldn't Right Livelihood be a major consideration? metta, Christine 17640 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:24am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) Dear Ven. Phra Piyadhammo, It's great to hear from you. Sorry I couldn't make the trip to NC for your ordination as planned. My schedule has been quite busy of late, and it is unbecoming of a householder to shirk his obligations to other people. I do hope all is well with you. Best wishes, Dan --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: > Hello Robert, > > Thank you for the welcome. I hope to continue to share and contribute > when possible. As you probably know I will be in Thailand for some > time. Perhaps, we might actually have the oppurtunity to meet at some > point in time if you still travel there much? I revisited the post I > wrote that you forwarded from D-l.. Actually, in hindsight if I cut > through the humor, and that it is situationally fiction, all the > reasons for my going forth are in that piece. > > Have you heard from Dan? Is he well? Good to here from you Robert. > May you take care of yourself happily. May we all keep up the > practice....Drop the unwholesome, cultivate the wholesome, and purify > the mind. > > Your friend in Dhamma > Phra Piyadhammo > > > Dear Venerable, > > Thanks for joining the list. I'm sure any contibutions you make > will be > > much appreciated. There is actually a conversation between you > (when > > you were a layman) and Dan ,that I forwarded from D-l, in the > useful > > posts under "light relief". > > Robert 17641 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 3:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi Christine & James, Yes, it’s an interesting sutta. wrote: > > To me it just seems that the Buddha was trying to speak to this man > on a level he would understand. I think it would be an area that > the Buddha was familiar with - a good understanding of the breeding > and training of horses would have been a requirement of the ruling > and warrior classes which I understand the Buddha came from. > I agree with these sentiments. ..... > --- "James > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > > for comic effect. ..... For the arahants all lobha has been eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined kinds not related to sense-pleasures). I’m just looking at the PTS translation by Woodward, but no commentary notes are given. Hopefully B.Bodhi will add some with his new translation. Just a few phrases for your interest to compare -it’s very similar to B.Thanissaro’s: Instead of “I kill him, Kesi”, PTS has “I destroy him, Kesi!” and then: “ ‘True it is, Kesi, that taking life does not become a Tathagata. yet if the man to be trained submits not to the training by mildness, by harshness or both together, then the Tathagata thinks it is not worth while to admonish that man, nor do his wise fellows in the God-life think it worth while to admonish that man. This, kesi, is destruction for a man in the discipline of the Ariyan, - when both the Tathagata and his fellows in the God-life think it not worth while to admonish him.’........” These are very useful reminders, thanks James. I don’t read them as being humourous at all, though I understand why you read them this way. They are similar to the one I just quoted from Visuddhimagga (1, 154) about the ‘unvirtuous person’ who is ‘uninstructable by his fellows in the life of purity’. Sarah ====== 17642 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right livelihood - Samma-ajiva Andrew As others have pointed out, 'Right Livelihood' in fact refers to a moment at which there is wholesome abstinence from a breach of the precepts in the course of earning one's livelihood. So it reflects the level of sila and understanding of the person in question rather than the nature of the occupation he pursues. Of course, some jobs by their very nature necessarily involve much wrong livelihood (like the 5 occupations named in the sutta quoted by Christine), so these would be best avoided if possible (but there is no rule about this). But outside of such occupations, it is really up to the individual to act appropriately -- no-one can 'make' one breach the precepts. BTW, note that the 5 occupations mentioned in the sutta do not include, for example, being a soldier, presumably because one could be a soldier without being called upon to take another's life. To repeat, the question of whether a person carries on his/her occupation skilfully and without breach of the precepts usually comes down to a matter of the individual's choice/accumulations and level of understanding. Factors such as peer pressure and the 'norms' of the particular occupation can make ethical conduct more difficult, but if one appreciates the great value of it then ways can usually be found. It's a bit like the issue of dealing with household pests other than by reaching for the spray gun/poison bait – if you give some thought to it, it's usually possible to find a workaround. Jon --- "Andrew " wrote: > Hi Azita, Jon & all > Thanks for your replies which I did find most useful. As an > ex-lawyer, I was actually considering whether the practice of law > is > right livelihood. Over the last year, I've lost count of the > number > of articles I've read on legal professional ethics. Of interest is > the strong "representational" view that a lawyer must do everything > to > advantage the client short of misleading the court or breaking the > law. This usually leads to disadvantaging the client's adversary. > Bhikkhu Bodhi writes of samma-ajiva that we should earn a living > "in > ways which do not entail harm or suffering for others". Is the > lawyer > acting on instructions from a malicious client practising wrong > livelihood because of the harm done to the client's adversary? > Bhikkhu Bodhi also says that if your work violates Right Speech, it > is > wrong livelihood. How does this relate to the lawyer seeking to > discredit a witness on cross-examination? I know Jon has a legal > background like me and I'm not expecting anyone to answer these > questions. They came to mind during my reading. Whereas > initially, I > thought "of course being a lawyer is right livelihood", I am now > more > of the view that it is one of those occupations that may or may not > be > right livelihood depending upon how it is practiced. > Andrew 17643 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/11/02 5:14:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I really like what you have written. I have inserted some questions. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I'll ty my best at giving answers. ---------------------------------------------- > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Rob (and Christine) - > > > > Here are some thoughts on this matter. They are not Dhamma, > but just > >my own thoughts which are hopefully not in contradiction to the > Dhamma. > > There are *many* namarupic streams of experience, each of > which we can > >think of, conventionally, as either a person or a world. > (Actually, even the > >notion of a single such stream is conventional.) These > experiential streams > >are not isololated, self-existent things, but are aspects or parts > of an > >interacting, interconnected whole. > > ======= > > My first impression is that a "namarupic stream of experience" might > be a fancy way of saying "self". Then I noticed that you > wrote, "person or a world"; interesting, do you mean that "the > world" has nama (mind)? