27600 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 0:35am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hello Andrew, Robert, Thomas and All, Thank you for your post, Andrew, and the honest reflections and questions on the March Fly incident. This touches on something that I never properly got sorted out in my mind last time it was discussed - i.e. the relative value of different life forms - is a 'fly being' as valuable as a 'human being', in Buddhism? Does the Precept against actual killing apply to both equally? I think last time it was discussed many people said that 'Size matters'. i.e. it is more unwholesome to kill an elephant than a mouse. Something to do with the anger it takes to consider the act, and the energy it takes to accomplish the task ... Considering the reality of rebirth, is it just our 'westernised' thinking that considers the urgent caring for an injured baby human a necessity, while the caring at all for an injured fly raises a quizzical eyebrow? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" 27601 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Herman, It’s the luminous hat that has prompted me to drop all my other urgent chores and quickly reply. --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it. You're right, of course, it > would be better to hear about Nibbana from those who have been > there, done that. And thank you for saying that all you know about > it is from the Buddha's say so. .... ;-) That’s exactly why we look at the texts as I see it. I enjoyed the kangaroo story. Perhaps the point is that if we’ve seen enough pictures and heard enough accounts from reputable sources (!) about kangaroos hopping, there will be fewer and fewer doubts to arise on this score. Of course it’s only confirmed when we actually see them, but the accounts, then the pictures, then the TV shots, then the zoo specimens all take us closer and closer to the ‘real’ thing. In the same way, we read and hear second-hand accounts, then read some texts about conditioned realities. A little understanding develops which begins to test out the edges and as it develops there are fewer conditions to question what the Buddha has taught. Only the sotapanna’s wisdom which has experienced THE unconditioned reality directly has no more doubts at all about what has been taught. Does this mean that everything the Buddha taught and knew has been directly tested out? Of course not. Even the key disciples did not have the Buddha’s omniscient wisdom. All I can say is that the more understanding develops, even around the shallowest edges, the fewer doubts and questions there are about what has been taught. Meanwhile, it’s very natural to raise these questions and be sceptical about what we hear from Born Again Buddhists on DSG;-) ..... <....> H: > Unconditioned, does that mean it is always there, or does never > arising, never ceasing mean time and space don't apply. Is it > experienced, or is it like the ti-lakkhana, matters of insight only, > or is it neither here nor there? Is nibbana the same as the > vimokkha? Why put a limit on the number of unconditioned dhammas? ..... Whoa there.... Nibbana is experienced by lokuttara wisdom, it doesn’t depend on any factors. Nibbana and vimokkha (liberation) are NOT synonyms as I understand. Vimokkha usually refers to the approaches or way to liberation of panna, i.e by the aspect of taking anicca, dukkha or anatta as object. (only one characteristic at a time). This is a post topic on its own (Not a simple one). We can find sutta and commentary references if you’re interested to discuss further. There are also the 8 liberations in other suttas. I don’t know much about it. Perhaps you can share more about your interest and understanding. Why put a limit? For me, what I have learnt and tested so far makes good sense, so I have no reason to doubt the Buddha and his followers when they say that nibbana is THE unconditioned reality, just as you had no reason to doubt the pictures about the jumping kangaroos even though you hadn’t seen them. In fact, you had enough trust in what you were shown and told to tell others about them. We read about the absence of any states belonging to sankhara and how nibbana is the antithesis of all that is conditioned, so I don’t understand how there could be other unconditioned dhammas. If you have any examples in mind, let’s hear. I’m resisting from adding Udana quotes here. .... H: > Just for starters :-) > > I know the calm mind is joyful, so I can wish you that without > getting ahead of myself. .... There you go - enough confidence to know about the value for all :-) Metta, Sarah > PS I posted a photo of Vick and myself in the second folder in the > photos section. ..... It’s a very nice pic too;-) Many thanks, Herman. Please thank Vick also and mention that her fine luminous hat is especially appropriate for DSG discussions. I hope James and Ken O have taken note;-) Your hat’s nice too, Herman, it’s just that it doesn’t have quite this ‘pure’ quality. [Ken O, glow-worms in ancient India??] =========== 27602 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:25am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Thank you for your post, Andrew, and the honest reflections and > questions on the March Fly incident. > This touches on something that I never properly got sorted out in my > mind last time it was discussed - i.e. the relative value of > different life forms - is a 'fly being' as valuable as a 'human > being', in Buddhism? Does the Precept against actual killing apply > to both equally? I think last time it was discussed many people > said that 'Size matters'. i.e. it is more unwholesome to kill an > elephant than a mouse. Something to do with the anger it takes to > consider the act, and the energy it takes to accomplish the task ... > > Considering the reality of rebirth, is it just our 'westernised' > thinking that considers the urgent caring for an injured baby human > a necessity, while the caring at all for an injured fly raises a > quizzical eyebrow? Yes, the Atthasalini does say that "size matters". Modern society tends to focus on the external (size, etc.) whereas the law of kamma depends on the internal mental states. It is the number and the intensity of the akusala javana cittas that impact kamma. If I have two animals, one is 10% bigger than the other, and I kill both of them; the smaller one I kill cruelly with much effort while the larger one I kill quickly without thinking about it, then the killing of the smaller animal will have much more grave kammic consequences than the killing of the larger animal. In other words, "killing a larger animal is more serious than killing a smaller animal" is a general statement. In general, all other things being equal, it would take more effort and consume more time (i.e. more intense akusala javana cittas and a large quantity of akuala javana cittas) to kill a larger animal. I don't see this as a fixed rule, but more as a general principal. The same "internal" principle works for kusala as well. You raised the question of compassion for a baby vs. compassion for a fly. When karuna arises, the mind cannot bear others' suffering and wants to remove that suffering (it does not specify human being, so animals are included). Given human nature, it seems natural that seeing a suffering baby would condition more moments of karuna than seeing a suffering fly. More moments of compassion means more good kamma. Metta, Rob M :-) 27603 From: nordwest Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:24am Subject: The Holy Relics of Lord Buddha Dear sangha, The Lord Buddha's Holy Relics - a collection the most holy objects of Buddhism NOTICE: Pictures of lord Buddha's corporal relics are displayed out of True reverence to the Master and should not be misconstrued as any thing other, by non Buddhists viewing this page. IF YOU DON'T APPRECIATE THIS INFORMATION, PLEASE KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF. DO NOT START DISCUSSING OR SLANDERING ABOUT THE HOLY RELICTS OF THE LORD BUDDHA. Thank you for your understanding and respect. You find the pictures and informations at http://www.shakumasu.com/ If you have visited the site before, you may have to "refresh" the page to see the link to "The Lord Buddha's Relics" Gassho, Thomas 27604 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 5:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Ken H I think I should clarify that the jhanas I talking about there is the jhanas of the stream entrant to Arahant > Even so, I have to remember there are no rules; we are entitled to > sit quietly or we can dance to Guns 'n Roses. Definitely we have to seek quietly this has been reference in many sutta even in Sati suttas where one go the a seluded place ..... > I like to think that a correct understanding of > meditation (on the Buddha, metta, death and > loathsomeness), can condition calm, kusala consciousness > when one of those objects comes to mind. Whether or not > formal practices can play a part in this process is > another matter. k: We cannot on our part totally disregard mediation bc we do know the impact of meditation on calmness. I have not read any commentary and I believe no commentaries will totally disregard meditation neither did any of the Abdhidhamma texts. In fact in Abdhidhamma text there are references to kasina. Why is there references to kasina if it is not impt? If it is not impt why should Buddha expound it in the first place. On the other hand,we should also realise that meditation could be so conditioned that it has become akusala as we are attached to the calmness effect. These are the dangers of practising we have to address when we practise. > Calm arises with all kusala moments, I think. It > certainly arises with wisdom but, even so, wisdom (right > understanding), comes first. In janna, right > understanding means directly knowing kusala from akusala. > In satipatthana, right understanding means directly > knowing the characteristics of nama and rupa. k: When I say that five hindrances cannot be suppressed bc what is anatta in the first place can never be suppressed. And also bc they are also condition it can only be discern and eventually eradicated. Suppressiong will mean a *self* compelling to stop it. k: No one disagree that insight is the most impt factor to enlightment, what I saying and emphasis again that we should not totally disregard meditation for practising of calm. As I say above - no evidence against meditation but a lot of evidence that calm is impt in jhanas for the supramundane level if we look at many suttas describing the 2nd jhanas. Whether calm is aroused by kuasala cittas is sufficenet enough or there is a need for meditation using kasina objects remains a contentious subject. Till then, unless explicitly declare no-no by Buddha or in the texts, there is still a possibility that meditation for calmness as a factor of enlightment cannot be discounted. As James alwasys say lets be open minded cheers Ken O 27605 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 5:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Howard I find your questions interesting and very much to the point of the task at hand. <> To my understanding, sati/panna cannot be made to arise by following a certain course of action, if that's what you mean. What can be cultivated, however, are the conditions that lead to the arising of sati/panna; but that arising will occur at a time, and in respect of an object, not of our choosing. <> As I understand it, there cannot be the cultivating of a practice of attending to dhammas, for the very good reason that dhammas only become apparent with the arising of sati/panna. So any attending to dhammas would be an instance of, rather than a means to, the occurrence of sati/panna. Furthermore, attending to dhammas if it occurs will occur by virtue of the appropriate conditions having been developed, rather than because of any cultivation of a practice (i.e., the exercise of deliberate effort). Cultivating the practice of attending to ceasing dhammas cannot be successful if dhammas are not apparent in the first place. The 'target' of any such attempted cultivation would be our conception of dhammas based on a rather inadequate intellectual understanding of things. Regarding the development of the conditions for the arising of sati/panna, however, this is a matter of reflecting on what one has heard and understood intellectually, and relating it to the present moment. Again, it is something that occurs (as it almost certainly does for all of us who use this list) rather than something that 'is done', and it can occur at any time regardless of the nature of the current activity. And likewise the fruit of that development, in the form of a level of awareness of a presently arising dhamma, can also occur at any time. Neither reality is 'self' or susceptible to control. I hope I have managed to make some sense. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > ========================= > I agree with much that you say here, Jon. Now ... what, > according to > the Buddha, *are* the conditions needed for the arising of > sati/panna? Are you > saying that they do not include cultivating the practice of > attending to the > arising and ceasing dhammas? Do they also not include cultivating > greater > mental concentration and energy? Do they include none of these > because nothing can be cultivated? > You wrote "We should not expect that book > knowledge/intellectual > understanding of, for example, the difference between different > kinds of consciousness will allow us to directly perceive those > differences." I very much agree > with you on this. So, what else, then, does the Buddha say should > be done? > Something? Nothing? Is there a practice according to the Buddha? > The eightfold > noble path you have often said is the co-arising of eight factors, > and not a > training program. Did the Buddha provide a training program? If > there is no > program of practice, what conditions the arising ofthe factors of > enlightenment? Merely good luck?? ;-)) > > With metta, > Howard 27606 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 5:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Herman --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I mentioned my 10 minute belly laugh at the realisation that there > was no Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life precisely > because it was not a Buddhist experience. I was not thinking in a > Buddhist framework at the time. And in any event the two (the realisation and the response to it) are separate things, so the quality of one does not necessarily reflect the quality of the other. > I do not think there are any Buddhist, or any other ...ist or ism > experiences. Agreed. > Yes, I accept fully that if I wanted to explain whatever was > happening in terms of a certain theory, I would need to adopt that > certain theory. Not as I see it. One needs to be famimliar with the theory, but not necessarily adopt it. > Do you think it is possible to experience "things" as they are, > without reference to or in terms of other "things"? Well, I couldn’t answer that without clarifying what you have in mind by the question. Or to put it another way, either a 'yes' or a 'no' could be correct depending on how I choose to take the question. So you see, we are going to have to agree a frame of reference if the discussion is to move forward. Whose idea of '[experiencing] things as they are' are we working to -- yours or mine? Or the Buddha's? Jon 27607 From: Sarah Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 5:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Doomed March Fly Hi Andrew (& Victor), I’m still on about hats. Actually, I’m a real hat person as you may recall. Now, I know everyone appreciates all your hospitality but why not go one step further next time and introduce some of those fetching bush hats with dangling corks which keep the flies on the move and dispense with the need for waving them onto your neighbours or torture-jars. I think a group pic of you all in these would look very fine in the album;-) ..... --- Andrew wrote: > I wish to add some of my thoughts, taking > Sarah's advice to KenH to throw caution to the wind and just send the > post regardless of any qualms. It (or refutation of it) may assist > understanding. ..... Yes, you guys need to forget all that cautious legal training - it’s not good for the list;-) Great Cooran posting team-work this time;-) ... > I was prepared > to squash it underfoot. <....