17800 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psychic Experiences Dear Swee Boon, --- "nidive " wrote: > Dear Everybody, > > I don't know whether this is off-topic or not. But since the Buddha > talked about abhinna powers, I would like to discuss about my > own 'psychic experiences' which I could still remember. ..... I think we need to clarify a little what the abhinna powers are so that there is no confusion or mistaking of 'psychic' or other special experiences any of us may be having at this time. In brief, these refer the 6 higher powers or knowledges which can only be attained through the perfection of jhanas. One of them can only be obtained through the realization of Arahatship. There was some discussion before with Wyn on these. The Visuddhimagga X1-X111 gives more details. We're talking about the powers after the attainment of rupa and arupa jhanas - quite impossible in our 'dusty' lives as I understand.(Others will disagree;-)) Many of us, including yourself, are interested in 'practice'. A good place and time to start is now: is there any clear knowledge of the distinction between moments that are kusala (wholesome) and akusala (unwholesome) and of how different objects of samatha, such as metta or death condition calm when there is understanding? Samatha can only begin to develop with clear understanding of the purpose and with knowledge of wholesome states, not by just concentrating and hoping. Thank you for sharing your interesting psychic experiences. I don't attempt to explain them. I don't think anyone would think you were the Devil;-) My mother was brought up in very large, very old, very remote vicarages, often without electricity and was very used to the ghosts which she took for being servants. It was quite common-place and in a very Christian environment;-).I've also had 'psychic' friends with experiences as you describe. I think the most important thing, as we've said before on DSG, is not to cling to such experiences at all. However strange, they are only namas and rupas rising and falling away. Back to practice and the only way to develop insight is by being aware of realities that appear now. Attaching to special episodes or concepts will never help. Concentration without panna is mostly wrong concentration and will take us in the wrong direction. ..... > I don't know if any of you had such experiences or not. I know > people seldom discuss such things because it is uncommon. ..... Another reason may be that it might not be useful. If we all discuss all the weird things that have ever happened to us (however memorable or disturbing), we'd be no closer to knowing the nature of dhammas as the Buddha taught. I hope this doesn't sound too harsh, Swee Boon. Please let us know what you think about the practice. Can your study of Abhidhamma help this practice? Sarah p.s I assume NEO is yr family name and Swee Boon your first names. Pls clarify that this is right as I think there is a little confusion. ===== 17801 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:03am Subject: Re: Christine (Women on the Buddhist Path) Hi Simon, I appreciate the info. about the books and I'll keep an eye out for them. I do have Vicki Mackenzie's biography of Tenzin Palmo 'Cave in the Snow', and I have another one of articles written by Buddhist women called 'Being Bodies' ed. by Lenore Friedman and Susan Moon. The back cover says "The relationship between body and mind has always been a topic of speculation and spirited discussion. The authors of the pieces contained in this anthology address the problem from the unique dual perspective of being women and being students of Buddhism." Contributers include a number of well known American Teachers. The Ch. headings are "Body as Suffering" "Body as Nature" "Body as Gender" "Body as Vehicle" "Body as Self". Thanks for your post, because of it I went to look for this book and realised I hadn't finished reading it. :-) metta, Christine --- "dragonwriter2 " wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Following are two books (contemporary:-) and their descriptions, > authored by women about the varied experiences on the path, that may > or may not be of interest. > > Women on the Buddhist Path by Martine Batchelor > This is a collection of stories and experiences of "Western" > and "Asian" women from a variety of Buddhist "traditions", ranging > from a hermit to a disk jockey, and including artists, social > workers, psychotherapists, nuns ans professors. What they have in > common is a meditation practice that has transformed their lives. > This book is an inspiration to "all" women who are seeking to > integrate spirituality into their daily lives. Pb 240 pp. > > Reflections on a Mountain Lake: A Western Nun Talks on Practical > Buddhism by Tenzin Palmo > "The essential thing is to learn how to develop a practice which you > can live with moment to moment in your everyday life." > > Tenzin Palmo, whose story is known to thousands of readers through > Vicki Mackenzie's biography, Cave in the Snow, draws on her years > (12ish) of solitary meditation in a Himalayan cave to bring this > down to earth approach to the spiritual path. She explains how to > develop a regular meditation practice and shows how meditation can > help us deal with painful emotions like anger, fear and jealousy. > She explores the traditions of great female practitoners and how > they are being "maintained" today. > > Metta, > Simon 17802 From: ajahn_paul Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:11am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Christine, i was just only joking,,,i've got my x'mas tree set up already in my house anyway! heheehe well,,, i dont know how to enlarge the pic, can u help? ^^ --- "christine_forsyth " wrote: > Hi Paul, > > May I give my two cents about your question to RobM? > Living in a country that celebrates Christmas both in a religious and > a worldly way causes strong emotions to arise when I hear the hymns > or a Christian sermon on the radio. Christmas in a non-religious way > is so important here that people travel home from all round the world > to be with their family - "I'll be home for Christmas". Christmas no > longer means what it meant to me, in a religious sense, for most of > my life. But, each Christmas now I have to deal with mixed emotions - > almost like grief for a lost loved one - for the simple way it used > to be when I believed what I was brought up to believe. Being > Buddhist doesn't stop them. I often wonder if there is a separate > form of memory for emotions. At this time, I am particularly > bothered by a yearning for the simple culture-wide beliefs of my pre- > Dhamma life. The 'truths' of yesterday that I believed so > joyfully, that I taught to my children, are just dear 'myths' to me > today. But, I buy the Christmas presents, and join in family > gatherings and celebrations. In this country, where the Festival of > the birth of the Christ child is both a worldly Celebration and > Thanksgiving for Family, as well as a consumer extravaganza, it would > cause misunderstanding and hurt among my Christian family and friends > (whether nominal or not) if I was to Make a Point of Being Buddhist > and withdraw. > > metta, > Christine > p.s. That is you in photo 58 isn't it? :-) I can't seem to enlarge > it. Will you have to stay a mini-Paul forever? :-) > 17803 From: ajahn_paul Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:13am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Rob, i know,,, i would like to have a x'mas gift too,,,, where is my book?! ^_~ --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > I have two sons; eight and twelve. They go to Buddhist Sunday School > each week, but they sure love to get presents and decorate the > Christmas tree. My wife and I certainly don't treat Christmas as a > religious holiday, but we do use this occasion to explain a bit to > our kids about Christian beliefs. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17804 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wrong speech in Jest Hi James, I smiled and laughed when I read your post (to Christine). I didn’t take a Prozac, but I’m calling you 'in the morning'(your time). Hope it was a general invitation and I don’t sound like a doomsayer either;-) ..... --- "James " wrote: > But this discussion reminds me again > of why I am a Buddhist. You know, I always thought of Buddhism as a > happy and joyful way of approaching life. A way of saying, "Yes, we > are all suffering…and it is all quite unnecessary. It is possible to > find true happiness in the here and now and the hereafter. And it if > from your own efforts that such will be done." .... I pretty much agree with these sentiments. I also agree to an extent with ones that David made to suggest we can ‘think’ too much. “Whatever will be, will be, the future is not ours to see” as the catchy song being played over and over in a nearby cafe belts out. If we find the path discouraging or fearful or have the idea we can think and think our way out of trouble, it’s not ‘right’. Furthermore, as I was writing to Ken H, if we have the idea we should be in another place, doing another job, sitting in a different position (like up a tree for 39 days as I read in the newspaper to save it, Ken), it’s also not ‘right’. We can see that with these ideas, the idea of practice is taking us away from the present moment and making life harder (read: piling up more suffering) rather than lighter. So I’d encourage anyone to be joyful and ‘in good cheer’ (as Azita likes to remind us), to go Xmas shopping or whatever brings happiness or one has inclinations to do. ..... > But since being a member of this group I have confronted such > depressing positions as Nibbana as complete nothingness and void, the > Buddha was practically a Vulcan and had no trace of humanity > whatsoever, that inanimate objects (like rocks) have the intrinsic > characteristic of suffering along with being hard and cold, and that > joking, smiling, laughing, and happiness are all against Buddhism. I > am not sure if this is a Buddhist group or a Silvia Plath fan club > . ..... I’m glad you added the or I might have been worried about you . Ok, I’m not taking your comments seriously. I would like to suggest, however, that there’s a very big difference between a) acknowledging, as we read in all the texts, that the arahants and Buddha were completely without any lobha (and thereby any inclination to laugh or joke) and b) suggesting as a result we shouldn’t laugh and joke. We’re not arahants. We’re just starting out on the Path. If we try to act as we imagine arahants would act, it is unnnatural and again shows wrong understanding of the practice. The practice should be to live as we always have (no obvious changes as Chris pointed out - in my case I've always disliked any kind of shopping and still do), but developing more understanding, more wholesome qualities of all kinds - slowly and without expectation of results. So there’s no need to join the suicidal fan club, James, just because the Buddha didn’t tell jokes or all conditioned phenomena are inherently unsatisfactory. Understanding phenomena a little more as they are is the most inspiring and uplifting way to live. This is what brings little tastes of freedom and ‘lightness’ of experience. No one or thing can ever touch or affect this understanding. It isn’t determined by the outer appearance at all. The teachings are for monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen alike. ..... >I keep writing to kids to be happy, be optimistic, and know > that everything is for a reason and that reason is good….but from the > thinking of the vocal majority of this group I might as well tell > them all to cut their wrists on the spot. There is nothing worth > living for and there is nothing to attain. All is emptiness and > emptiness is all…And `Have a Good, Mettiful Day' ;-) ..... Some days you remind me of our old friend Erik, but at least you add the ;-) Please continue to inspire and help the kids (and a few adults with kids’ hearts;-)) with the beautifully written posts. I particularly appreciated the ones you just wrote on kamma and rebirth with the great revolving door analogy. (Kom and Rob K also wrote really helpful ones on kamma - jsut the right ‘pitch’) (New members pls note: some of these children are as young as 8 yrs old, so they’re allowed a few toys in their posts;-)) ..... > Rubbish and Nonsense!! So much has been lost and those who think > they know don't really know anything. They only hear the empty > echoes in their lonely heads as they lament to themselves. .... Oh, that was a rude awakening. Lamenting to myself.....;-(( ..... >I just > wanted to get this off my chest. I am sure the doomsayers will have > much to say in response. Fine. ..... I think they’ve been noticeable by their absence so far... not everyone on DSG is such a masochist;-) ..... >But please, I want to urge everyone, > don't think that all is forsaken! There is hope and there is > happiness…all is not dukkha. Dukkha is a dream, Happiness is > reality. Just take a Prozac and