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: A namarupic stream of experience is a conditioned flow of events which are elements of the five khandhas. The stream is, relative to itself, "the all", and it is, conceived of, as a whole, both as the world and as the empirical self. But any one stream of becoming is one of many mutually interactive streams - it does not exist isolatedly. The elements of each stream that are not conceptual constructs are paramattha dhammas. --------------------------------------------------- > > Have you run across the concept of "an interacting, interconnected > whole" in the Dhamma? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not in so many words. But the Buddha was not a solipsist. He recognized a multiplicity of beings and worlds, and certainly he recognized the obvious interactions among them. The perspective I suggest here is an attempt to go a bit beyond the mundane reality I express in the last sentence to an understanding of it from a phenomenalist-abhidhammic-kammic vantage point. ---------------------------------------------------- > > ====== > > >The acts of volition arising in any > >mindstream have primary effect within that mindstream itself, but > also > >ultimately influence all the others. > > ======= > > I think that what you are saying is that kamma is what interconnects > everything. > --------------------------------------------- Howard: I see kamma as the creative and motive force, but not just the kamma of one "person". ---------------------------------------------- I can see how my actions impact those with whom I have > > immediate contact (conditions are created), but are you > suggesting, "I influence 'Howard' and because I influence 'Howard', > the way in which 'Howard' influences his wife (with whom I have no > direct contact, promise :-) ) will be impacted... therefore I have > an indirect influence on 'Howard's wife' and an even more indirect > influence on 'the friend of Howard's wife"? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Somewhat, yes. I am saying that our volitional actions spread out in waves of (ever-weakening) influence. Moreover, I am saying that kamma is a world-builder! There is no need for a creator god - creatrion is ongoing. -------------------------------------------------- > > =========== > > >The determination of the realm of > >experience into which a namarupic stream is "born" is vipaka of > kamma > >previously ocurring in that stream. Others with similar kammic > history are > >born into "the same" realm (although the realms of experience of > two > >different streams are never identical). A given realm of > experience is the > >joint-creation of the kamma of a multitude of beings, with the > specifics of > >one's own experiences the result largely of one's own kamma, but > also of the > >kamma of others. It is a vast, extraordinarily complex, > interactive network. > > ========== > > Are you saying that the world arises because of collective kamma? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't like the term 'collective kamma', because it suggests group action and the results of that. But there is individual kamma, and the kamma of different beings, especially those who are kammically connected will interact. --------------------------------------------------- > > Does this imply that rocks and trees arise because of collective > kamma? BTW, the Abhidhamma says that rocks and trees arise because > of utu, not kamma (I am not trying to shoot down your argument, I am > trying to understand it better... it sounds interesting). --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well ... yes, that's what this implies. BTW, of course biologists will confirm that heat is needed for the growth of trees, and geologists will talk about heat and igneous rocks. But all the "things" of this world and all other worlds are conceptual constructs or pa~n~natti, and kamma is the (ultimate) creator. I make no presuppositions about the existence of external objects such as rocks "actually" existing "out there". Rocks are part of my world of experience, due to kamma and to the constructive capacity of mind. ------------------------------------------- > > =========== > > >From the perspective of the network as a whole, if there were such > such a > >perspective, perhaps events proceed deterministically. But from > the limited > >perspective of a single mindstream, that is not so. > > =========== > > I think that we are saying the same thing here; that the concept of > predeterminism doesn't apply from our own frame of reference. > > =========== > > > What occurs in "one's world" is multiply conditioned but > most > >directly by one's own volitional actions. Those actions are, of > course, > >constrained by what is possible, and what is possible is > determined by > >conditions, conditions brought into being by oneself and by others > in varying > >degrees and strengths. The main condition directly influencing > one's volition > >is desire, and the fact that we can will and act based on our > desire is > >generally what we mean by the ability to exercise "free will". > > ========== > > I think that our volition is conditioned by our accumulations and > desire is certainly a major accumulation in each of us. However, > there are many moments when other accumulations take centre stage. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: And how did they get formed? ---------------------------------------------- > > Please explain how acting based on desire means exercising "free > will". I am confused here. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Frankly, I think that the notion of 'free will' is probably incoherent. If someone is pressed to say what they mean by it, usually nothing worthwhile will emerge! ;-) But in colloquial usage, when someone says "I have free will", they typically mean that they can do what they wish (subject to some constraints). ----------------------------------------------- > > ========== > > >Even though > >our volition doesn't arise randomly (and what sort of "prize" > would random > >volition be?), volition does occur, it is most strongly based on > our own > >wishes, and it is the primary but not exclusive determiner of the > events that > >will befall us. For example, when A does something to B, it is a > direct > >consequence of factors within A (mainly volition) and within "the > shared > >world" of A and B, plus the kamma that put B into the > circumstances making it > >possible for A to do to B what A does. This kamma of B is among > the > >conditions leading to the event, but, all told, it is a minor > factor. The > >action of A is "owned" by A, and while B's kamma played some role > in the > >event, B can neither be praised nor blamed, at least in any > primary sense, > >for A's action. > > =========== > > Could we say that volition plays the "active role" in determining > what happens to us, while conditions have a "passive role"? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, perhaps. I think I would sooner use 'primary' and 'secondary' rather than 'active' and 'passive'. ------------------------------------------------ > > Let us expand on your example of A doing something to B, let us say > for example that A hits B. > > From the perspective of A > ------------------------- > The hitting arose because of conditions (the presence of B is one of > the conditions) and accumulations (in this case probably anger). The > impersonal law of kamma ensures that a seed of future akusala vipaka > is sown and it may impact A in the future (all beings are the owners > of their own kamma). > > From the perspective of B > ------------------------- > Being hit arose because of conditions (the presence of A is one of > the conditions) that allowed a past akusala kammic effort to develop > into a vipaka at that moment. The impersonal law of kamma has played > its part when the vipaka arose. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure, it is possible that A has served as the vehicle for the fruition of some akusala kamma of B. But it is also possible that no kamma vipaka was being brought to the fore, and that A is now, in a sense, in the kammic debt of B. But this is guesswork on my part. What if B stands for Buddha? ;-) -------------------------------------------------- > > ============ > > > In a sense, every event is an occurrence within a vast, > interactive > >kammic network, centering on one namarupic stream, or a few, or > many, but > >ultimately going way beyond any of these. This, in part, is > perhaps one > >reason why full individual "control" is an illusion. But also, > because there > >are so *many* influences on any event, most with small impact, > volition looms > >large, and there *is* choosing. > > ============== > > Howard, I am enjoying your post. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: That pleases me, Rob. I hope that there is some merit to it and that it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a point of view, and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. ---------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 17644 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:21am Subject: Re: Hello(Venerable PiyaDhammo) Dear Dan, Hope you and your family are well. It is good to see you here also. I understand your obligations to others. Thank you for the kind words and best wishes. Much Metta to you and yours, Phra Piyadhammo > Dear Ven. Phra Piyadhammo, > It's great to hear from you. Sorry I couldn't make the trip to NC for > your ordination as planned. My schedule has been quite busy of late, > and it is unbecoming of a householder to shirk his obligations to > other people. I do hope all is well with you. > > Best wishes, > > Dan 17645 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Sarah and Christine, Smiles and Salutations! Well, I don't think either one of you met my challenge. You did not show that the Buddha did not crack a joke, a very dark joke actually, in your interpretations of this sutta. Both of you miss the main thing that shows that it is a joke. Of course the Buddha turns it into a lesson, as humor is often used, but he first uses humor. Let me give you some hints: Don't look at the subject matter, horse training, jokes can occur in any setting; and don't look at the follow up explanation of the Buddha, jokes don't last forever and he did have a lesson to teach. Look at the events immediately following the words of the Buddha. There you will find the humor. And I am not going to point it out directly. Like insight, jokes are either something you get or something you don't. When they are explained, the experience is lost in translation. Christine wanted to know what makes something funny. Richard F. Taflinger comes up with some pretty good guidelines in his "A Theory of Comedy": 1) it must appeal to the intellect rather than the emotions; 2) it must be mechanical; 3) it must be inherently human, with the capability of reminding us of humanity; 4) there must be a set of established societal norms with which the observer is familiar, either through everyday life or through the author providing it in expository material, or both; 5) the situation and its component parts (the actions performed and the dialogue spoken) must be inconsistent or unsuitable to the surrounding or associations (i.e., the societal norms); and 6) it must be perceived by the observer as harmless or painless to the participants. When these criteria have been met, people will laugh. If any one is absent, then the attempt at humor will fail. The Buddha spoke against humor at some else's expense, not all humor in general—according to my interpretation of that teaching to his son. Granted, the Buddha didn't go around cracking jokes all of the time, but I don't think that was a sign of his enlightenment (Mahayana records tell of many subsequent Buddhas [arahants] who did crack jokes and laugh all the time…hence, `The Happy Buddha'…who I am beginning to resemble with all the food this holiday season ). I believe the Lord Buddha's predominately cool temperament was a result of him being raised as a Prince. Royality is expected and taught to act dignified and proper at all times and any type of humor is supposed to be dry and subtle at the very least. The Buddha was always a leader, even when seeking enlightenment. He would obviously know the responsibility that position held, social customs and mores expected, and was therefore prim and proper most of the time. Question: Did the Buddha ever smile? I think he must have. He wasn't Vulcan . Side Note: Sarah, you write, "For the arahants all lobha has been eradicated (and also for the anagamis except for a few very refined kinds not related to sense-pleasures)." Now, this statement really makes me smile. Please take the following statements as kind and not nasty: Just how many arahants and anagamis have you psychoanalyzed to make this determination? This is an `allness' statement and, giving the diversity of human nature, `allness' statements are very unlikely to be correct when applied to humans (or anything really). This is another issue I have with the Abhidhamma. It leads people to believe they know something that they cannot possibly know. The Buddha taught not to believe something unless it is experienced first-hand, and yet the Abhidhamma asks people to believe all sorts of things not experienced first-hand. That is, if it is to be taken literally; if it is to be taken symbolically, that is another issue. I eagerly await Nina's response to that. And, according to the Sutta Pitaka, arahants still have traces of defilements (of which `lobha', greed, is one) or they would disappear in a puff of smoke . Even the Lord Buddha had traces of defilements but his were practically nil because he had been purifying his karma stream for so many eons (according to the suttas and him…but that is up for argument also). Smiling Metta, James Ps. I find Thanissaro's translations of the suttas without equal. "I destroy him, Kesi" would not make any sense in context to the remainder of the sutta. Why would the Buddha say, "I destroy him, Kesi" and then later say, "`True it is, Kesi, that taking life does not become a Tathagata…" I can `destroy' someone's reputation; I can `destroy' a building, etc. This is obviously about taking life, `killing' as opposed to `destroying'. Thanissaro has proven time and time again that he knows these important subtleties in the English Language. We should all thank our lucky stars he decided to become a monk rather than a field more lucrative. 