> > MY POINT - I think we all have to remember that, at times, we do what > needs to be done. We have to stop intellectualising and just act. > Accept the consequences, be they pleasant or unpleasant. Even if it > means putting (our worldling view of) the Teachings aside. > Did I lack sufficient saddha to stop me from breaking the precept > against killing? ..... I’d say we do what we do and others respond and react as they do. (Of course, now ‘we’ and no ‘they’). So whether we harm or don’t harm the fly, there are bound to be countless different cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising and falling away. Any of them can be the object of awareness. Saddha can only arise with wholesome cittas, so of course at moments of intending to kill, there’s no saddha. But then, there isn’t at all the other unwholesome moments in a day either. We can test out and know for ourselves what is real now. For example, we may abstain from killing with unwholesome thoughts as well or try to stop others with aversion, being disturbed by their intention to harm(as I often do with the kids I teach) or attachment to the insect. I know Christine has written some good posts on this before. It always comes back to knowing the present realities rather than judging by the actions. Just act, just do it - accumulations to follow or not follow any particular course or even to think in this way about acting;-) .... Like the point you made about the raft, there can be clinging to anything - even to following good sila or to developing wisdom. Andrew, it’s just occurred to me that this is a GREAT example for Victor who is collecting discourse references on ‘clinging to wholesome states’. THANK YOU! Victor, take note: A: >Naturally, later I reviewed the Simile of the Raft and in particular the Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta (MN38 paras 9-14, Bodhi edition page 352) in which the Buddha says "the Dhamma has been taught as similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of grasping". Bodhi's note 406 reads "This is said to show the bhikkhus that they should not cling even to the right view of insight meditation" Andrew, thanks for reporting back. Don’t run away - just keep posting (just act!!) and keep in mind those stylish hat numbers. I wonder if they’d work for summer mosquitoes here whilst I’m doing my Tai Chi. Now that’s a thought...... Metta, Sarah ====== 27608 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 5:54am Subject: Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Herman, k: I was wondering if what Buddha say about his experience Nibbana is not good enough then who is the better person. > Why put a limit on the number of unconditioned dhammas? k: If we assume that Buddha say about Unbinding in the sutta as the word for unconditioned dhamma or Nibbana, then there is only one. Or would you like to point to me that there are other unconditioned dhammas that is said the suttas? If there is, this will be a very interesting subject to talk about. kind regards Ken O 27609 From: Htoo Naing Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 6:48am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 05 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The Dhammafarer has decided to get through the Samsara. He has mentally prepared to do the practice that will lead him to Nibbana. The practice is Mahasatipatthana. It is Vipassana meditation. This practice which is aware to everything that encounters at the very present moment is Noble practice. Before arising of Sammasambuddha, there are those who are practising and have been practising meditation. There are many different kinds of meditation. Some have strange names for each practice. Non-Buddhist meditators who had been practising Yoga said, ''Gotama The Buddha had to live only 80 years because he did not practise Yoga. If he practised Yoga, we would be able to live 1000 years, 10,000 or 100,000 or to years he wanted. Instead he practised a different meditation and he had to leave the Samsara. Unlike other kinds of meditation, Vipassana meditation is fully aware of the object that has been put under attention. At the thought of practising Vipassana meditation, the Dhammafarer's mind becomes pure. He has well believed in The Buddha, The Dhamma, and The Sangha, and the practice. He is now quite confident in Dhamma. As he has decided to get through the Samsara, he has a clear and exact destination. As he has a good destination, he has been repeatedly reminded by his own mind that he is leading to Arahatta Magga Nana. This reminder Sati Cetasika frequently arises in his mind and his mind is well aware of the clear destination. As he has defined destination, he will not commit things, the act of which is shameful. And he will not practise on bad things as the consequences of which are dreadful and frightenening. Now he nows where he is, who he is, what he is, and why he has to be here. And he has a clear destination. All in these matter, there is no reason to hurt anyone. Instead, he becomes passionate to all Sattas as his friends. Metta develops in him. Metta is lovingkindness and unhurting in nature. He will wish all good things happen to all Sattas. Developing this in his mind, he will steadfastly go forward to his destination. As he marches on his way, he will consider that there is no reason to strongly grasping all properties as his aimed target is Nibbana. Instead, he will frequently release his properties as Dana to other Sattas for the benefit of them. As he becomes a Vipassana meditator, his Dana is much more cleaner and purer than any other Sattas. If he joins the order of The Sangha and becomes a monk, he will keep all his Sila to the puremost form. If he still lives as a lay person, he will keep 5 precepts permanently and for life. And he will practise other forms of Sila as frequently as he can and whenever possible he will practice these Sila for the benefit of his achievement in progressing. The practice Vipassana will be in line with path Of Purification. At the base is Sila Visuddhi or moral purification. In Noble Eightfold Path, Samma-Kammanta, Samma-Vaca, and Samma-Ajiva are called Sila Maggangha. But the purest path arises at the very moment of Magga Citta. Before arising of Sotapatti Magga, the practitioner practises Sila as much as he can. These preliminary Dhamma such as Dana, Sila will be practising along with Bhavana ( Vipassana meditation ) in the same vicinity. As he has decided to get through the Samsara, he has been practising Vipassana meditation steadfastly. The practice starts when he becomes conscious to his environment at his waking up and it goes throughout the day and it ends temporarily when he falls asleep with Vipassana meditation. May you all practise Vipassana meditation to get through the Samsara With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group htootintnaing@y... 27610 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:37am Subject: Nutriment (Re: [dsg] eyesense.) Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/3/03 1:00:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Hi Larry, > yes. I concentrate on the eye, smaller than a louse's head, doing its > functions. It is a great text!! Really impressive. And just enjoying the > Tiika now, but slowly. More about the eyedecad, you will like it. How all > these rupas support eyesense and coordinate, and how all other groups of > rupa produced by citta, heat and nutrition also support the group produced > by kamma. And how the great elements tend to eyesense as if it were a royal > prince, by upholding, cohering, maturing (heat!) and movement (wind). > In Pali: long compounds and many words I had to look up. Can I make anybody > happy in jotting them down, there are a great deal of them? > Nina. ========================== Nina, in this post I touch on one of my "pet peeves" with regard to Abhidhamma. In itself, it isn't a topic of major importance, but it points to what I see as a more important issue - the taking of prescientific, conventional notions and turning them into alleged "realities". In the following I don't "pull my punches," but say out straight what I think about this issue. Please don't take my directness for rudeness, as rudely is the last way I wish to act, especially as regards you and all the other good people here. It seems to me that o'ja/nutriment/nutrition is a nonexistent, imagined (never observed) referent of a notion that existed circa 2500 BCE. Speaking conventionally, certain foods consist of components that the body incorporates into new tissue. Nowadays there are entire fields of nutrition, physiology, and biochemistry that attempt to explain, of course all conventionally, how this processing works. They are more or less adequate in predictive capability. All that people in ancient India saw was that children grew and adults added body mass and replaced muscle tissue, hair, nails, fat etc when they got enough food, but not so when they were starving, and these people came up with the notion of some substance in foods they called o'ja that was responsible for this. Now, I am not keen on the practice of presuming the existence of unobserved, hidden somethings (like God, selves, essences, ether, fate, and nutriment) as substitutes for looking into the actual functioning of observable phenomena. It seems to me, though, that the Abhidhammic scholars took the prescientific notion of an unobservable something they called "o'ja", not unlike the "ether" of more modern-day scientific theorists, and treated it as a "reality". This "reality" of nutriment, you have written, is only known through the mind door. This doesn't surprise me, as I see it as concept-only. I do not believe there is such a "reality". Do you ... really? And if so, why? 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) 27611 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/3/03 8:49:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > I find your questions interesting and very much to the point of the > task at hand. > > < provide a training program?