call me in the morning. .... Ok, I called. I appreciate the encouragement. I disagree that ‘all is not dukkha’. Does that mean there can’t be happy feelings or we should take a Prozac as a solution? I don’t think so. Does it mean we should all be full of wholesome qualities. No, as you suggested at the end of a quote on mana, the development and understanding has to be ‘trained’. James, you also asked in another post how some of us had come to our conclusions about arahants having eradicated lobha and so on. I think out of confidence in the Teachings, we can look to the suttas at least and to the entire Tipitaka for some of us. We don’t ‘know’ these details, but surely they are more reliable than our own specultions? You suggest that in some suttas it says arahants (inc. the Buddha) still have traces of defilements including lobha. I think it is quite erroneous but I’ll look at the suttas if you give me the references. You say that otherwise they would disappear in a cloud of smoke . Well, I’m smiling but quite puzzled as to why you would think this at all. Finally, James, (OK, a little ambush), you found it disconcerting (17100) that phenomena are conditioned, that there is no self to suppress anger and so on. I agree there has to be the proper groundwork and as I just said, it’s no use trying to imitate an arahant or the Buddha. However, ‘standing fast in the flow’, appreciating the value of good deeds and cultivating ‘proper mental states’ can only be done at this moment by sati, panna and their associates. Not by a self, not by 'Sarah' or 'James'. Talking now, considering what is wise and unwise, is an important condition for such practice and development to take place. Many thanks again for your uplifting and inspiring posts. Just let us know anytime we sound too depressing to you;-) Sarah ====== 17806 From: chase8383 Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 3:47am Subject: The Gift of Suffering Morning ( here anyway) All There is a story about a women who came to the Buddha carrying her dead child. She asked the Buddha to bring her child back to life. The Buddha told her that he would talk of that later, but first he wanted her to go into the village below them. Once in the village, she was to go from house to house and get a mustard seed from each house that had not experienced death. She did as the Buddha asked. And as she went from house to house, she collected no mustard seeds. Not one house in the village had not experienced death. All had know the suffering of loss. All had tasted the suffering of impermanence. When she returned to the Buddha, she opened her empty hand. She said all in the village had known death personally. The Buddha said, you see, this is what we share. This suffering is what brings us together. No suffering, no joy. No Mara, no Buddha. No samsara, no nirvana. David 17807 From: nidive Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psychic Experiences Hello Sarah, Thank you for responding to my post. NEO is my surname (family name), and Swee Boon is my name. Thank you for clarifying about abhinna powers. I am not claiming that I have abhinna powers. But some strange experiences that I have are very mysterious and unexplainable. I thought Buddhism would be more accommodating of such experiences, in the manner that such experiences are not 'uncommon'. Thank you for sharing that you have family members and friends who also have psychic experiences. It's kind of comforting. I am not attached to such experiences. But I don't discount them either. Maybe I could have been a brahma in my previous life? :) Therefore I have such accumulations? Maybe I could have practised concentration in my previous life? I don't know. But I remembered a dream I had while I was a child: I dreamt that I was a Buddhist monk residing in a majestic (where everything was virtually golden) monastery. I don't think I am going on the wrong path. But I still experience such psychic experiences in my life. It can be as mundane as having fore-knowledge (or intuition) of what might happen later in the day. NEO Swee Boon 17808 From: chase8383 Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:39am Subject: Letting our notions fall away (Re: If volition is conditioned)/ David Hello Christine "You're 'a yank' I assume, David - from the Eastcoast, Westcoast or the Heartland?" Eastcoast. New Englander born and breed. I lived in Colorado and Texas for a while, but otherwise pure Eastcoaster. I have never been to Australia. I want to go though. Australia and New Zealand are the two places I most indentify with outside of the states. Be spacious, David 17809 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:11am Subject: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi, all - All conditions/formations are flawed. They are imperfect in that they are, none of them, of the nature to satisfy. Some cause outright physical and mental pain to which we react with varying degrees of aversion, and, in some cases, we commit the most terrible and disturbing actions to flee from them. Others are neutral in feeling, from which arises boredom, loss of attention, and confusion. Still others range from mildly to enormously pleasant. Of these, the moderately to enormously pleasant are met with craving that is often compulsive, disturbing, and leads to a slavish attachment that is thwarted by impermanence and lack of full control on our part, and this often leads to the desperate commitment of dreadful acts. And even the mildly pleasant conditions dissapoint in not lasting. Not a pretty picture, is it? But where lies the flaw? Is it that all conditions have evil essence? Certainly not. They are just what they are, some pleasant, some neutral, some unpleasant, as they strike us, depending on changing circumstances. The flaw is in us. The dukkha is in us, in our defiled, confused, reactive nature, a nature, which like all conditions, is, happily, subject to change. Not only is there dukkha - there is also its cause, and, because it is caused and not intrinsic, there is an escape from it, and that escape is the Buddha's path. To escape the prison of dukkha, we must first be able to see fully and clearly the extent of our imprisonment. We need to see that even when the incarceration is mild, it is still a prison cell we occupy. The irony is that the cell door is wide open, but we are too drugged to simply walk out. Another irony is that the very recognition of our dukkhic state, necessary for our release, may throw us into a state of despair. We may then, reactively grasp onto the false and extreme notion that nothing but total annihilation of experience of all sorts is the only remedy, because the realm of conditions is inherently flawed. But this is the opposite error to thinking that lasting happiness is to be found in condtions themselves. Lasting happiness, including the most joyful appreciation of life in all its aspects, comes not from pushing away of conditions, not from running from conditions and annihilating all of them, but from a very specialized annihilation - the annihilation of the three poisons: our spiritual blindness of defiled cognition, our craving, and our aversion. Their cessation marks the realization of nibbana, the end, the absolute end, of dukkha - the complete and pemanent removal of all flaws. 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) 17810 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:59am Subject: Contemplating Aging ([dsg] Re: Take Care of Yourself) Hi Christine, How did you get that impression? Metta, Victor > Victor, from your current remarks, (and previous posts on this > subject):""There is nothing wrong with being aware of yourself. Note > that in the last paragraph of the quote, the Buddha's teaching on > each and > every aggregate being not self is not meant to deny self-awareness." > I still get the impression that you are saying there is 'something' > standing behind and separate from the khandas. Am I misunderstanding > you? > > metta, > Christine 17811 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:02am Subject: Re: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi Howard, I think you understand the characteristic of dukkha rather well. Metta, Victor --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > All conditions/formations are flawed. They are imperfect in that they > are, none of them, of the nature to satisfy. Some cause outright physical and > mental pain to which we react with varying degrees of aversion, and, in some > cases, we commit the most terrible and disturbing actions to flee from them. > Others are neutral in feeling, from which arises boredom, loss of attention, > and confusion. Still others range from mildly to enormously pleasant. Of > these, the moderately to enormously pleasant are met with craving that is > often compulsive, disturbing, and leads to a slavish attachment that is > thwarted by impermanence and lack of full control on our part, and this often > leads to the desperate commitment of dreadful acts. And even the mildly > pleasant conditions dissapoint in not lasting. Not a pretty picture, is it? > But where lies the flaw? Is it that all conditions have evil essence? > Certainly not. They are just what they are, some pleasant, some neutral, some > unpleasant, as they strike us, depending on changing circumstances. The flaw > is in us. The dukkha is in us, in our defiled, confused, reactive nature, a > nature, which like all conditions, is, happily, subject to change. Not only > is there dukkha - there is also its cause, and, because it is caused and not > intrinsic, there is an escape from it, and that escape is the Buddha's path. > To escape the prison of dukkha, we must first be able to see fully and > clearly the extent of our imprisonment. We need to see that even when the > incarceration is mild, it is still a prison cell we occupy. The irony is that > the cell door is wide open, but we are too drugged to simply walk out. > Another irony is that the very recognition of our dukkhic state, > necessary for our release, may throw us into a state of despair. We may then, > reactively grasp onto the false and extreme notion that nothing but total > annihilation of experience of all sorts is the only remedy, because the realm > of conditions is inherently flawed. But this is the opposite error to > thinking that lasting happiness is to be found in condtions themselves. > Lasting happiness, including the most joyful appreciation of life in all its > aspects, comes not from pushing away of conditions, not from running from > conditions and annihilating all of them, but from a very specialized > annihilation - the annihilation of the three poisons: our spiritual blindness > of defiled cognition, our craving, and our aversion. Their cessation marks > the realization of nibbana, the end, the absolute end, of dukkha - the > complete and pemanent removal of all flaws. > > With metta, > Howard 17812 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dukkha as Flaw (A Pep Talk! ;-) Hi, Victor - In a message dated 12/16/02 12:04:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I think you understand the characteristic of dukkha rather well. > > Metta, > Victor > > ======================= Thanks, Victor. (Hey, so does that make me "one for three"? ;-)) 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) 17813 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:27pm Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Ajahn Paul, The book was prepared in Penang. I have sent a letter to Penang asking for a copy to be sent to me. No reply yet. I will be following up with a phone call next week. Metta, Rob M :-) --- "ajahn_paul " wrote: > Hi Rob, > > i know,,, i would like to have a x'mas gift too,,,, where is my > book?! ^_~ > > --- "robmoult " > wrote: > > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > > > I have two sons; eight and twelve. They go to Buddhist Sunday > School > > each week, but they sure love to get presents and decorate the > > Christmas tree. My wife and I certainly don't treat Christmas as a > > religious holiday, but we do use this occasion to explain a bit to > > our kids about Christian beliefs. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) 17814 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Robert (and All); Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to say about this. --- "rjkjp1 " wrote: > How do you reconcile "that > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with the > Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > " Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, 3. > Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > Seasonal conditions is utu. I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point and then return to the topic of rupa. In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball of Honey) MN18: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less known." I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that they are not in the Tipitaka. Why is this so? In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope of His teachings: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta. My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our guideline as to our focus. Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my effort to minimize pananca. I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. Metta, Rob M :-) 17815 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 2:42pm Subject: Re: Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Rob M, I think it is a well articulated post. Indeed, a lot of discussion on the citta process struck me as pseudo-scientific. Metta, Victor --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Robert (and All); > > Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to > say about this. > > --- "rjkjp1 " > wrote: > > How do you reconcile "that > > consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with > the > > Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > > http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > > " Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, > 3. > > Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > > Seasonal conditions is utu. > > I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create > rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. > > I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite > interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called > the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point > and then return to the topic of rupa. > > In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to > describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball > of Honey) MN18: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html > > "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there > is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What > one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & > categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." > > The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the > Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven > volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not > part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - > Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, > as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes > of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, > votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms > is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the > Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice > briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less > known." > > I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he > able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty > pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) > not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", > another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not > found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the > Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in > commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that > they are not in the Tipitaka. > > Why is this so? > > In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope > of His teachings: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by > me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This > is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path > of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. > And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with > the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to > disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, > self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, > Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, > and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." > > The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... > that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In > other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the > best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To > show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the > mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu > explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. > > The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide > a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in > delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the > Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada > Sutta. > > My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete > ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough > and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike > papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- > vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions > which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential > to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one > to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act > as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to > focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. > > Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of > rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according > to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does > not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in > Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the > pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. > > Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying > the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and > Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to > teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature > for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember > the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our > guideline as to our focus. > > Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the > memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear > with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is > seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my > Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the > list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the > students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my > effort to minimize pananca. > > I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17816 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 11:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Rob - You ask for comments at the end of this post. I have one: I have learned much from it, and I am saving it! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 5:20:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Robert (and All); > > Sorry for the delay in responding to this post. I've got a lot to > say about this. > > --- "rjkjp1 " > wrote: > >How do you reconcile "that > >consciousness it is a necessary condition for rupa to arise " with > the > >Abhidhammamatthasangaha: > >http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_6.htm > >" Material phenomena arise in four ways, viz: 1. Kamma, 2. Mind, > 3. > >Seasonal Conditions, and 4. Food." > >Seasonal conditions is utu. > > I don't see any conflict. Kamma / citta / utu / oja are what create > rupa and consciousness is a necessary condition for rupa to arise. > > I am going to make an observation here which I think is quite > interesting. I will use the citta-process (formerly called > the "thought process" until Sarah put me right :-) ) to make a point > and then return to the topic of rupa. > > In my limited reading of the Suttas, the closest the Buddha came to > describing the citta-process was in the Madhupindika Sutta (The Ball > of Honey) MN18: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn018.html > > "Dependent on eye &forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there > is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What > one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & > categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > present, &future forms cognizable via the eye." > > The citta-process (17 cittas in a row) was never laid down by the > Buddha in the Suttas. The citta-process is not even in the seven > volumes of the Abhidhamma. In other words, the citta-process is not > part of the Tipitaka. According to Nyanatiloka (Buddhist Dictionary - > Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines - Appendix), "citta-vithi, > as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes > of consciousness, such as avajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santirana, > votthapana, javana, tadarammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms > is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the > Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice > briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less > known." > > I have incredible admiration for Acariya Anuruddha. Not only was he > able to condense seven thick volumes of the Abhidhamma into fifty > pages, but he also added a significant new material (citta-process) > not found in the original. I believe that "paramattha dhamma", > another critical term in the Abhidhammatthasangaha, is also not > found in the Suttas nor in the original seven volumes of the > Abhidhamma. Citta-vithi, paramattha may have appeared in > commentarial literature prior to Anuruddha, but my point is that > they are not in the Tipitaka. > > Why is this so? > > In the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha clearly defined the scope > of His teachings: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn063.html > > "And what is disclosed by me? 'This is stress,' is disclosed by > me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This > is the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. 'This is the path > of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is disclosed by me. > And why are they disclosed by me? Because they are connected with > the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to > disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, > self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are disclosed by me. So, > Malunkyaputta, remember what is undisclosed by me as undisclosed, > and what is disclosed by me as disclosed." > > The Buddha made it clear; he taught about the four Noble Truths... > that which was conducive to the holy life and led one to Nibbana. In > other recent posts, I have called this "Ethics" (perhaps not the > best name). So why did the Buddha deliver the Madhupindika Sutta? To > show how papanca (conceptual proliferation) arises to cloud the > mind. In his commentary to the Sutta above, Thanissaro Bhikkhu > explains how papanca arises from a lack of understanding anatta. > > The Buddha did not deliver the Madhupindika Sutta to provide > a "scientific" roadmap of the citta process. The objective in > delivering the Madhupindika Sutta was clearly in line with the > Buddha's stated objectives as laid out in the Cula-Malunkyovada > Sutta. > > My suspicion is that, though the Tipitaka provides a complete > ethical system, later thinkers did not find it "scientific" enough > and felt the need to add a layer of "pseudo-science" (not unlike > papanca) on top of the ethical base found in the Tipitaka. Citta- > vithi, paramattha and a host of other ideas were later additions > which were not taught by the Buddha because they are not essential > to the Four Noble Truths, conducive to the holy life and leading one > to Nibbana. One might also say that these mental proliferations act > as a distraction, clouding the mind so that it is more difficult to > focus on the ethical aspects of the Teaching. > > Our discussion on rupas falls into this category. The origin of > rupas (kamma / citta / utu / oja) and the classification according > to characteristic / function / manifestation / proximate cause does > not appear in the Tipitaka. I believe that it first arises in > Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga. In other words, it is part of the > pseudo-scientific, pananca-like, commentarial literature. > > Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying > the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and > Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to > teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature > for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember > the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our > guideline as to our focus. > > Our focus in studying the citta-process should not be so much in the > memorizing of the names of the cittas, the cetasikas which appear > with each citta, etc. but focusing more on the fact that there is > seeing but there is no seer (the citta process is empty). In my > Abhidhamma class, I will continue to teach the citta vithi and the > list of cetasikas in each citta; but I will constantly remind the > students of why we are studying this stuff. This is part of my > effort to minimize pananca. > > I appreciate feedback / comments from all DSG members. > > Metta, > 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) 