17646 From: nidive Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:34am Subject: Re: nibbana Dear Larry, > Anyone who asserts that nibbana must be other than a mere > cessation must find that otherness in the ariyan's life because > the cessation of defilements is nibbana and that cessation is > lived with. > What do you think? I agree with you: nibbana is cessation. Anyone who says that nibbana is equivalent to "anatta" or "emptiness" misses the whole point. If nibbana is equivalent to "anatta" or "emptiness", there could be no escape from that which is Conditioned, i.e. cittas, cetasikas and rupas, which are themselves "anatta" or "empty". Nibbana is the cessation of that arising, the cessation of that momentary existence, and the cessation of that dissolution. NEO Swee Boon 17647 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:50am Subject: Silabbata-paramasa Christine: Did you mean to say "silabbataparamasa (clinging to SILA and wrong practice)" ? I thought it was 'attachment to mere rules and ritual'. --------------- Dear Christine, Oh yes, I meant to say it. I sort of hoped though that I'd get away without having to explain it:). Silabbataparamasa: A common translation of this term is "attachment to mere rules and rituals." And this is a good translation for the more gross forms but doesn't quite clarify the meaning of the more subtle types. The meaning of sila is habit -which can be right or wrong. And in fact even right sila can be part of silabbataparamsa: In the Visuddhimagga XV11267. : "[he] thinks through Silabbataparamasa, 'This rite and ritual leads him who perfects it to perfect bliss... So silabataparamsa is a condition for all three namely the sense-desire, fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming with their analysis and their synthesis". Thus one cane even develop jhana, be perfect in conduct but still be mired in silabbataparamasa. However, lets just consider the clinging which is very gross: When I first started in buddhism I grasped on to sila once I heard that it was the basis for all attainments. But grasping is always without wisdom and so it actualy made my life more difficult. Since then I see many new buddhists getting more uptight, having guilty feelings etc because of not comprehending that the path leads towards freedom- not entrapment. And the entrapment related to wrong practice can be gross or subtle. If right view is developing there will be a letting go of these aspects of grasping little by little. Needless to say this is much more profound than thinking, "ok sila and practice can be grasped, thus I'll run amok to show my lack of clinging". A good explanation of this is the conversation between Venerable Piyadhammo(David)and Dan (nice to see him on the list today ) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8673 Robert ADVERTISEMENT 17648 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi, James - In a message dated 12/12/02 3:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Hey All, > > I would challenge anyone to read this sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-111.html > > and then state that the Buddha didn't have a sense of humor, crack > jokes, startle people for comic effect, or misrepresent the truth > for comic effect. > > Metta, James > ========================== I read the sutta. I agree with your evaluation except for the business of the Buddha's being misleading, for that was only momentary and was *immediately* followed by the clarification that metaphor was being used. With metta-for you, ;-) 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) 17649 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I hope that there is some merit to it and that > it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a point of view, > and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. > ---------------------------------------------------- Thanks for clarifying those points. I understand your perspective better now. I would like to continue this thread in a slightly different way. I think we can agree that your point of view is a very liberal interpretation of the Dhamma as laid out in the Tipitaka and supporting commentaries / subcommentaries. You've obviously done some thinking about this. I am assuming that your decision to take a very liberal approach arises because you are not comfortable with a more literal approach to the Tipitaka. I would be interested in knowing in what areas the Tipitaka just doesn't feel right for you. My intention is not to argue with you but to explore those areas more deeply. Would you be interested in continuing this thread using this approach? Metta, Rob M :-) 17650 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:16pm Subject: Re: Silabbata-paramasa Dear Robert, and all, You say: "even right sila can be part of silabbataparamsa" and "lets just consider the clinging which is very gross: When I first started in buddhism I grasped on to sila once I heard that it was the basis for all attainments. But grasping is always without wisdom and so it actualy made my life more difficult." C: I agree that grasping is without wisdom, but diligently following the basic ethical teaching of the Blessed One, not doing evil, cultivating virtue and purifying the mind doesn't necessarily equate to clinging, does it? Without 'seeing danger in the slightest fault', without cultivating sila to be as close as possible to the templates laid down in the Suttas, wouldn't one be likely to be deluded, find moral loopholes, convince oneself that what one really wants to do is part of a 'higher wisdom' free from 'rules' and 'precepts'? Perhaps that is more nearly clinging ... clinging to self? Thanks for this post which has left me a little bemused and reflecting. metta, Christine --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: 17651 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: If volition is conditioned: what difference between kamma and v... Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/12/02 4:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >--------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I hope that there is some merit to it and that > >it is not fully off-base. I readily admit that it is merely a > point of view, > >and I do not hold it in a firm grasp. > >---------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for clarifying those points. I understand your perspective > better now. I would like to continue this thread in a slightly > different way. > > I think we can agree that your point of view is a very liberal > interpretation of the Dhamma as laid out in the Tipitaka and > supporting commentaries / subcommentaries. > > You've obviously done some thinking about this. I am assuming that > your decision to take a very liberal approach arises because you are > not comfortable with a more literal approach to the Tipitaka. I > would be interested in knowing in what areas the Tipitaka just > doesn't feel right for you. My intention is not to argue with you > but to explore those areas more deeply. > > Would you be interested in continuing this thread using this > approach? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ============================== I will start right now. I have no argument with the Tipitaka nor do I think that my interpretation contradicts it, but is simply a way of understanding it. Though I have no ready reference (I'm quite poor at citations), I believe there are places in the suttas where this very body-mind is identified as both the empirical person and as "the world". The five khandhas (of a single namarupic stream) are "the world", and nibbana, their cessation, is "the end of the world". In some sutta, that is the answer the Buddha gives for how one reaches the "end of the world". So, I am in line with the suttas in that respect. Also, that such phenomena as solidity, sights, sounds, touch sensations, feelings, volition, discernment etc, etc, all "internal phenomena", constitute a greater reality than trees, rocks, cars, and people, the apparent "external" entities that Abhidhamma, explicity, and the suttas, less explicitly, dismiss as mind-constructed pa~n~natti puts me somewhat in line with both of those baskets My phenomenalist interpretation of the Dhamma is not cut from whole cloth. It has been noted by many that Buddhism is, if not an outright species of phenomenalism, at least a species of phenomenology. Also, that kamma, defined by the Buddha as volition and volitional action, is the motive force of the world is at least implicit in the Dhamma. This in fact, may be why the Theravadins understand the paranibbana of an arahant as constituting an irreversible leaving of the world, for there remains no further kamma vipaka to sustain the wheel of becoming. (Actually, some Mahayanists accept this as well. Nagarjuna seems to express this at the end of his discussion of the 12-link wheel of dependent origination in his Mulamadhymikakarika.) That sentient beings living in a common realm cognize the same or similar "external things" clearly points to their having similar kammic accumulations - at least it does to me. So I view shared realms of experience as the result, directly and indirectly, of kammic contributions of many "beings". Now, if I'm wrong on this, well, that's okay. I have nothing riding on it. All that I consider of major importance is to walk lightly through life, without grasping - or as little as possible, following the Buddha's prescription for liberation, and with love and compassion for my fellow travellers. 