>> > > To my understanding, sati/panna cannot be made to arise by following > a certain course of action, if that's what you mean. What can be > cultivated, however, are the conditions that lead to the arising of > sati/panna; but that arising will occur at a time, and in respect of > an object, not of our choosing. > > < for the arising of sati/panna? Are you saying that they do not > include cultivating the practice of attending to the arising and > ceasing dhammas?>> > > As I understand it, there cannot be the cultivating of a practice of > attending to dhammas, for the very good reason that dhammas only > become apparent with the arising of sati/panna. So any attending to > dhammas would be an instance of, rather than a means to, the > occurrence of sati/panna. > > Furthermore, attending to dhammas if it occurs will occur by virtue > of the appropriate conditions having been developed, rather than > because of any cultivation of a practice (i.e., the exercise of > deliberate effort). > > Cultivating the practice of attending to ceasing dhammas cannot be > successful if dhammas are not apparent in the first place. The > 'target' of any such attempted cultivation would be our conception of > dhammas based on a rather inadequate intellectual understanding of > things. > > Regarding the development of the conditions for the arising of > sati/panna, however, this is a matter of reflecting on what one has > heard and understood intellectually, and relating it to the present > moment. Again, it is something that occurs (as it almost certainly > does for all of us who use this list) rather than something that 'is > done', and it can occur at any time regardless of the nature of the > current activity. And likewise the fruit of that development, in the > form of a level of awareness of a presently arising dhamma, can also > occur at any time. Neither reality is 'self' or susceptible to > control. > > I hope I have managed to make some sense. > > Jon > ======================== As I understand what you have said here, there is no practice taught by the Buddha other than studying what he said, reflecting on it, and relating it to the present moment. Of course, and here I am following what your general approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen or won't happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, thus, to sum up: There is no practice. How am I doing? ;-) 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) 27612 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:04am Subject: anapanasati 4 c anapanasati 4 c As to the words, , we read in a footnote (Vis. VIII, 234, note 64): Knowledge of Desire for Deliverance is one of the higher stages of insight knowledge (the sixth maha-vipassana ~naa.na), when panna has become more and more detached from conditioned realities, sees their danger and disadvantage. At the end of this tetrad, the Vis. states that this tetrad deals with contemplation of citta. The Commentary to the sutta, the Papa~ncasuudanii, explains the words of the sutta: , here this is the explanation: a monk who proceeds by the method, etc... although he makes the sign(nimitta) of the in-and-outbreathing the object, is nevertheless called someone who contemplates citta in citta, because the citta of that monk proceeds by establishing sati and sampaja~n~na (pa~n~naa) with regard to the object. Because there cannot be the development of mindfulness of breathing for someone who is forgetful and without clear comprehension. That is why, by experiencing the citta as object,(it is said) The Commentary on the Satipatthana Sutta (the Papa~ncasuudanii, translated by Ven. Soma) states that just as in the case of body and feelings, citta should be contemplated in seven ways: as impermanent; as being subject to dukkha; as anatta; by way of turning away from it and not by way of delighting in it; by freeing himself of passion for it; with thoughts making for cessation and not making for origination; and not by way of laying hold of it, by by way of giving it up. Nina: these contemplations refer to the stages of insight: in the course of insight there is a clearer understanding of the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta, and hence there is a growing detachment from conditioned dhammas. When citta appears panna should see citta in citta, not a self in citta. Citta knows an object, it does not last and it is not self who knows an object. ***** Nina. 27613 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Dear Steve op 03-12-2003 03:06 schreef bodhi2500 op seisen_@h...: > This section at the beginning of the Anapanasati sutta was > briefly discussed at cooran on the weekend> > > "Monks, this assembly is free from idle chatter, devoid of idle > chatter, and is established on pure heartwood: such is this community > of monks, such is this assembly. **The sort of assembly that is > worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy > of respect, an incomparable field of merit for the world: such is > this community of monks, such is this assembly.** N: yes, such texts always describe enlightened bhikkhus. I like this beginning very much, also about the Kamudian festival, and the monks forgiving one another. Reminds me of the perfection of dana which also includes forgiving. At that time there were still arahats with high distinctions: jhana and also the four discriminations. This is no longer possible today. Those monks who also developed jhana through mindfulness of breathing could reach these high distinctions. We read in the Co to the Maharahulovada sutta, that Sariputta taught mindfulness of breathing to Rahula: < Then, why did he exhort him to develop Mindfulness of Breathing? Because it is suitable for a sitting posture. It is said that the Thera had not observed that the Buddha had spoken about the meditation subject of materiality to Rahula. He thought that for Rahula who was seated in that way, steadfast and immovable, that subject of meditation in such sitting posture was suitable for him, and thus he spoke to him in that way. As regards the word, aanaapaanasati, mindfulness of breathing, he explained: "After you have comprehended inbreathing and outbreathing, and with this subject attained the fourth or the fifth stage of jhana, and you have developed insight, you should reach arahatship." As to the words, it is of great fruit, how is it of great fruit? Here, the monk who is intent on mindfulness of breathing, eradicates all defilements and reaches arahatship. If he cannot do this , there will be at the end of life the extinction of all defilements. If he cannot do this, he will be reborn in a deva plane, and when he has heard Dhamma from a deity (son of a deva) who is a speaker of Dhamma, he will attain arahatship. If this fails because the appearance of a Buddha has not taken place, he will realize the awakening of a solitary Buddha. If he cannot realize this, he can, being in the presence of Buddhas, attain higher knowledge quickly, such as the Elder Baahiya and others. Thus it is of great fruit.> Rahula was to reach arahatship. Nina. 27614 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re seeing now Dear Howard, op 01-12-2003 22:16 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > .... To me, the arising of a feeling of > pleasantness and feeling something as pleasant are one and the same. When we > feel pleasantness is exactly when pleasantness has arisen, whether that is > simultaneous with the object eliciting the pleasant feeling or whether it is > subsequent to it.... N:I read your post to Jon, explaining how you see things from the point of phenomenology. I also know that you are not extreme, and that you really appreciate conditions. One of your points is that you do not believe in unobserved rupas which arise in a group. You write about feeling and its object, but I come back to that later on. There are many things you do not experience but you know it is there: take the eye. You cannot see your eyesense, but you know it as an essential condition for seeing. Nutrition is another rupa arising in a group, and this rupa conditions another group, and this again another group. Thus, food that is taken can last you for a week! You wrote: B.B. remarks in Perfections, patience: <...for restlessness due to excessive activity is abandoned through reflective acquiesence in the Dhamma (dhammanijjhaanakhanti).