17817 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > I hope you don't let this > conversation preempt the one you started with Howard. Basically I think > I am on a different track from the one you guys are taking. I agree that the Rob-Larry discussion, the Rob-Howard discussion and the Howard-Larry discussion are quite distinct. > > I wrote, "In my opinion kamma must reach from javana, through vipaka and > subsequent remembering of accumulations to the next javana and must > necessarily include the object of vipaka." > > What I am proposing is a full circle from javana to javana. Javana > intentionality results in a value free result but in order for good > intentions to reap good results the vipaka (value free result) must be > experienced as good. In order for that to happen, accumulations must > arise, cued by the vipaka (if not remembered). These accumulations must > then elicit a reaction (in this case favorable) to the vipaka. I am > calling this reaction another javana series. So there is a causal javana > and a resultant javana all part of the same kammic process. Do you still > think this is correct? I'm not sure. I just looked down and saw a pencil on the writing desk. Seeing a pencil arose because of conditions and vipaka. The accumulations which arose conditioned by this vipaka were moha-mula (I did not see things as they really are, "visible object", so it cannot have been kusala. I felt no attachment nor any aversion, so it was moha-mula). What kind of past kamma arose into a vipaka to allow me to see the pencil (i.e. kusala / akusla)? Impossible for anybody but a Buddha to know. "Good intentions to reaping good results" is conventional language; in Abhidhamma terms, results are never "good" or "bad". In a previous life, I studied the Dhamma (good intentions, kusala javana cittas creating "seeds" ready to develop into vipaka when conditions are right; again I emphasize that the vipaka would be called "kusala vipaka" simply because it arose from a kusala javana citta, not because of any intrinsic "goodness" in the vipaka). So in this life, among the gazillion seeds awaiting an opportunity to develop, are those "seeds" created by my past life studying of the Dhamma. Those past life kusala javana cittas did two things; created "seeds" (as discussed in the past paragraph) and they also supported an accumulation / tendency / habit of appreciating the Dhamma. This accumulation could have been developing over countless numbers of lifetimes. As a young teenager, I started developing my "own" philosophy. I spent a few years trying to discover what *I* thought. One evening, my girlfriend's father (a Christian minister) asked me about my personal philosophy. I expained in detail what I had spent years thinking about. After listening patiently for two hours, the father said, "What you have explained is Buddhism; different terminology, but essentially Buddhism." I reacted with shock, "I don't believe it! I have never studied anything about Buddhism. I find it hard to believe that independently, I could come up with one of the world's major religions." I went to the library, picked up a book on Buddhism and was shocked with what I read. Exact parallels to my "personal" philosophy. Now I understand what happened. I have a "deep accumulation" to the Dhamma, undoubtedly built up over one or more past lives. With such deep accumulation, I naturally saw situations of my young life in a way that mirrored the Dhamma. It is true that everything that happens to us is the ripening of a seed from a past action into a current vipaka. However, do not underestimate the incredible importance of accumulations or the critical role played by conditions. These three things together steer our lives. I am concerned that your javana -> vipaka -> javana circle oversimplifies the importance of accumulations and the role of conditions. > > I came up with this scenario as a way of explaining ethical behavior in > terms of citta process. Assuming you don't agree with it, how do you > explain ethical behavior (good intentions reap good results) in terms of > javana and vipaka? > How about: 1. Good intentions -> "seed for future vipaka" (not inherently good or bad) 2. Good intentions -> good accumulations 3. Conditions + "seed for future vipaka" -> current situation 4. Current situation + good accumulations -> good intentions 1 and 2 are past, 3 is present and 4 is future. (hey! this might be able to be explained in terms of paticca-samuppada! Let me think about this :-) ) > The business about vipaka including the object of the vipaka citta is, > for me, a doorway to the universe of physical objects outside the body. > A sense organ is a door and something external passes through that door > and becomes internal. A chunk of hardness doesn't interrupt the bhavanga > stream and sit there while 17 cittas react to it. Rather, some thing > that is hard touches the sensitive matter at the sense door. That > sensitive matter converts that input into something cittas can interact > with. This whatever-it-is is what interrupts the bhavanga and what 17 > cittas react to. This is obviously something I made up as a way of > explaining what is going on at the sense doors. How do you see it? I think that we are on the same page here. 1. Rupa arises - this occurs during the past bhavanga citta 2. The presence of rupa establishes a sympatheic vibration in the stream of bhavanga - this occurs during the vibrating bhavanga citta 3. It takes the duration of one more citta to cut off the flow of bhavanga citta - this is the arresting citta 4. The five sense door adverting citta redirects the flow to the appropriate sense door; the object of this citta is the rupa, even though the rupa has not been experienced yet. 5. The sense door consciousness citta contacts the rupa. This is the only citta in the citta-process where the rupa is contacted. All other cittas in the citta-process have heart-base; this is the only citta in the citta-process with some other rupa as a base. 6. The receiving / investigating / determining / javana / registration cittas all perform their function with the object (not the rupa itself, because the rupa was only contacted at the sense door consciousness citta). This is what you called "the something that the cittas can interact with" in your message. Larry, I hope that you feel that we are progressing. Others, please let me know if I have misrepresented somethin. Metta, Rob M :-) 17818 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, Let me summarize: 1. You and I have very similar views on rupa 2. You see some form of interaction / interdependency in citta and cetasikas of one "being" and another. I do not see any form of interaction / interdependency. 3. Neither you nor I are qualified to discuss Nibbana. I'm okay with this if you are. Metta, Rob M :-) 17819 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 0:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 8:16:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Let me summarize: > 1. You and I have very similar views on rupa > 2. You see some form of interaction / interdependency in citta and > cetasikas of one "being" and another. I do not see any form of > interaction / interdependency. > 3. Neither you nor I are qualified to discuss Nibbana. > > I'm okay with this if you are. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ======================== Sounds cool! ;-) [Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our "worlds of experience"?] 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) 17820 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi again, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 8:28:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our > "worlds of experience"? ================================ Just to clarify: As we interact, (and, of course, we do), how does "your" kamma condition arising of rupa in "my" world of experience? Either there is a self-existent outside world that we are both parts of (this being the normal, everyday, basically objectivist and materialist understanding of most people), or, somehow, your kamma impacts my mindstream, and mine impacts yours. What do you say? 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) 17821 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap between our > "worlds of experience"? Citta in your mind creates a rupa (body intimation / vocal intimation). This intimation rupa becomes a condition which directly or indirectly allows one of my vipaka seed to mature into a vipaka (my current situation). From there, my accumulations take over to work with the condition and the vipaka to cause my response to arise. In my opinion, the interaction between "your citta and cetasika" and "my citta and cetasika" is indirect; it happens because "you create conditions" (at least from my perspective). Metta, Rob M :-) 17822 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi again Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Just to clarify: As we interact, (and, of course, we do), how does > "your" kamma condition arising of rupa in "my" world of experience? Either > there is a self-existent outside world that we are both parts of (this being > the normal, everyday, basically objectivist and materialist understanding of > most people), or, somehow, your kamma impacts my mindstream, and mine impacts > yours. What do you say? Yes, my citta (not kamma) causes body intimation / vocal intimation to arise which is then a condition for you (and visa-versa). From an "ethical" (internal) perspective, rupa exists (because it impinged on my senses). From an "ethical" (internal) perspective, how it got there is not on my radar screen. Only when I take a "scientific" perspective do I get tangled up in the outside world. It is only in the scientific perspective that the origin of that rupa is relevant. Metta, Rob M :-) 17823 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/16/02 9:14:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Just one question though: Are we interacting now? If > >yes, then how is that happening? Must there not be an overlap > between our > >"worlds of experience"? > > Citta in your mind creates a rupa (body intimation / vocal > intimation). > > This intimation rupa becomes a condition which directly or > indirectly allows one of my vipaka seed to mature into a vipaka (my > current situation). From there, my accumulations take over to work > with the condition and the vipaka to cause my response to arise. > > In my opinion, the interaction between "your citta and cetasika" > and "my citta and cetasika" is indirect; it happens because "you > create conditions" (at least from my perspective). > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can see that our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka condition the ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact point. P erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In any case, there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I claim. 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) 17824 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:28pm Subject: Mara No More Hello All, Well, I got to the bottom of the `Mara Visitations' I was having. I went to see an expert meditation monk here in Phoenix, a personal friend of Thich Nhat Hahn (and he is traveling this month to France to see him at Plum Village for the yearly retreat), and I told him of my recent experiences. He and I meet frequently to discuss points of Buddhism but I don't consider his temple mine since he is Mahayana (http://aztec.asu.edu/worship/buddhist/sked.htm). He knew immediately the cause (I am very lucky to have access to such great teachers). He told me that they were meditation visions; which is seeing and hearing things during meditation that seem very real and can become a hindrance to progress. I told him that I wasn't meditating at the times I had the experiences, I was just thinking about anatta. He told me that I must have the kind of mind that goes into a deep meditative state just from thinking about dharma concepts (as I already knew about myself). I knew about meditation visions but had not expected them to occur during daily activities. Now that I know the cause, I don't suspect that they will bother me for much longer. We also had a very interesting, intense discussion for about three hours about Abhidhamma, anatta, consciousness, rupas, and emptiness and how these concepts compare and contrast between Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism. I could detail some of the gist of the conversation but that could be interpreted as off-topic for this list. Anyway, Mara of the sensual realm hasn't really visited me. It seems the Mara of my clinging ego wants me to stop with this whole `anatta business'. Metta, James 17825 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:35pm Subject: Re: Mara No More Hi James, I am sincerely happy for you. I have heard that meditation visions can be dangerous. Metta, Rob M :-) 17826 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can