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) 17652 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 2:17pm Subject: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path In the Vibhangha, The Book of Analysis. The second book of the Abhidhamma. Translated from the Pali of the Burmese Chatthasangiti Edition by, Pathamakyaw Ashin Thittila (Setthila) Aggamahpandita. Pali Text Society Oxford. Chapter 11 Analysis of the Path Constituents #2 Analysis According to Abhidhamma, starting with verse number 490. through verse number 492. gives an analysis of the Eight Constituent Path with the factors, of course as we all know are: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Of course Sammaditthi and Sammasankappa are Panna. Sammavayama, Sammasati, and sammasamadhi are Samadhi. Verse 494. states: Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? Herein at the time when a Bhikkhu develops supramundane jhana tending to release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death; he for the abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from sense pleasures, attains and dwells in the first jhana that is hard to practice and knowledge slowly acquired; at that time there is the Five Constituent Path right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. Verses 495. through 497. give an analysis of the five factors right view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. In Dhamma Metta Phra Piyadhammo 17653 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi, Bhante - In a message dated 12/12/02 5:19:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, phrapiyadhammo@y... writes: > > In the Vibhangha, The Book of Analysis. The second book of the > Abhidhamma. Translated from the Pali of the Burmese Chatthasangiti > Edition by, Pathamakyaw Ashin Thittila (Setthila) Aggamahpandita. > Pali Text Society Oxford. > > Chapter 11 Analysis of the Path Constituents #2 Analysis According to > Abhidhamma, starting with verse number 490. through verse number 492. > gives an analysis of the Eight Constituent Path with the factors, of > course as we all know are: right view, right thought, right speech, > right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, > right concentration. > > Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: right view, > right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. > Of course Sammaditthi and Sammasankappa are Panna. Sammavayama, > Sammasati, and sammasamadhi are Samadhi. > > Verse 494. states: Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? Herein > at the time when a Bhikkhu develops supramundane jhana tending to > release, dispersive of continuing rebirth and death; he for the > abandoning of wrong view, for entering of the first stage, aloof from > sense pleasures, attains and dwells in the first jhana that is hard > to practice and knowledge slowly acquired; at that time there is the > Five Constituent Path right view, right thought, right effort, right > mindfulness, right concentration. > > Verses 495. through 497. give an analysis of the five factors right > view, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness, and right > concentration. > > In Dhamma > Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > ============================ Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. Actually, I would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only good kamma! :-) 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) 17655 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:14pm Subject: Friday nonsense [Re: Posts slow in appearing] Hi RobM, How fortuate you only THOUGHT of making disparaging remarks about the intellectual capabilities of Australians. :) (do I sound fierce?) :) If you had, I would have been forced to sound The Australaise and call out the Aussies on the List to attend to you. A bit of a problem with the two hour delay at that point. :) This would have been excruciating to you, as I would have had to sing it to the tune of Onward Christian Soldiers, and insert within the dotted lines the Great Australian Adjective. "Fellers of Australier, Blokes an' coves an' coots, Shift yer --- carcases, Move yer --- boots. Gird yer --- loins up, Get yer --- gun,(perhaps as a buddhist I should substitute 'bun'?) Set the --- enermy An' watch the blighters run." (C.J. Dennis) On the other hand, I could simply unmask the identity of the only person who couldn't find others he knew in the Shangri-la lobby in HK. Who sat three tables away behind a pot plant, and had to ring on his mobile phone after 45 minutes so someone could walk twenty feet and escort him? But I won't. :-) {Can you tell I'm still on holidays?} much metta, Christine (clearly practising abstinence from any form of right speech) --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I am tempted to make a derogatory comment about Australians, but I > realize that there are many of you out there :-) > 17656 From: peterdac4298 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:25pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences Hi Christine Ajhan Cha would tell us to watch the perplexity, doubt and confusion in the moment that they arose, 'cause that is where we get enlightened. From his pov, the whole point of the Vinaya is two fold, a/ the basis for developing tranquility, and b/ just this kind of predicament. I have heard of one instance, and I think it was Ajhan Sumedho who told the story, that there was an occasion of termite infestation of one of the monastery buildings, might have been a sala or a kuti. On this occasion there was no alternative but to kill the insects. Ajhan Cha took part in, if not actually led, the operation too. Needless to say this situation was distinctly a one off. Sangha credibility would never have survived a repetition. Fortunately, to my knowledge, the need for such extreme measures has never since arisen. Cheers Peter --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Thanks for telling us such a satisfying story! I catch the cane > toads in plastic shopping bags (so I don't have to touch them or > their poison glands) and take them up the road to the only street > light in the area (attracts a food source of moths etc.) and release > them. Though I now wonder about the poor moths and my responsibility > in their deaths. The dog and local moths vs the moths up the > road .... > And I DO understand the sensitivity of Aussie Environmentalists to > not eradicating this introduced pest which is devastating to small > fauna. But it is another Being, and our individual behaviour is > covered by the Dhamma, so what is one to do? > > metta, > Christine > > > Hi Christine > > > > At Wat Ba Pong and branches, where forest rats, (looking more like > > mice to me) plagued the monastery kitchen, were routinely caught, > > kept in a paper bag over night (for some reason they never tried to > > get out of these bags, even though their jaws were very powerful > and > > teeth needle sharp). We released them the following mornings on > > alms round at any place considered to be midway between the Wat and > > the village to which the monks would be visiting that morning. > > > > Cheers > > Peter 17657 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:38pm Subject: Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Howard, I think that I am starting to understand where my confusion is coming from. Allow me to define two different views; an "ethical view" and a "scientific view". I see these two views as quite distinct and perhaps even unrelated. For example, in the past century there has been major scientific progress, but it could be said this has not translated into ethical progress. I see Buddhism as working in the domain of the "ethical view". I see the ethical view as purely internal and as such, I strongly agree with your phenomenological approach. Last night I read that the proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly supports a phenomenological perspective. Rupa only has relevance in the ethical view when it touches consciousness. Again, ethical view is purely internal. But what about that "stuff" out there that doesn't touch consciousness (i.e. the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because there is no consciousness. It is "out there", it is external. The "stuff" that is "out there" (the external stuff that doesn't touch consciousness) is not part of the ethical view. The ethical view does not make any statements about its existence or non- existence; it is simply not on the radar screen. Using strict definitions, I can't call it "rupa", so I will call it "apur" (rupa spelled backwards; I checked in my 1778 page Pali-English dictionary and apur is not already taken as a word :-) ). Apur is part of the scientific view. Scientists can write volumes about their analysis of apur and their models for apur. That is fine. The scientific view does not enter into the ethical realm. Last weekend, I attended a two day long Buddhist seminar that touched on the issues of ethics of cloning and euthanasia. Boy, are there challenges when science and ethics try to meet! As a Buddhist, I look at rupa from a purely phenomenological perspective. As a man of science, I look at apur from a purely non- phenomenological perspective. This does not create a dichotomy for me. What creates problems is when I try to mix views. If I try to extend the concept of rupa into the domain of science, I look like an Aristotelian (centuries out of date). Trying to take a scientific view on ethical issues is equally futile. Howard, I expect that you agree with most of what I am saying so far. Now let's look at "kamma". It is a critical part of the Buddhist ethical view. It says in a Sutta somewhere, "All beings are owners of their own kamma."; this emphasizes the "internal" nature of kamma. But what about the kamma of another being? Because it is not touching us at the moment, this "outside kamma", which I will call "ammak" ("ammak" is not in the big dictionary either). I have a hard time placing ammak in the scientific realm, but as it is external, it is not part of the ethical view. I would even go so far as to say that ammak is not part of Buddhism! Let's return to A hitting B. From the perspective of A, B is a condition and B's ammak is not relevant. From a phenomenological perspective, conditions exist but ammak does not. Similarly, from the perspective of B, A is a condition and A's ammak is not relevant. When the Buddha said, "Nibbana is the end of the world", he was speaking from an internal, phenomenological perspective, not from a scientific perspective. To summarize this long post, I am getting confused because I sense that you are moving a bit too freely between the ethical view and the scientific view. I could go on for a while longer, but this message is getting long and I want to get your feedback on what I have written so far. Metta (and "Attem") Rob M :-) 17658 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:48pm Subject: Re: The Three Abstinences --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine > > Ajhan Cha would tell us to watch the perplexity, doubt and confusion > in the moment that they arose, 'cause that is where we get > enlightened. From his pov, the whole point of the Vinaya is two > fold, a/ the basis for developing tranquility, and b/ just this kind > of predicament. > > I have heard of one instance, and I think it was Ajhan Sumedho who > told the story, that there was an occasion of termite infestation of > one of the monastery buildings, might have been a sala or a kuti. > On this occasion there was no alternative but to kill the insects. > Ajhan Cha took part in, if not actually led, the operation too. > > Needless to say this situation was distinctly a one off. Sangha > credibility would never have survived a repetition. Fortunately, to > my knowledge, the need for such extreme measures has never since > arisen. > > Cheers > Peter Dear Peter, Thanks for this story. I was not aware of this story about Ajahn Chah and it is good to hear. I was recently at Wat Nanachat (August, 2002), within walking distance of Wat Pah Pong, with the goal of ordaining and the insect problem (not just termites) must have gotten much worse since Ajahn Chah's death. I felt, deep in my bones, that the entire area needed a thorough insect extermination. And I would single-handedly do it also!! -- For the sake of the Sangha and the sake of the insects. That such shortsighted silly people in the area don't see as much, I have no idea. I disagree that such an act would destroy Sangha credibility. And if it did, then so be it. In that case, it would demonstrate that the Sangha had lost its credibility anyway. Metta, James 17659 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Howard, Your welcome. Came across the Five Constituent Path in my studies and thought I would share it. Right now Phra Maha Arkorn is having me memorize Vibangha and chant it in Pali also (besides the English language version of the Abhidhamma). Much Metta Phra Piyadhammo > ============================ > Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an > English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. Actually, I > would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only good > kamma! :-) > > With metta, > Howard 17660 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Rob - I find this a very interesting post of yours. I can see points of agreement between us and points of difference. I will give a full reply to this, but not immediately. I couldn't do it justice right now, because I'm running a bit of a fever and posibly have a recurrence of asthmatic bronchitis that landed me in the hospital a few months ago. (I hope to see the doctor tomorrow.) Please, in a week or so, if I haven't replied yet, do give me a reminder. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/12/02 7:40:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > I think that I am starting to understand where my confusion is > coming from. > > Allow me to define two different views; an "ethical view" and > a "scientific view". I see these two views as quite distinct and > perhaps even unrelated. For example, in the past century there has > been major scientific progress, but it could be said this has not > translated into ethical progress. > > I see Buddhism as working in the domain of the "ethical view". I see > the ethical view as purely internal and as such, I strongly agree > with your phenomenological approach. Last night I read that the > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > Rupa only has relevance in the ethical view when it touches > consciousness. Again, ethical view is purely internal. But what > about that "stuff" out there that doesn't touch consciousness (i.e. > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > there is no consciousness. It is "out there", it is external. > > The "stuff" that is "out there" (the external stuff that doesn't > touch consciousness) is not part of the ethical view. The ethical > view does not make any statements about its existence or non- > existence; it is simply not on the radar screen. Using strict > definitions, I can't call it "rupa", so I will call it "apur" (rupa > spelled backwards; I checked in my 1778 page Pali-English dictionary > and apur is not already taken as a word :-) ). > > Apur is part of the scientific view. Scientists can write volumes > about their analysis of apur and their models for apur. That is > fine. The scientific view does not enter into the ethical realm. > Last weekend, I attended a two day long Buddhist seminar that > touched on the issues of ethics of cloning and euthanasia. Boy, are > there challenges when science and ethics try to meet! > > As a Buddhist, I look at rupa from a purely phenomenological > perspective. As a man of science, I look at apur from a purely non- > phenomenological perspective. This does not create a dichotomy for > me. What creates problems is when I try to mix views. If I try to > extend the concept of rupa into the domain of science, I look like > an Aristotelian (centuries out of date). Trying to take a scientific > view on ethical issues is equally futile. > > Howard, I expect that you agree with most of what I am saying so > far. Now let's look at "kamma". It is a critical part of the > Buddhist ethical view. It says in a Sutta somewhere, "All beings are > owners of their own kamma."; this emphasizes the "internal" nature > of kamma. But what about the kamma of another being? Because it is > not touching us at the moment, this "outside kamma", which I will > call "ammak" ("ammak" is not in the big dictionary either). > > I have a hard time placing ammak in the scientific realm, but as it > is external, it is not part of the ethical view. I would even go so > far as to say that ammak is not part of Buddhism! > > Let's return to A hitting B. From the perspective of A, B is a > condition and B's ammak is not relevant. From a phenomenological > perspective, conditions exist but ammak does not. Similarly, from > the perspective of B, A is a condition and A's ammak is not relevant. > > When the Buddha said, "Nibbana is the end of the world", he was > speaking from an internal, phenomenological perspective, not from a > scientific perspective. > > To summarize this long post, I am getting confused because I sense > that you are moving a bit too freely between the ethical view and > the scientific view. > > I could go on for a while longer, but this message is getting long > and I want to get your feedback on what I have written so far. > > Metta (and "Attem") > Rob M :-) > > /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) 17661 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Bhante Piyadhammo, do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the book everywhere but have not found it. metta, selamat rodjali dhamma study group bogor indonesia ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Howard, > > Your welcome. Came across the Five Constituent Path in my studies and > thought I would share it. Right now Phra Maha Arkorn is having me > memorize Vibangha and chant it in Pali also (besides the English > language version of the Abhidhamma). > > Much Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > ============================ > > Thank you for this, Bhante! You are so fortunate to have an > > English-language version of the Abhidhamma available to you. > Actually, I > > would presume that good fortune had nothing to do with it, but only > good > > kamma! :-) > > > > With metta, > > Howard 17662 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Howard, I know you will take care of yourself, but I have to say it...please do take care of yourself. Please, let us know how you are doing after you go to the doctor tommorow! Metta, May you be healthy and strong, May you take care of yourself Phra Piyadhammo 17663 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:45pm Subject: Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hello Selamat, Our Wat has the entire Tipitaka in Thai, Pali, and English. Unfortunantley our Chaowat was very kind and let a westerner borrow the Yamaka. It has been a couple of years, and the person never returned it. Fortunantly it is all he took, and thankfully our Chaowat has been kind only once concerning the English Tipitaka! The book may be out of print by the Pali text society. Mrs. Rhys Davids called it a valley of dry bones a hundred years ago, and probably killed much of any intrest in it. Metta In Dhamma Piyadhammo Bhikkhu > Bhante Piyadhammo, > do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the book > everywhere but have not found it. > > metta, > selamat rodjali > dhamma study group bogor > indonesia 17664 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:50pm Subject: Take Care of Yourself Hi Howard, Please take care of yourself - I can wait a week or more; your health is very important. Metta, Rob M :-) 17665 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Bhante - Thank you! You are very kind. I'm sure I'm pretty much okay. My fever isn't anywhere as high as last time (when it exceeded 104 F). With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/12/02 8:12:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, phrapiyadhammo@y... writes: > Howard, > > I know you will take care of yourself, but I have to say it...please > do take care of yourself. Please, let us know how you are doing after > you go to the doctor tommorow! > > Metta, May you be healthy and strong, > May you take care of yourself > Phra Piyadhammo > > /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) 17666 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 0:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Take Care of Yourself Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/12/02 8:51:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Please take care of yourself - I can wait a week or more; your > health is very important. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ====================== Thank you, Rob! I hope to continue our conversation soon! 