> He explains that it is intellectual acceptance of doctrines which are not completely clear to the understanding. That is true, you cannot understand kamma, but you accept it. Don't you? I want to go deeper and stress more the active sense of this notion: nijjhaana (see the word jhaana in this compound which also means reflection) is reflection and study with awareness, again and again. With great patience and perseverance! Howard, you feel confortable with phenomenology, but, you may see that the goal of Abhidhamma is detachment from the idea of self. Medical science has a goal different from Abhidhamma, but there need not be any conflict. Keep in mind the different angles. Evenso, you may appreciate different angles in your case, and try to understand what the Abhidhamma is teaching and to what goal. As Ken O said, give it a try. Phenomenology is one angle, the Abhidhamma is another angle. During our Saturday hike (Lodewijk saw two deer, and we saw about fourteen wild swine), I was discussing with Lodewijk your point of view. N: How would Howard feel when he would meet A. Sujin and hear: Would people not be put off? L: People may say, "so what". First a long explanation is necessary for more than an hour. N: Yes, we have to know that seeing just experiences what appears through the eyes, and that it does not see shape and form, that that is already a different moment. But a long explanation, that is what A. Sujin usually does not give, that is thinking. She helps and reminds people to realize the characteristic of seeing, and that has to be seeing right now. No need to think or define. When we learn to be aware of different characteristics, we shall have no doubt about realities. No doubt about what objects are and the experience of objects. L: I believe that the eightfold Path has to be developed. We are on it, and step by step it has to be developed. ***** Take feeling: you may define it, reason about it, but, the angle of Abhidhamma is: it appears now, it feels, it has a characteristic that can be directly known. No need for words. I quote what Sarah just said about feeling now: Sarah: When studying the reality of the present moment more and more, we do not think of millenia. Not everybody is inclined to all the details of the Abhidhamma, there is no rule that you have to be interested in all details. Do no pay attention to me raving about the louse head. I find that details help me to go deeper into conditions, it helps to cling less to self. Nina. 27615 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Doomed March Fly Dear Andrew, in such cases we need equanimity: everyone receives the result of his own actions. This helps if we can't remedy the situation of another being, in this case the fly. Why add more akusala kamma by squashing it? Best to do nothing. Nina. op 03-12-2003 00:55 schreef Andrew op athel60@t...: > Did I lack sufficient saddha to stop me from breaking the precept > against killing? 27616 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Hello Nina, Weather is miserable today so I have skipped my afternoon walk and took the time to read the dsg posts more carefully. I think there is a small misunderstanding in what you said: Nina: >The sort of assembly that is >worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy >of respect, an incomparable field of merit for the world: such is >this community of monks, such is this assembly. N: yes, such texts always describe enlightened bhikkhus. Michael: From the two suttas below it is possible to verify that not all of them have to be enlightened to be a member of that assembly. In fact of the eight individual types described below, which comprise the assembly worthy of gifts, etc., only one type is fully enlightened, while the one practicing to realize the fruit of stream entry has no realization whatsoever. The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well... who have practiced straight-forwardly... who have practiced methodically... who have practiced masterfully -- in other words, the four types [of noble disciples] when taken as pairs, the eight when taken as individual types -- they are the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples: worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, the incomparable field of merit for the world." AN XI.12 The Eight taken as Individual Types: Just as the ocean is the abode of such mighty beings as whales, whale-eaters, and whale-eater-eaters; asuras, nagas, and gandhabbas, and there are in the ocean beings one hundred leagues long, two hundred... three hundred... four hundred... five hundred leagues long; in the same way, this Doctrine and Discipline is the abode of such mighty beings as stream-winners and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry; once-returners and those practicing to realize the fruit of once-returning; non-returners and those practicing to realize the fruit of non-returning; Arahants and those practicing for Arahantship... This is the eighth amazing and astounding fact about this Doctrine and Discipline." Ud V5 Metta Michael 27617 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:49am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hello RobM, and All, The difficulty I have with this, is that (I think) it assumes that everyone experiences similar mental states before similar actions. They don't. Someone intent on (say) the calculations necessary to guide a jet to a target, avoiding obstacles like anti-aircraft missiles and then get the bombs to hit the determined area may feel nothing but exhilaration at avoiding the opponents weapons and the satisfaction of a difficult task 'well done'. They may have a feeling of camaraderie with other colleagues in the plane and the ground crew - hi fives all round ... no hate, no anger. No great physical effort needed - except enjoyable mental concentration and the merest press of a button. Uncountable beings, human and otherwise, die in pain and fear, and others live with injuries and grief for the rest of their lives. But the airforce personnel didn't hate them, maybe didn't think of them - then or later, just completed a task ordered by their commander - who also didn't have any particularly strong feelings - just wanted a successful mission to assist in further promotion in the Airforce bureaucracy. On the other hand, a person bitten by a wasp, may experience a flare up of immediate pain and intense anger, and kill the insect with great hate. Does the Abhidhamma 'take' on this mean that the upset person killing the single wasp with hate is likely to end up in the Avici hell and the jubilant happy team successfully completing the mission and killing tens of thousands is headed for the deva realms? If it is mindstates that matter, do the intense feelings of hate, and wish to harm, felt in the bruising contact of football matches (by both players and spectators), or someone immersed in killing aliens in a computer game have the same fruits as for the airforce blokes and the waspkiller? Regarding compassion - RobM: 'the mind cannot bear others' suffering'- I wonder if 'cannot bear'shows aversion, a 'not wanting to see unpleastantness'?; and whether 'cannot bear' could also mean 'is unable to take on' anothers suffering - i.e. each must endure our own suffering (results of kamma?) .... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > Yes, the Atthasalini does say that "size matters". Modern society > tends to focus on the external (size, etc.) whereas the law of kamma > depends on the internal mental states. > > It is the number and the intensity of the akusala javana cittas that > impact kamma. If I have two animals, one is 10% bigger than the > other, and I kill both of them; the smaller one I kill cruelly with > much effort while the larger one I kill quickly without thinking > about it, then the killing of the smaller animal will have much more > grave kammic consequences than the killing of the larger animal. > > In other words, "killing a larger animal is more serious than > killing a smaller animal" is a general statement. In general, all > other things being equal, it would take more effort and consume more > time (i.e. more intense akusala javana cittas and a large quantity > of akuala javana cittas) to kill a larger animal. I don't see this > as a fixed rule, but more as a general principal. > > The same "internal" principle works for kusala as well. You raised > the question of compassion for a baby vs. compassion for a fly. When > karuna arises, the mind cannot bear others' suffering and wants to > remove that suffering (it does not specify human being, so animals > are included). Given human nature, it seems natural that seeing a > suffering baby would condition more moments of karuna than seeing a > suffering fly. More moments of compassion means more good kamma. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 27618 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 1:17pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > The difficulty I have with this, is that (I think) it assumes that > everyone experiences similar mental states before similar actions. > They don't. Someone intent on (say) the calculations necessary to > guide a jet to a target, avoiding obstacles like anti-aircraft > missiles and then get the bombs to hit the determined area may feel > nothing but exhilaration at avoiding the opponents weapons and the > satisfaction of a difficult task 'well done'. They may have a feeling > of camaraderie with other colleagues in the plane and the ground > crew - hi fives all round ... no hate, no anger. No great physical > effort needed - except enjoyable mental concentration and the merest > press of a button. Uncountable beings, human and otherwise, die in > pain and fear, and others live with injuries and grief for the rest > of their lives. But the airforce personnel didn't hate them, maybe > didn't think of them - then or later, just completed a task ordered > by their commander - who also didn't have any particularly strong > feelings - just wanted a successful mission to assist in further > promotion in the Airforce bureaucracy. > On the other hand, a person bitten by a wasp, may experience a flare > up of immediate pain and intense anger, and kill the insect with > great hate. > Does the Abhidhamma 'take' on this mean that the upset person killing > the single wasp with hate is likely to end up in the Avici hell and > the jubilant happy team successfully completing the mission and > killing tens of thousands is headed for the deva realms? ===== I like your approach of testing an argument by taking it to an extreme. My opinion is, Yes, the killer of the wasp conditions more bad kamma for himself than the flight navigator. However, I don't agree that the actions of the flight navigator are enough to send him to the Deva realms and it is highly unlikely that a single act of killing a wasp is going to send somebody to Avici hell. The flight navigator INDIRECTLY caused tens of thousands to die; in the same way, my dinner last night INDIRECTLY caused a chicken to be killed. According to Theravada, I am not guilty of breaking the first precept by eating meat. Extending the same argument, the flight navigator is also not guilty of breaking the first precept. On the other hand, the wasp killer meets all the criteria for breaking the first precept (another life, knowledge of another life, desire to kill, effort to kill, consequent death). ===== > If it is mindstates that matter, do the intense feelings of hate, and > wish to harm, felt in the bruising contact of football matches (by > both players and spectators), or someone immersed in killing aliens > in a computer game have the same fruits as for the airforce blokes > and the waspkiller? ===== The airforce bloke did not experience any moments of dosa. The wasp killer experienced a relatively small number of intense moments of dosa. The football players / spectators experience a relatively large number of not-so-intense moments of dosa. The wasp killer, the football players and the spectators all create akusala kamma. Their actions also qualify as "strong past cittas"; wasp killer's cittas are "strong" because of their intensity, football players / spectators cittas are "strong" because of their frequency. "Strong past cittas" are a conditioning state for natural decisive support condition (pakatupanissya). This means that future mind-states can be influenced by these actions (i.e. accumulations are formed). ===== > > Regarding compassion - > RobM: 'the mind cannot bear others' suffering'- I wonder if 'cannot > bear'shows aversion, a 'not wanting to see unpleastantness'?; and > whether 'cannot bear' could also mean 'is unable to take on' anothers > suffering - i.e. each must endure our own suffering (results of > kamma?) .... ===== I hesitated when including this description of karuna which includes the term "unable to bear". The last time I included this expression (in my long post on karuna), Sarah had a similar reaction; "doesn't 'unable to bear' imply dosa?" Sarah verified that this was the term used in the English-language text and also checked the Pali. As I recall, the term is clarified in the text by saying that "witnessing another's suffering makes the heart quiver"; from this clarification, I see no dosa and no implication of "each must endure our own suffering". The arising of the thought that we must endure our own suffering is a description of the arising of equanimity. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 27619 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:51pm Subject: Vism. thread Hi Nina, Where are you in the translations of the Vism. commentary and what are your intentions? Larry 27620 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Doomed March Fly --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Andrew (& Victor), > > I'm still on about hats. Actually, I'm a real hat person as you may > recall. Now, I know everyone appreciates all your hospitality but why not > go one step further next time and introduce some of those fetching bush > hats with dangling corks which keep the flies on the move and dispense > with the need for waving them onto your neighbours or torture-jars. Hi Sarah It's a good idea but I can't remember ever seeing KenH (the main fly target) wearing a hat. Also, as his post discloses, they were attacking his heel! > I'd say we do what we do and others respond and react as they do. (Of > course, now `we' and no `they'). So whether we harm or don't harm the fly, > there are bound to be countless different cittas, cetasikas and rupas > arising and falling away. Any of them can be the object of awareness. > Saddha can only arise with wholesome cittas, so of course at moments of > intending to kill, there's no saddha. In nama terms, what is "intending to kill"? Is it the universal cetasika, cetana (volition)? As Christine and RobM have been discussing, when we conventionally talk about "killing something", this is a concept that may take seconds, minutes or even hours (depending on what we are trying to kill - see George Orwell's famous essay about "Killing an Elephant" in Burma). This time covers an awful lot of 17-set mind-moments. As the overall intention is to kill, must all the cittas in the time span be akusala (due to "killing" cetana)? As you can see, I am still having difficulty switching to mind-moment thinking from conventional thinking. The root of what I am asking is - if I had killed that march fly, could I have experienced some kusala cittas (karuna?) while "doing it" (conventional mode of expression)? > .... > Like the point you made about the raft, there can be clinging to anything > - even to following good sila or to developing wisdom. ...which makes akusala what would otherwise be kusala? > Andrew, thanks for reporting back. Don't run away - just keep posting Thanks Sarah I will keep trying. Am doing work for a Swedish publisher at the moment and we are in the editor's panic phase, so there is lots to do here. Metta, Andrew > 27621 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 3:12pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > Some types of cittas are "unprompted" (asankharika) and some types > are "prompted". > They can be prompted by internal thoughts etc. or because of the > urgings of others. The sotapanna has no more inclination to kill and > so probably the abstaining from killing is asankharika - it doesnt > need to be prompted and arises instantly. > The one who is not sotapanna still has tendencies towards killing so > sometimes the abstaining from killing has to be prompted. I think it > is good Christine and Ken were around to give such prompting. > RobertK > Dear RobertK Thank you for this reply. It would be great to meet you during your trip to Queensland - we locals will get our heads together and organise something. A nice time of year to visit, too. I would like to ask you what "tendencies to kill" are in nama terms and how do they manifest in a mind moment? What role does cetana have to play in this? As I have just posted to Sarah, the conventional expression "killing something" encompasses a huge number of mind moments. Are they all necessarily akusala? Metta Andrew 27622 From: Egberdina Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 3:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Hi Jon, Ever thought of taking up law. I imagine you'd be very good at it :-) wrote: > Herman > > > > Yes, I accept fully that if I wanted to explain whatever was > > happening in terms of a certain theory, I would need to adopt that > > certain theory. > > Not as I see it. One needs to be famimliar with the theory, but not > necessarily adopt it. > I can see what you mean, but one who is less familiar with a theory will get refuted or corrected by one who is more familiar with that theory. Depending on the value placed on getting the theory right, the discussion will require an ever deeper study of the theory, not what the theory was describing. And