see that > our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the > point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka condition the > ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact point. P > erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is > conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In any case, > there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I claim. > I see the interaction of streams as extremely indirect. Your citta causes your hand to move to type a message; goodness knows how many other things were conditioned (electrons moving in your computer, across the Internet and in my computer) before an image (visible object) appeared on my screen. As an "ethical phenomenologist", I only want to focus on direct interactions. Once I start accepting "indirect" and "indirect- indirect" and "indirect-indirect-indirect", I start down a slippery slope that leads to a non-phenomenological (and therefore outside of the scope of ethics) perspective. Metta, Rob M :-) 17827 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - Okay. I'm seeing this matter a bit more clearly, I think. Our phenomenological understandings are similar. The main difference is that you are what you call an "ethical phenomenologist", whereas I am what might be called an "ontological phenomenologist", or a "phenomenalist", or, with William James, a "radical empiricist". [I believe that your position of ethical phenomenology is based on the view that this is what is relevant to liberation (a sentiment I share), but, ontologically, I'm not sure what your position is - I think it is a hybrid one.] With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 9:43:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Okay. We're getting much closer in understanding, and I can > see that > >our positions may be quite close. One question: Where is the > >point-of-contact? How does the rupa that is my kamma vipaka > condition the > >ripening of a kammic seed of yours? Perhaps there is no contact > point. P > >erhaps there is stream to stream conditioning, just as there is > >conditioning-at-a-distance within a single stream. That's fine. In > any case, > >there is stream-to-stream interaction. That's about all that I > claim. > > > > I see the interaction of streams as extremely indirect. Your citta > causes your hand to move to type a message; goodness knows how many > other things were conditioned (electrons moving in your computer, > across the Internet and in my computer) before an image (visible > object) appeared on my screen. > > As an "ethical phenomenologist", I only want to focus on direct > interactions. Once I start accepting "indirect" and "indirect- > indirect" and "indirect-indirect-indirect", I start down a slippery > slope that leads to a non-phenomenological (and therefore outside of > the scope of ethics) perspective. > > Metta, > 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) 17828 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:09pm Subject: Re: Mara No More --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi James, > > I am sincerely happy for you. I have heard that meditation visions > can be dangerous. (Yea! They scared the holy crap outta me! :-) But they are only dangerous if you attach to them and believe that they are real or significant. I was doing that, not knowing that they were coming from meditative states of mind, and so they were getting worse. Now that I know what they are, I know what to do. I am 100% positive they will stop. I just knew one thing for sure--I wasn't crazy.) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Metta, James 17829 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob - > > Okay. I'm seeing this matter a bit more clearly, I think. Our > phenomenological understandings are similar. The main difference is that you > are what you call an "ethical phenomenologist", whereas I am what might be > called an "ontological phenomenologist", or a "phenomenalist", or, with > William James, a "radical empiricist". [I believe that your position of > ethical phenomenology is based on the view that this is what is relevant to > liberation (a sentiment I share), but, ontologically, I'm not sure what your > position is - I think it is a hybrid one.] When it comes to questions touching ethics (i.e. Buddhism), the only things on my radar screen are things that touch my mind. This is because I see ethics as being mind-based: "Mind is the forerunner of all evil states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with wicked mind, suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. Mind is the forerunner of (all good) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with pure mind, affection follows one, even as one's shadow that never leaves." When it comes to non-ethics issues (I am an engineer by training), I no longer am a phenomenologist. I see non-ethics issues as not involving the mind. Metta, Rob M :-) 17830 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, I agree the javana/vipaka relationship doesn't appear to support the idea "good intentions produce good results". However, I think it should support this idea because that is how I understand buddhist ethics and kamma. Maybe I have it wrong. How do you understand Buddhist ethics and kamma (I'm assuming they go together)? I'm starting to think the resultant javana idea won't work, so here's another: kusala intentions produce pleasant vedana results. Also, is there mind door javana and mind door vipaka, or is kamma only a reaction to rupa? Also, I've loosened up my ideas on what vipaka means. Today's weather probably wasn't due to a specific javana series in my past, but, due to a javana citta at the end of my past life I was born in this time and place and with this genetic make-up. Due to the combination of genes and culture I lived this long and ended up in this place and experienced today's weather. That is one way of explaining how today's weather is the result of a javana citta. Also, of course, my choice to drive a car and use coal produced electricity played a part in global warming and contributed to today's weather. However, since today's weather was pleasant, I must have done something right in the past. Knowing a tiny bit how painful pain can be, I will try to keep a sharp eye out for akusala cittas. Even though I am equipped with a powerful and sophisticated philosophy it is all someone else's wisdom as is the idea kusala cittas produce pleasant vedana. So, I just have to follow my accumulations:))) One slight misunderstanding in your reply. There is a rupa outside a sense door and a rupa inside a sense door. I am contending they are different kinds of phenomena. I asked Howard if I could call the rupa inside a sense door a consciousness, but he said no. So in my email to you I called it a "whatever-it-is". When a rupa touches the sensitive matter of a sense door, it seems to me this sensitive matter converts that input into something that can relate to bhavanga and all the other cittas. This whatever-it-is is not the same stuff as what is outside the sense door touching the sensitive matter. In addition to that, we have no real experience of rupa until sense consciousness arises. This sense consciousness is what we know directly as rupa and it is a different phenomenon from the rupa outside the sense door and the whatever-it-is. So basically, there are three rupas. Howard seemed to think the sense consciousness rupa would be overlaid with concepts but I don't think concepts come into the picture in a major way until the accumulations arise. I'm betting on sanna as being chiefly responsible for concepts and accumulations in general. I like your 4 part kamma progression: 1. Good intentions -> "seed for future vipaka" (not inherently good or bad) 2. Good intentions -> good accumulations 3. Conditions + "seed for future vipaka" -> current situation 4. Current situation + good accumulations -> good intentions L: My only qualm is that we have to say "current situation" is neither good nor bad. We can at least say current situation is pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral, and we can also say current situation is dukkha. Is that enough to satisfy a moral imperative? Larry 17831 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More Hi James, I'm very glad to read your report. It sounds as though this wise monk was just the person to visit and it all makes very good sense. It must have been a really helpful encounter. Thank you for sharing the report. Sarah p.s - I hope you saw my DSG note to you yesterday - it didn't come through on escribe or my inbox even tho' it's there on the website. 17832 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Perfections, Ch 7, no 2 Perfections, Ch 7, no 2 If sati-sampajañña arises, the perfection of patience will become more refined. We need patience and endurance, because akusala citta arises often in daily life. Patience in our daily life is ³adhivåsanå khanti². The Påli word adhivasati means to inhabit (våso is habitation), and adhivåsanå khanti is acceptance and endurance with regard to our living conditions, our environment, the place where we live, thus, the dhamma of each moment. This is, for example, the change of temperature which may be hot or cold. If sati-sampajañña does not arise, we may say, ³It is very hot², and then there is likely to be already akusala citta. If sati-sampajañña has become more refined, we can find out whether our patience in action and speech with regard to our environment is deficient or whether it has grown and developed. There is khanti påramí, the perfection of patience, when sati-sampajañña arises and knows the characteristic of the citta at that moment. If sati-sampajañña knows that there is akusala citta there are conditions for the arising of kusala citta instead. If patience is developed, someone who was in the habit of complaining can refrain from it, and someone who usually was bad-tempered can understand that this is useless. If someone dislikes particular objects, he can understand that this is akusala which does not serve any purpose at all and then sati-sampajañña can arise so that the perfection of patience can further develop. In daily life we need a great deal of patience, because apart from endurance with regard to our environment or living conditions, we have to be patient and tolerant towards people with different characters and habits. Some people are in the habit of doing everything quickly, and they should be patient with people who are slow in their actions. We may meet someone who is of contrarious behaviour, but we should be patient and tolerant towards him and not complain about him. If sati-sampajañña arises there are conditions to refrain from critizing or blaming such a person, to think with mettå of giving him guidance, support and advice at the appropriate occasion. Thus we see that the perfection of khanti should not be lacking in our daily life. There should be patience and endurance in our manners and behaviour. For example, when people travel together there are bound to be difficulties as regards seats and sleeping places, the means of transportation and appointments. When someone does not complain and does not criticize, and when he has sympathetic understanding and assists others, his fellowmen will approve of him and praise him. We should know that akusala dhammas, including lobha and dosa, cannot endure, but only sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas can endure. When we see someone who is impeccable in action, speech and thinking, we know that he has endurance with regard to the different situations and events that occur, because his sobhana cetasikas have been developed. There is no being, person or self, but only sobhana cetasikas which develop when kusala citta arises. However, when patience is lacking akusala citta arises. ****** 17833 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Jon and Steve, There is a great deal on aspects of nibbana in the Book of Analysis, Ch 4, Analysis of Truth. See the truth of cessation. Considering these aspects helps us to understand a little more about the nature of nibbana. It is good to study Num's post on the Path of Discrimination 6, giving several aspects, like animitta, not nimitta which is conditioned dhamma. One aspect that may interest some who believe nibbana is a higher kind of consciousness: the Truth of cessation has no object. And: the Truth of cessation is not coexistent with consciousness. Nina op 16-12-2002 01:03 schreef jonoabb op jonoabb@y...: > --- Bodhi2500@a... wrote: > ... >> Does anyone know what the Abhidhamma states as Nibbana's own >> charateristics(sabhava??)? 17834 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 3:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan Hi, Rob - Great! Crystal clear!! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/16/02 10:36:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > When it comes to questions touching ethics (i.e. Buddhism), the only > things on my radar screen are things that touch my mind. This is > because I see ethics as being mind-based: > > "Mind is the forerunner of all evil states. Mind is chief; mind-made > are they. If one speaks or acts with wicked mind, suffering follows > one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. Mind is > the forerunner of (all good) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are > they. If one speaks or acts with pure mind, affection follows one, > even as one's shadow that never leaves." > > When it comes to non-ethics issues (I am an engineer by training), I > no longer am a phenomenologist. I see non-ethics issues as not > involving the mind. > > Metta, > 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) 17835 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Maybe a little message to help things along Dear Dion, Others have added comments to your post and welcomed you on here. For any newcomers to DSG, I think it must be very confusing and frustrating in the beginning when one doesn’t ‘know’ any of the people or understand any of the threads of discussion, some of which go back a long way. Please be patient and don’t give up! A few tips: 1. Don’t try to read everything in the beginning - just select threads which seem relevant to you or can easily be understood. 2. Start your own threads - ask (polite) questions about topics which seem more relevant to your practice. 3. Refer to the Pali glossary -print it out to have next to the computer: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Glossary_of_pali_terms 4. Refer to Useful Posts and in particular, posts under ‘New to the list...’ .,’Abhidhamma -New...’ and ‘Pali’ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 5. If you’re getting confused by all the names and the different Robs - look at the photo section under photos on the left of the home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup (also if any new members post their photos, we’d all appreciate it ) 6. Feel free to ask for help or clarification anytime. There is a lot of goodwill and a large number of members who are always willing to help out. Everyone has been new to the list at sometime or other;-) ***** Hope you find your stay useful and enjoyable. Sarah ===== p.s Nina is now getting her mail, so I think anyone can now write to her on list (it seems her inbox was full - she may have received a large document). One of the first messages she got was yours, Dion. She laughed about ‘that Nina person’ and now refers to herself in that way;-). She also stresses that no one needs to read or like any of her books - we can all just choose what we find helpful. She looks forward to hearing more people talk about ‘experiences in life’ and to more friendships with you and others. ***** 17836 From: James Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More --- Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > I'm very glad to read your report. It sounds as though this wise monk was > just the person to visit and it all makes very good sense. It must have > been a really helpful encounter. > > Thank you for sharing the report. > > Sarah > > p.s - I hope you saw my DSG note to you yesterday - it didn't come through > on escribe or my inbox even tho' it's there on the website. Dear Sarah, Oh, no, I had missed that post. I skipped a lot of posts I thought were unrelated to me and yours was buried. I think you had a problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. Here are the defilements: 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed 2. byapada, ill will 3. kodha, anger 4. upanaha, hostility or malice 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt 6. palasa, domineering or presumption 7. issa, envy 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit 10. satheyya, fraud 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity 13. mana, conceit 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness 15. mada, vanity or pride 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this leads to lack of consideration. Here is the sutta where the Buddha proclaims that they are only abondoned "in part" by aryians: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn007.html Please don't ask me to prove more. This makes me very uncomfortable to even prove this much. I don't like to focus on what can't be done; I like to focus on what can be done. But the goal should be reasonable and not based on 'wishful fantasy'. I am not sure what the Abhidhamma says in regards to this issue. I don't believe/follow the Abhidhamma. Metta, James 17837 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness? Dear Nina, Steve & Jon, I just posted before I saw yr messages;-) --- nilo@e... wrote: > Jon and Steve, > There is a great deal on aspects of nibbana in the Book of Analysis, Ch > 4, > Analysis of Truth. See the truth of cessation. Considering these aspects > helps us to understand a little more about the nature of nibbana. .... We also had some discussion before on sabhava and nibbana (there will be more quotes from texts in U.P. under 'sabhava' or 'nibbana' on this). There is a lot of detail in a couple of footnotes in Vism (BPS), esp V111, n68, p.789. One quote from it: "Of nibbana (for which see XV1, 46ff), which has its own individual essence, the Mula Tika says: 'Nibbana is not like other dhammas; because of its extreme profundity it cannot be made an object of consciousness (aalambitu.m) by one who has not realized it. that is why it has to be realized by change-of-lineage. it has profundity surpasing any individual essence belonging to the three periods of time' (VbhAA.38)." ***** Sarah ====== 17838 From: Date: Mon Dec 16, 2002 9:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Rob, My main response is that people who are only interested in what the Buddha himself said are people who don't talk to other people about buddhadhamma. And what do you mean by pseudo science? They got it wrong? If so, how should it go? Here is a snippet from the introduction to "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma": While it is tempting to try to discern evidence of historical development in the Commentaries over and beyond the ideas imbedded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, it is risky to push this line too far, for a great deal of the canonical Abhidhamma seems to require the Commentaries to contribute the unifying context in which the individual elements hang together as parts of a systematic whole and without which they lose important dimensions of meaning. It is thus not unreasonable to assume that a substantial portion of the commentarial apparatus originated in close proximity to the canonical Abhidhamma and was transmitted concurrently with the latter; though lacking the stamp of finality it was open to modification and amplification in a way that the canonical texts were not. Bearing this in mind, we might briefly note a few of the Abhidhammic conceptions that are characteristic of the Commentaries but either unknown or recessive in the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself. L: It then lists citta process, "moment" for "occasion", arising, presense, and dissolusion of a moment, kalapa as a way of organizing material phenomena, heart base, a limited number of cetasikas, intrinsic nature, and the defining device of characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause. It doesn't attribute any of these concepts to Acariya Anuruddha. The CMA is a manual for beginners, not a commentary. Its usefulness is very much a matter of accumulations and javana cittas, but I would say it has survived the test of time, so far. Larry 17839 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > My main response is that people who are only interested in what the > Buddha himself said are people who don't talk to other people about > buddhadhamma. And what do you mean by pseudo science? They got it wrong? I hope that you are not counting me as one of those "who are only interested in what the Buddha himself said". Here is a key message from my posting: Please don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that we stop studying the commentarial literature. I suspect that Acariya Anuruddha and Buddhaghosa may have been Arahants and they definitely have much to teach us. I am suggesting that we see the commentarial literature for what it is; use it and learn from it but that we should remember the Buddha's words "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind" as our guideline as to our focus. I am not making any comment about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the commentaries. I am commenting that much of what is in the commentaries takes a "scientific view" rather than an "ethical view". A "scientific view" is concerned with creating accurate models of reality and with classifications; these things are not part of "ethics". For example, what if there three javana cittas in a thought process rather than seven; it would change the model but it would have no bearing on ethics. Similarly, if there were really 90 classifications of cittas rather than 89, that would not have any ethical impact either. I call this scientific because it is disconnected from ethics. I added the prefix "pseudo-" because it may not qualify under today's definitions of "science" (i.e. repeatable, measurable results, etc.). I did not mean the term "pseudo-science" to have any negative connotations. Metta, Rob M :-) 17840 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:17am Subject: Going off-line Friends, I will be spending the next few days in cities in China whose names I can't pronounce. My internet access does not extend to these cities, so I will not be able to respond to messages. Please don't think that I am ignoring you... I will reply. Metta, Rob M :-) 17841 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:30am Subject: Reply to James Dear James: Thanks a lot for writing to me in 17230. I certainly agree with you in the letter that when we do wrong things, we should always apologise to people. I am very surprsed that you would use the example of the cartoon Winnie the Pooh. I also agree that we should always be optimistic, so we would enjoy life. Once again, thanks a lot for writing and for your advice. Merry Christmas! Yours sincerely, Philip 17842 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:38am Subject: Samvega and Pasada Dear Group, The anxious and weary feeling that life is pointless and sometimes unbearable, that no matter how happy or enjoyable something is - it's doomed to change and end, an intense desire for things to be different, the irresistable attraction of the Teachings - that's samvega and pasada. Be glad of it, it means hopefully you won't waste this rare human birth on mundane pleasures. Samvega means a sense of urgency to escape the round of meaningless existence; and pasada, a clarity and serene confidence that allows one to proceed confidently towards the goal without lapsing into despair. A modern day cause of Samvega? http://www.antiwar.com/ Affirming the Truths of the Heart - The Buddist teachings on Samvega & Pasada. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/affirming.html Suttas about Samvega: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/affirming.html Samyutta Nikaya III.25 Pabbatopama Sutta 'The Simile of the Mountains' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn03-025.htmlSutta Nipata II.10 Utthana Sutta 'On Vigilance' http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5354/snp2-10.htm Anguttara Nikaya III.91 Accayika Sutta 'Urgent' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-091.html Anguttara Nikaya V.77-80 Anagata-bhayani Suttas 'The Discourses on Future Dangers' (four consecutive suttas) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-077.html#1 And my favourite yet again - sorry, but there's no link - I just think this translation is much more elegant than the one at ATI. Majjhima Nikaya 131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta 'A Single Excellent Night' (Bhikkhus Nanomoli and Bodhi trans.) "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, But one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night." metta, Christine 17843 From: ajahn_paul Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:21am Subject: Re: May the Force be with you, Obi-Wan thx Rob! ^_~ --- "robmoult " wrote: > Hi Ajahn Paul, > > The book was prepared in Penang. I have sent a letter to Penang > asking for a copy to be sent to me. No reply yet. I will be > following up with a phone call next week. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17844 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 4:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More Hi James From the Bloodstream Sermon of Bodhidharma: >>Everything that appears in the three realms comes from the mind. Hence Buddhas of the past and future teach mind to mind without bothering about definitions. Student: But if they don't define it, what do they mean by mind? Bodhidharma: You ask. That's your mind. I answer. That's my mind. If I had no mind how could I answer? If you had no mind, how could you ask? That which asks is your mind. Through endless kalpas" without beginning, whatever you do, wherever you are, that's your real mind, that's your real buddha. This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll never find another Buddha. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible. The reality of your own self-nature the absence of cause and effect, is what's meant by mind. Your mind is nirvana. You might think you can find a Buddha or enlightenment somewhere beyond the mind', but such a place doesn't exist.Trying to find a Buddha or enlightenment is like trying to grab space. Space has a name but no form. It's not something you can pick up or put down. And you certainly can't grab if. Beyond mind you'll never see a Buddha. The Buddha is a product of the mind. Why look for a Buddha beyond this mind? Buddhas of the past and future only talk about this mind. The mind is the Buddha, and the Buddha is the mind. Beyond the mind there's no Buddha and beyond the Buddha there's no mind. If you think there is a Buddha beyond the mind', where is he? There's no Buddha beyond the mind, so why envision one? You can't know your real mind as long as you deceive yourself. As long as you're enthralled by a lifeless form, you're not free. If you don't believe me, deceiving yourself won't help. It's not the Buddha's fault. People, though, are deluded. They're unaware that their own mind is the Buddha. Otherwise they wouldn't look for a Buddha outside the mind. Buddhas don't save Buddhas. If you use your mind to look for a Buddha, you won't see the Buddha. As long as you look for a Buddha somewhere else, you'll never see that your own mind is the Buddha. Don't use a Buddha to worship a Buddha. And don't use the mind to invoke a Buddha." Buddhas don't recite sutras." Buddhas don't keep precepts." And Buddhas don't break precepts. Buddhas don't keep or break anything. Buddhas don't do good or evil. To find a Buddha, you have to see your nature." Whoever sees his nature is a Buddha. If you don't see your nature, invoking Buddhas, reciting sutras, making offerings, and keeping precepts are all useless. Invoking Buddhas results in good karma, reciting sutras results in a good memory; keeping precepts results in a good rebirth, and making offerings results in future blessings-but no buddha. If you don't understand by yourself, you'll have to find a teacher to get to the bottom of life and death. But unless he sees his nature, such a person isn't a tea6er. Even if he can recite the Twelvefold Canon he can't escape the Wheel of Birth and Death. He suffers in the three realms without hope of release. Long ago, the monk Good Star 21 was able to recite the entire Canon. But he didn't escape the Wheel, because he didn't see his nature. If this was the case with Good Star, then people nowadays who recite a few sutras or shastras and think it's the Dharma are fools. Unless you see your mind, reciting so much prose is useless.<< James: "I think you had a problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. Here are the defilements: 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed 2. byapada, ill will 3. kodha, anger 4. upanaha, hostility or malice 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt 6. palasa, domineering or presumption 7. issa, envy 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit 10. satheyya, fraud 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity 13. mana, conceit 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness 15. mada, vanity or pride 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this leads to lack of consideration." Peace, David 17845 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some interesting comments on Ethical View vs. Scientific View Hi, Larry (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/17/02 12:59:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > ... Bearing this in mind, we might briefly > note a few of the Abhidhammic conceptions that are characteristic of the > Commentaries but either unknown or recessive in the Abhidhamma Pitaka > itself. > > L: It then lists citta process, "moment" for "occasion", arising, > presense, and dissolusion of a moment, kalapa as a way of organizing > material phenomena, heart base, a limited number of cetasikas, intrinsic > nature, and the defining device of characteristic, function, > manifestation, and proximate cause. It doesn't attribute any of these > concepts to Acariya Anuruddha. The CMA is a manual for beginners, not a > commentary. Its usefulness is very much a matter of accumulations and > javana cittas, but I would say it has survived the test of time, so far. > > ========================== So you are saying that all these notions provided in the list appear in the commentaries but not in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, itself? If so, I have just felt the cheese become a bit more binding. Included in this list are such troublesome-to-some notions as moments and their phases, kalapas, and intrinsic nature. These notions are among those which lie at the frontier of differentiation between Theravada and Mahayana. [Two things have arisen in me: 1) an increase in caution with regard to the commentaries, and 2) an increase in confidence in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and its origins. But these are just tentative inclinations on my part - nothing firm yet.] I have a copy of the CMA. I look forward to reexamining its introduction. I'm particularly interested in seeing which cetasikas are not included in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. 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) 17846 From: chase8383 Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:01am Subject: Re: Samvega and Pasada Hi Christine Excellent post. You quoted: ""Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, But one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night." When a log burns, it becomes ash. Why worry about how it became ash? It's ash now. When a bird flys from one tree to another, it's in the other tree now. Did it leave a trace as it flew through the air? Is part of it still in the tree it flew from? No, it's just in the tree it flew to. Peace, David 17847 From: Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Going off-line Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/17/02 4:18:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Friends, > > I will be spending the next few days in cities in China whose names > I can't pronounce. My internet access does not extend to these > cities, so I will not be able to respond to messages. > > Please don't think that I am ignoring you... I will reply. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================= Have a wonderful trip, Rob. BTW, I've thoroughly enjoyed our recent exchanges. 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) 17848 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis With due respect, there is suffering kind rgds KC --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, thank you for explaining to all the members this rules. > If I was > a woman, under no circunstances I will humiliate myself to be > treaty that > way. Many times I have to shut and bite my tonge when I see in the > temples > where I go ( this afternoon for example) the Sri Lanka monk is in > SriLanka > so at 5 pm I am conducting by myself the entire ceremony, allthe > men will > kneel in the front and the women at the back. It looks like the > 21st century > has not reach Buddhism. Ven. Yanatharo > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: peterdac4298 > [mailto:peterdac4298@y...] > Enviado el: Domingo, Diciembre 15, 2002 12:21 p.m. > Asunto: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis > > > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > > > > > --- Sarah > wrote: > > > Dear Christine, > > > > > > --- "christine_forsyth " > > > wrote: > Dear Peter, > > > > > > > > On a number of lists (including this one) and over a period > of > > time, > > > > I have found the topic of the Bhikkuni Sangha, and > especially > > the > > > > issue of its Restoration in terms of the original, to be > > > > uncomfortable to many posters. 17849 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis With due respect, I mean this is suffering kind rgds KC --- "ven.yanatharo.bikkhu" wrote: > Dear Peter, thank you for explaining to all the members this rules. > If I was > a woman, under no circunstances I will humiliate myself to be > treaty that > way. Many times I have to shut and bite my tonge when I see in the > temples > where I go ( this afternoon for example) the Sri Lanka monk is in > SriLanka > so at 5 pm I am conducting by myself the entire ceremony, allthe > men will > kneel in the front and the women at the back. It looks like the > 21st century > has not reach Buddhism. Ven. Yanatharo > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: peterdac4298 > [mailto:peterdac4298@y...] > Enviado el: Domingo, Diciembre 15, 2002 12:21 p.m. > Asunto: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis > > > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > > > > > --- Sarah > wrote: 17850 From: nidive Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:57am Subject: Do brahmas experience vipaka? Since brahmas have no five senses, does this mean they don't experience vipaka of any kind? If not, how do they experience vipaka? 17851 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:18am Subject: RE: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? Dear Swee Boon, Only arupa brahmas and a particular rupa brahma doesn't have the 5 senses. The arupa brahmas have vipaka cittas too. The bhavanga cittas interrupting the citta vithis are vipaka. Also, if they reach the supra-mundane path, the supra-mundane fruit is vipaka. Also, if they have meditation on supra-mundane fruit (as an Ariyan), the citta vithi is vipaka. We can't verify any of this, can we? kom > -----Original Message----- > From: nidive [mailto:nidive@y...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:58 AM > Subject: [dsg] Do brahmas experience vipaka? > > > Since brahmas have no five senses, does this mean > they don't > experience vipaka of any kind? If not, how do > they experience vipaka? 17852 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhunis Hi Peter "It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong!" Buddha does not have a blind spot and he has good reasons to do this. He is a man of equality, he has reservation, then there must be very good reason and not discounting that he could see things in the future. As I said before, Buddha is not affected by any norms or culture. I think it is not fair to judge his actions of him putting so much rules on a Bhikkhunis and his actions seems to be of inequality. His rules are not to be changed. For this we have to accept it even though it could be very hard for us bc now we are in the world where all humans have equal rights. It is also wrong for us to do against his rules bc there are very good reasons for him doing that. We are not at his level, so if we need to accept his teachings then we got to accepts his reasons on issues that he don't wish to discuss too much on. Certain norms set by him previously have been changed. The consequences is very damaging to the Sangha world. Take for example the acceptance of money rather than begging in the Chinese customs. What was meant to suite cultural norms at that time but its initial good intention has been corroded and has now becoming a maglinant cancer. If my words are too strong, I am very sorry but this is a truth I have observe. But what to do, even Buddha laws will eventually disappear from this world. Solemn and disheartening but this is the truth. rgds KC --- "peterdac4298 " wrote: > Hi Christine, Sarah, and all > > In my previous post on this thread I used the > expression "intimidating and demeaning" in brief reference to the > original, historic Bhikkhuni Sangha, and how this was absent from > the more democratic Amaravati style DSM Sangha of today. I feel I > aught to expand this so as to avoid any misunderstanding. > > As most of us are aware, at the time of the Buddha, when Ananda > thrice requested the admittance of women to the Sangha, the Buddha > replied in what could be seen by todays standards as rather a > derogatory, if not paranoid manner. > > He spoke about the Sasana lasting only half the time it originally > would have. And also insisted on eight restrictions ('capital > points', ~Naa.namoli) to be imposed on the nuns as a condition for > their admittance. One of which was that a nun of advanced > seniority > would be junior to a monk newly admitted that very day. Another > spoke of Bhikkhunis not being allowed to find fault with Bhikkhus > nor admonish them at all. A Bhikkhuni must never address > discourses > to Bhikkhus, but Bhikkhus may address discourses to Bhikkhunis. In > > the matter of grave offences a Bhikkhuni must do penance before > both > Sanghas. Additionally to these eight capital points, a Bhikkhuni > must be given the admission by both Sanghas (and is why the lineage > > could not be restored once broken: hence the need to find an > unbroken branch elsewhere). > > The Buddha gave his reasons for insisting on these eight conditions > > of acceptance. He unflatteringly likened women in the Sangha to a > rice field being infected by various kinds of fungus or mildew. A > clan with too many women and too few men is vulnerable to robbers > and bandits is likened to the Sangha with women admitted. "...As > a > man might construct in advance an embankment so that the waters of > a > great reservoir should not cause a flood, so I too have made known > in advance these eight cardinal points..." (~Naa.namoli) > > Now this can't be explained as some kind of slip of the tongue, or > even playing to contemporary sensibilities. These are powerful and > > systematic statements. What are we to make of them? The Buddha, > having willingly recognised their equal ability to fully penetrate > and realize the Dhamma, is more than creating an historic precedent > > by granting women the admission. This is virtual revolution by the > > standards of that time. But he goes to great lengths to ensure > that > there is no mistaking his view on female admission. It's always > possible the Buddha, being a mere mortal, had some kind of a blind > spot and got this bit wrong! > > Either way, the Amaravati DSM's evade this whole issue, and seem > quite happy having equal rank with Bhikkhus even though it is only > within the Amaravati Sangha. They enjoy the holy life, exhibit a > mature understanding of the Dhamma and are much sought after for > teaching engagements. > > Cheers > Peter > > --- "christine_forsyth > " wrote: > > Hi Sarah, and all, > > > > You are correct - any discussion of this matter on this list, > > particularly between you and I, has been respectfully conducted. > > > The rest is probably my subjective interpretation. Implacability, > > > though, has been evinced by people taking the 'the scriptures say > > > it's impossible to reinstate' line. e.g. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15646 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15653 > > > > Of great interest to me is this article which states: 'There is > > permission in the Vinaya Chullavagga for monks to ordain nuns." > > and, "the Bhikkhuni Sasana has been revived in Sri Lanka > According > > to full Theravada ceremonial." > > http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/nunorder.htm > > > > > metta, > > > > Christine 17853 From: James Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More --- "chase8383 " wrote: Hi David, What you describe is The Third Gate of the Dharma Seal of Mahayana Buddhism; called 'Wishlessness'. Not only is it off-topic for this list, it is impossible to reach with so much platitudes. Metta, James 17854 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 11:48am Subject: Re: Samvega and Pasada Hi David, You wrote: "When a log burns, it becomes ash. Why worry about how it became ash? It's ash now. When a bird flys from one tree to another, it's in the other tree now. Did it leave a trace as it flew through the air? Is part of it still in the tree it flew from? No, it's just in the tree it flew to. " I agree. But living one's life that way is a little more difficult. Your mention of the bird flying from one tree to another, reminds me of this poem (cut and pasted below) on the Present Moment being all there is. The poem takes a lot longer to say what you did in fewer words. :) Thanks. metta, Christine Excerpts from "Now and Then" June 18, 1995 Each and every morning, first this spring and now this summer, a house wren calls out. He calls out, "I am THIS house wren and this is my house. Stay away." His house is a hole in the wall of the house neighbouring this building. It is a brick wall that faces onto and adjoins the monastery garden. The house wren sits in this hole sometimes, and there he calls out his message. Sometimes, however, he sits amongst the branches and leaves of the sumac tree. Sometimes he sits on the wires. Now he is here and now he's there. When here, it is here, now. When there, it is then. But when "then" was "now," "there" was "here." Whenever anything happens it happens now and "now" IS this "happening." Each moment, when it is THIS moment, is right now. But "then" was once "now" and "right now" tick tick tick is now "then." This moment is not the past moment, not the future moment but in this moment what happens as this moment both shows and hides the past. The bird was "there" and now is "here." The future, however, seems to be utterly hidden. We can have some very small sense of the future, in that, we can know, somewhat, the future completion of the motion of lifting, placing, and setting the foot. But we might die before the foot makes contact with the next stair and go tumbling down. We don't know. We don't know. The future is that hidden. Because it is so hidden from us, we can engage in all manner of speculation. We can lose ourselves in all manner of hopes and fears. We can imagine future glories, or complete and abject failure, or any combination thereof... And so it can seem to us that time moves as past, present and future. Each moment has a past and a future. Each moment is this moment and there is only this moment. But each moment, when it is this moment, is only this moment. And this moment contains within itself past and future. But "past" and "future" only have meaning when measured from this moment; and this moment has no width. It has no depth. There is nothing that is this moment. There is only this presencing, this activity of Experiencing that is happening everywhere right now. ---------------------------- We understand nothing about time because we understand nothing about this moment. --------------------------------- Time is not merely something which "passes." "It is the utter and radical impermanence that makes life possible so that when you breathe in you don't have to hold it forever and ever. You can breathe out. And when you breathe out there is room to breathe in. And this impermanence is so radical that it must be understood not as some thing which happens "to" things but as the activity, the presencing, of Reality." ------------------------------ then, knowing that you don't know what anything is becomes such an open ended questioning that it opens into wonder. And when this wonder is unfolded in each moment of your life, not just your "practice" but your life, when you understand that "practice" is your life, when you are practising your life, then the doubt which became questioning, which became wonder, becomes understanding. http://www.wwzc.org/teisho/wildTime.htm --------------------------------- --- "chase8383 " wrote: > Hi Christine 17855 From: Ray Hendrickson Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 11:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mara No More > Dear Sarah, > > Oh, no, I had missed that post. I skipped a lot of posts I thought > were unrelated to me and yours was buried. I think you had a > problem with my statement that lobha isn't completely abandoned in > Arahants/Buddhas/Silent Buddhas. You state that the suttas say > otherwise and would like proof of my statement. *Sigh* Okay, I did > a quick search and found one telling sutta. I am sure I could find > others but I don't see the point of that. As was already pointed > out in this list, the Buddha had certain 'defilements' in regards to > his view of women, that is proof enough of my statement. But I will > provide more proof since you seem amazed and shocked by my comment. > Here are the defilements: > > 1. abhijjha-visama-lobha, covetousness and unrighteous greed > 2. byapada, ill will > 3. kodha, anger > 4. upanaha, hostility or malice > 5. makkha, denigration or detraction; contempt > 6. palasa, domineering or presumption > 7. issa, envy > 8. macchariya, jealousy, or avarice; selfishness > 9. maya, hypocrisy or deceit > 10. satheyya, fraud > 11. thambha, obstinacy, obduracy > 12. sarambha, presumption or rivalry; impetuosity > 13. mana, conceit > 14. atimana, arrogance, haughtiness > 15. mada, vanity or pride > 16. pamada, negligence or heedlessness; in social behavior, this > leads to lack of consideration. > > Here is the sutta where the Buddha proclaims that they are only > abondoned "in part" by aryians: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn007.html > > Please don't ask me to prove more. This makes me very uncomfortable > to even prove this much. I don't like to focus on what can't be > done; I like to focus on what can be done. But the goal should be > reasonable and not based on 'wishful fantasy'. I am not sure what > the Abhidhamma says in regards to this issue. I don't > believe/follow the Abhidhamma. > > Metta, James Actually I think this Sutta indirectly supports the position that an Arahant does not have any defilements. You will notice in the Sutta that the first sections that talk about giving up the defilements in part have this paragraph before the next section ""He knows: 'I have given up, renounced, let go, abandoned and relinquished [the defilements] in part'; and he gains enthusiasm for the goal, gains enthusiasm for the Dhamma, gains gladness connected with the Dhamma." Now in the notes of the MLD by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi, it states that these sections apply to a once returner, based on the defilements talked about. But you will notice that towards the end of the Sutta after talking about developing the brahmavihara there is this: "13. "He understands what exists, what is low, what is excellent,[13] and what escape there is from this [whole] field of perception.[14] " Here we have the development of insight which leads to Arhantship and then we get this as the result...notice the mention of "in part" is now gone... "14. "When he knows and sees[15] in this way, his mind becomes liberated from the canker of sensual desire, liberated from the canker of becoming, liberated from the canker of ignorance.[16] When liberated, there is knowledge: 'It is liberated'; and he knows: 'Birth is exhausted, the life of purity has been lived, the task is done, there is no more of this to come.' Such a monk is called 'one bathed with the inner bathing."[17] " Thus there are no more defilements to be relinquished. Oh one note down from the note you quoted shows which defilements are relinquished with each path... According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by the noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: "By the path of Stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) fraud. "By the path of Non-returning (anagami-magga): (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) malice, (16) negligence. "By the path of Arahatship (arahatta-magga): (1) covetousness and unrighteous greed, (11) obstinacy, (12) presumption, (13) conceit, (14) arrogance, (15) vanity." Thus I think it is apparent that the first part of the Sutta that deals with relinquishing the defilements in part was not speaking about the attainments of an Arhant......Ray 17856 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 0:55pm Subject: Dualism/Non-Dualism Dear Group, 'Talking' with Buddhists of other traditions on the Internet, and even 'listening' to those who see themselves as Theravada, it seems to me Dualism/Non-Dualism is a confusion. My understanding of Non-Dualism is that it asserts that the ground of being is One. All separations or dualities are formed symbolically by Mind. I don't understand how this isn't just another way of ensuring there is an eternal self, albeit a Super Self - the dew-drop slipping into the shining sea. Does the Canon clarify what the Buddha taught in this respect? What is the Theravada perspective? metta, Christine 17857 From: James Date: Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: Mara No More --- "Ray Hendrickson" > Actually I think this Sutta indirectly supports the position that an > Arahant does not have any defilements. You will notice in the Sutta that > the first sections that talk about giving up the defilements in part have > this paragraph before the next section ""He knows: 'I have given up, > renounced, let go, abandoned and relinquished [the defilements] in part'; > and he gains enthusiasm for the goal, gains enthusiasm for the Dhamma, gains > gladness connected with the Dhamma." Now in the notes of the MLD by Bhikkhu > Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi, it states that these sections apply to a once > returner, based on the defilements talked about. But you will notice that > towards the end of the Sutta after talking about developing the brahmavihara > there is this: > > "13. "He understands what exists, what is low, what is excellent, [13] and > what escape there is from this [whole] field of perception.[14] " > > Here we have the development of insight which leads to Arhantship and then > we get this as the result...notice the mention of "in part" is now gone... > > "14. "When he knows and sees[15] in this way, his mind becomes liberated > from the canker of sensual desire, liberated from the canker of becoming,