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) 17667 From: James Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:05pm Subject: Re: Take Care of Yourself Dear Howard, Oh my goodness! That sounds quite serious! Words like `hospital', `asthmatic bronchitis', and `fever' don't sound good to me…and ring many warning bells. Eeeekkkk!! Being ever mindful of myself (transient self), I realize the subtle and not-so- subtle attachment I have to you. Dhamma Grandpa, please take care! I, if not many more, depend on you. Good thoughts for your speedy recovery!! Metta, James 17668 From: dragonwriter2 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:06pm Subject: Christine Re: Emptiness? Hi Christine, Thanks for your reply and an overt apology for not replying sooner :) "Are you still in Sulawesi?" No May you be happy May you be well May you be at ease Metta, Simon 17669 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Ven Bhante, greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book returned to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. metta, selamat ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:45 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Hello Selamat, > > Our Wat has the entire Tipitaka in Thai, Pali, and English. > Unfortunantley our Chaowat was very kind and let a westerner borrow > the Yamaka. It has been a couple of years, and the person never > returned it. Fortunantly it is all he took, and thankfully our > Chaowat has been kind only once concerning the English Tipitaka! The > book may be out of print by the Pali text society. Mrs. Rhys Davids > called it a valley of dry bones a hundred years ago, and probably > killed much of any intrest in it. > > Metta > In Dhamma > Piyadhammo Bhikkhu > > > Bhante Piyadhammo, > > do you have the English version of Yamaka? I try to look after the > book > > everywhere but have not found it. > > > > metta, > > selamat rodjali > > dhamma study group bogor > > indonesia > > 17670 From: phrapiyadhammo Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Selamat, A note to make a correction. I talked to another Bhikkhu here and he said the book that is missing is The Points of Contoversy (Kathavatha). He said that the Pali Text Society never published the Yamaka. Sorry about the confusion. It happened when I checked for Yamaka in our Tipitaka and could not find it. I remembered that my Achaan had lent a Book of the Abhidhamma which was not ever returned. I assumed that was the missing book was the Yamaka. Metta Phra Piyadhammo > Ven Bhante, > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book returned > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > metta, > selamat 17671 From: selamat at cbn Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path ok Bhante, no problem. anumodana for your kind attention. muditacittena, selamat ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 9:21 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path > Dear Selamat, > > A note to make a correction. I talked to another Bhikkhu here and he > said the book that is missing is The Points of Contoversy > (Kathavatha). He said that the Pali Text Society never published the > Yamaka. Sorry about the confusion. It happened when I checked for > Yamaka in our Tipitaka and could not find it. I remembered that my > Achaan had lent a Book of the Abhidhamma which was not ever returned. > I assumed that was the missing book was the Yamaka. > > Metta > Phra Piyadhammo > > > Ven Bhante, > > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book > returned > > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > > > metta, > > selamat > > 17672 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi Selamat, Try this: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.phtml?prod_id=132765 Larry 17673 From: Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Hi again Selamat, I just noticed. Its in pali. Sorry Larry ps: maybe you could translate it 17674 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:07pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Selamat, I have heard from a gentleman in Malaysia that the Burmese have translated the Yamaka into English (presumably sponsored by the Department for the Promotion and Propagation of the Sasana). I have a copy of their Dhammasangani translation. It's not great, but it beats the Mrs. Rhys Davids translation from 1900. My Dhs. says it was "Printed in the Union of Myanmar at the AZ Offset by U Myint Wynn Maung (04504), 118 Pathein Myay Quarter, Dawpn Township, Yangon." You could try contacting them about Yamaka. Mrs. Rhys Davids "valley of dry bones" comment dampened any potential interest of mine in Yamaka before that interest could even sprout. That changed when I read a wonderful and insightful essay by Ledi Sayadaw in the "Journal of the Pali Text Society" (v. VII, pp. 115- 163). The essay is entitled "Some points in Buddhist doctrine," and much of it is derived from his understanding of Yamaka -- great stuff. The "pairs" may be "dry bones" to some, but careful consideration of the pairs can surely clarify subtle shades of meanings of various concepts (one would think). If you should come across a copy, please let me know how I could too! (Best to do it off- list because I rarely pop in at dsg these days.) Dan > > Ven Bhante, > > greatly appreciate your info. We still wait the info till the book > returned > > to your Wat. Or does anyone in this mail list have the book? > > > > Abhidhamma is great for our practice in daily life. > > > > May ven Bhante and all in this list ever grow in the Dhamma. > > > > metta, > > selamat 17675 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:43pm Subject: Re: Ethical View vs. Scientific View --- "robmoult " wrote: >. Last night I read that the > proximate cause of rupa is "consciousness (vinnana)", according to > Abhidhammatthasangahadipanipali (that's a mouthful!). Saying that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise clearly > supports a phenomenological perspective. > > the "sound" from the tree that falls in the forest with none to hear > it)? I believe that according to Buddhism, this is not rupa because > there is no consciousness. ______________________ Dear Rob M, Could you give the full references that support these conclusions. Robert 17676 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Sailor.......lawyer, used car salesman Hi Sarah, This takes me back to the dsg discussion meeting held on a balcony of the Noosa Sheraton in July. One of your old friends, (Gilli?), and I were giving you the third degree. We were trying to impress upon you, the need for social and environmental action. I should add that you and Jon put us all to shame, being as you are, the most considerate and responsible couple a person could ever hope to meet. But there you were, seemingly unimpressed by the need to go out and make the world a better place.(!) I think you gave the example of a person actually bulldozing a tree -- you said we can't know the state of his mind at any one moment. It could be kusala; while, with a person planting a tree or waving a protest banner, it could be akusala. I couldn't see that tree planting, even though ultimately unreal, was not better than bulldozing. I nodded in pretend agreement, vowing to myself that I would eventually understand what on earth you were on about. Well, here's my chance because you have put the same sort of thing down in writing. It's probably no different from the usual explanations of absolute reality verses conventional reality, but for some reason, it's particularly hard for me to grasp. Whenever this point is grasped, I think there will be more acceptance of our present circumstances. Even Red Cross volunteers won't consider themselves superior to butchers and vice versa. In reality, there are no Red Cross volunteers, no butchers, no occupations, just nama and rupa . -- the real Right Livelihood can occur anywhere at any time. It's hard to grasp and sometimes, we don't want to grasp it. The main thing is that we're working on it :-) Kind regards Ken H --- Sarah wrote: 17677 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Eight Fold Path and The Five Fold Path Dear Phra Piyadhammo, Thank you for providing the reference and interesting/dificult points from the Vibhanga: --- "phrapiyadhammo " wrote: ..... > Then verse 493. States the Five Constituent Path is: righ