in those cases where the theory is regarded as being a closed canon (no additions, deletions or modifications), a recourse to the "why" of the theory is futile. Such discussions will end up being a theoretical discussions, and reality will have vanished out the window quite some time ago. > > Do you think it is possible to experience "things" as they are, > > without reference to or in terms of other "things"? > > Well, I couldn't answer that without clarifying what you have in mind > by the question. Or to put it another way, either a 'yes' or a 'no' > could be correct depending on how I choose to take the question. > > So you see, we are going to have to agree a frame of reference if the > discussion is to move forward. > > Whose idea of '[experiencing] things as they are' are we working to > -- yours or mine? Or the Buddha's? > > Jon I agree with what you are saying. A conceptual discussion requires an agreed frame of reference. The difference in this case is that "what is experienced" does not become clearer viewed through a conceptual framework, it becomes unclearer. It becomes the conceptual framework, actually. So what is required is a negative framework, one that negates any hint of an implicit reality of the selected relations that are made between selected sensations. Such a framework will not allow for a discussion of "what is experienced". Such a framework would lead to the unbinding of all the constructs that allow a discussion to take place. There is an unbridgable gap between the idea of experiencing things, and experiencing things. It doesn't really matter who'se idea of experiencing things we use, as long as it is seen that the idea is not so, we can all be quiet about it :-) Peace Herman 27623 From: Egberdina Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 4:08pm Subject: Kangaroos (was Re: October thoughts from Cooran) Hi Ken, Good to be typing to you :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > Hi Herman, > > k: I was wondering if what Buddha say about his experience Nibbana > is not good enough then who is the better person. In the case of Captain Cook and kangaroos, people developed all sorts of weird ideas about kangaroos. Some of the drawings that were made are very funny, because they are so obviously different to the real thing. Even for some of those who had actually seen a kangaroo, it was very difficult to get the proportions of the drawing right, because the form of the kangaroo was so different to anything they had ever drawn before. There was nothing to compare to! The point is that it is not important to have an idea of nibbana, because any idea of nibbana will be wrong. Thinking about nibbana won't get you to Australia, if you know what I mean. > > > Why put a limit on the number of unconditioned dhammas? > > k: If we assume that Buddha say about Unbinding in the sutta as the > word for unconditioned dhamma or Nibbana, then there is only one. > Or would you like to point to me that there are other unconditioned > dhammas that is said the suttas? If there is, this will be a very > interesting subject to talk about. > I would say that the negation of a positive is never 1 (one). Can you tell me how quantity applies to the indefinite? Or how does unity apply to the featureless? Peace Herman > > > kind regards > Ken O 27624 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 4:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re seeing now Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/3/2003 1:04:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > During our Saturday hike (Lodewijk saw two deer, and we saw about fourteen > wild swine), I was discussing with Lodewijk your point of view. > N: How would Howard feel when he would meet A. Sujin and hear: seeing now at this very moment.> Would people not be put off? --------------------------- Howard: I wouldn't be put off by that. It is simply a true observation, and one which is useful to make. -------------------------- > L: People may say, "so what". First a long explanation is necessary for more > than an hour. > N: Yes, we have to know that seeing just experiences what appears through > the eyes, and that it does not see shape and form, that that is already a > different moment. -------------------------- Howard: I have no problem with that at all. That's exactly how things are as far as I'm concerned. ------------------------- But a long explanation, that is what A. Sujin usually does > not give, that is thinking. She helps and reminds people to realize the > characteristic of seeing, and that has to be seeing right now. No need to > think or define. When we learn to be aware of different characteristics, we > shall have no doubt about realities. No doubt about what objects are and the > experience of objects. > L: I believe that the eightfold Path has to be developed. We are on it, and > step by step it has to be developed. ------------------------------- Howard: I certainly agree with that! ------------------------------ > ***** > Take feeling: you may define it, reason about it, but, the angle of > Abhidhamma is: it appears now, it feels, it has a characteristic that can be > directly known. No need for words. I quote what Sarah just said about > feeling now: > Sarah: intellectually at least, I think we can appreciate that it is the > characteristic of feelings, say, to arise accordingly and to fall away > almost immediately. Whilst reading this email, the feeling now is > different from a split instant ago and each time we look at a different > visible object or consider what’s written there are different feelings > again according to so many factors. Being conditioned is part of the > nature of realities. -------------------------------- Howard: My point about feeling was quite specific. Someone - you, I think - claimed that a feeling arises as part of an act of consciousness of an object, the feeling being with regard to that object, but there is no awareness of pleasantness or unpleasantness or neutrality at that time - that awareness comes afterwards, with the feeling then being an object of consciousness. It is that which I took exception to. An unfeeling feeling is no feeling at all. I can except contact as conditioning simultaneous feeling or subsequent feeling, though I now tend to agree that it is probably simulataneous, but I do not accept an occurrence of unfeeling feeling. Whenever a feeling occurs is when it feels, and whenever a feeling feels is when it occurs. Feeling feels - that is all there is to feeling. ------------------------------ > > When studying the reality of the present moment more and more, we do not > think of millenia. ------------------------------ Howard: Hah! you like my millenia business, huh? ;-)) ------------------------------ > Not everybody is inclined to all the details of the Abhidhamma, there is no > rule that you have to be interested in all details. Do no pay attention to > me raving about the louse head. I find that details help me > to go deeper > into conditions, it helps to cling less to self. ============================ With metta, Howard 27625 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 4:23pm Subject: RE: [dsg] PHOTOS PHOTOS PHOTOS The photos of the Jedis are totally amazing. Just imagine how much saddha people need to have to think about building at such a grand scale! Thanks, Christine et Al, for the little bit of Burma! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 11:33 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] PHOTOS PHOTOS PHOTOS > > > All members,(new and not so new), > > DhammaStudyGroup has four photo albums. > The albums are: > 1. Members - there are currenty 63 photos of members in this album. > 2. Significant Others and Family - there are currently 11 photos in > this album. > 3. DSG Meetings - there are currently 14 Group photos in this album. > 4. Myanmar (members trip October 2003) - there are currently 41 > photos in this album. 27626 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 6:02pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly -Dear RobM and Christine, The texts are very specific that the one who performs any misdeed kills with ignorance of the results of kamma makes worse kamma than someone who has any understanding about kamma.In the commentaries they give the example of the baby who reaches out for a hot pot on a stove. They are completely ignorant of the danger and so burn themselves badly. The adult takes hold of the same pot, but very gingerly moving it quickly. They feel the heat but don't get burned much, if at all. Say someone is poor and makes a living as a hunter supporting his family in this way. But he knows it is akusala, so as soon as another opportunity arises he gives up that action and never kills again. On the other hand, the person ignorant of Dhamma might even do hunting as a sport, enjoying the killing, and looking for any chance to go hunting. Hunting is always akusala but we see how the ignorant one is in the more dangerous position. In the case of the flightnavigator who fires off the missile resulting in the death of many beings, but who feels pleasure this is rooted in moha of a very high degree. Killing at a distance is still killing according to the scriptures and so is ordering another to kill. So in fact the kamma of that act of killing will give its unpleasant results to many: the one who pushed the button certainly; and also his commander and probably even the person who ordered the soldiers to fight in the first place. It is one of the reasons that being the ruler of a country is seen as such grave and duty in the Buddhist texts. ================ "robmoult" > My opinion is, Yes, the killer of the wasp conditions more bad kamma > for himself than the flight navigator. ======= In fact killing a human is considered more serious than killing an animal or insect in the Buddhist texts. ============== rob.moult@j...>The flight navigator INDIRECTLY caused tens of thousands to die; in > the same way, my dinner last night INDIRECTLY caused a chicken to be > killed. According to Theravada, I am not guilty of breaking the > first precept by eating meat. Extending the same argument, the > flight navigator is also not guilty of breaking the first precept. ========== As I said above killing at a distance is not an excuse in Buddhism, thus the airman certainly killed. Do you believe the buddha and arahants were indirect killers when they ate meat or fish? RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > The difficulty I have with this, is that (I think) it assumes that > > everyone experiences similar mental states before similar > actions. > > They don't. Someone intent on (say) the calculations necessary to > > guide a jet to a target, avoiding obstacles like anti-aircraft > > missiles and then get the bombs to hit the determined area may > feel > > nothing but exhilaration at avoiding the opponents weapons and the > > satisfaction of a difficult task 'well done'. 27627 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 7:20pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" > I would like to ask you what "tendencies to kill" are in nama terms > and how do they manifest in a mind moment? What role does cetana > have to play in this? As I have just posted to Sarah, the > conventional expression "killing something" encompasses a huge number > of mind moments. Are they all necessarily akusala? Metta > Andrew =============== Latent tendencies (anusaya) are subtle defilements that lie dormant 'waiting' for the opportunity to arise as pariyutthana where they are active forms of craving, dosa and wrong view. And then vittikkama where bad actions such as killing and lying are done. Taking your example of squashing the dieing fly: presumably there was initially some compassion? you wanted to alleviate the flys pain? This is kusala. Then you thought squashing it would end its pain quickly? This is akusala, probably rooted in wrong view. There wasn't correct understanding of kamma and result , there wasn't equanimity based on such understanding. If you had squashed it that would be akusala at the moments of doing the action, but immediately afterwards there might have been reflection that such action is wrong and the determination not to do it again might have arisen: kusala. Or you might have been pleased that the fly was now dead and not suffering, you might have been happy about killing it? This is akusala rooted in ignorance and wrong view and lobha. Or you might have had regret: mea culpa!, felt bad; this is akusala rooted in dosa. RobertK 27628 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 7:35pm Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Ken O, ----------- KO: > I think I should clarify that the jhanas I talking about there is the jhanas of the stream entrant to Arahant --------------- There is confusion over what each of us is talking about. I'm not sure what you mean by, "the jhanas of the stream entrant to Arahant." To me, that could mean the Right Concentration that accompanies each moment of Path Consciousness. I believe it is, at the very least, at the level of the first jhana. If the Ariyan had been a jhana practitioner prior to enlightenment, then the degree of concentration might be higher -- it would be at whatever level of jhana that ariyan had perfected. By the way, I think I have read (on dsg) that the level is always the same. So, even if an ariyan develops higher levels of jhana after attaining Stream-entry, his subsequent moments of supramundane Right Concentration will remain at the original, lower, level. (I'm not sure if I've understood that correctly -- or if it's relevant.) --------------- KH: > > Even so, I have to remember there are no rules; we are entitled to sit quietly or we can dance to Guns 'n Roses. KO: > Definitely we have to seek quietly this has been reference in many sutta even in Sati suttas where one go the a seluded place ..... ----------------- Now it's my turn to be misunderstood :-) When I wrote the above, I was referring to my own bad habits: I tend to argue with people who want to practise in a way which I think the Buddha did not teach. I should leave them in peace. The meditative development of a calm, concentrated mind CAN be a step in the development of vipassana: That is, if a person is developing jhana. However, if it is a form of concentration other than jhana (as it is in modern, popular, traditions), then, no, it is not a part of vipassana development. It is not a method taught by the Buddha. ------------- KO: > Why is there references to kasina if it is not impt? If it is not impt why should Buddha expound it in the first place. -------------- I'd like to remind you that, in the Tipitaka, some ariyans developed jhana followed by vipassana, some developed vipassana followed by jhana, some developed jhana and vipassana together and some developed vipassana alone (no jhana). The last category of ariyans are described as having attained by bare insight. The descriptions of all four ways of attaining are to be understood -- as part of our Dhamma study. We are not required to choose, "I will follow the path of bare- insight," or, "I will develop jhana then vipassana etc." There is no self to choose these things; they depend on accumulated conditions. ---------------- KO: > On the other hand, we should also realise that meditation could be so conditioned that it has become akusala as we are attached to the calmness effect. These are the dangers of practising we have to address when we practise. ------------- Exactly. In fact, I find it hard to imagine how a person could set out to 'intentionally practice.' That is, how he could do so without attachment (attachment to calm, attachment to the idea of becoming a better person), or, worse still, wrong view of a controlling self. ------------- KO: > When I say that five hindrances cannot be suppressed bc what is anatta in the first place can never be suppressed. And also bc they are also condition it can only be discern and eventually eradicated. Suppressiong will mean a *self* compelling to stop it. --------------- Agreed. Once again, we were misunderstanding each other. Kind regards, Ken H 27629 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 2:57pm Subject: Path & Fruit Hi, all - I have a question: Abhidhamma presents the notion of path consciousness and fruition consciousness (or path and fruit). Now, path and fruit are also mentioned in the suttas. I'm not sure about this, but I suspect that in the suttas, 'path' refers to a path of practice (leading to a stage of enlightenment) and 'fruit' to the result of that path of practice, namely the given stage of enlightenment. So, there is the path to stream entry, and its fruition which consists of entering the stream. Likewise for once returning, non-returning, and full enlightenment. Is there anywhere in the suttas mention of path and fruit consciousness, or do they only appear in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the commentaries? 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) 27630 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 9:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi Howard, Excellent, well said. Nina. P.S. I come back to nutriment, interesting subject. I want to pay more attention to it. op 03-12-2003 16:47 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > As I understand what you have said here, there is no practice taught > by the Buddha other than studying what he said, reflecting on it, and relating > it to the present moment. Of course, and here I am following what your general > approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen or won't > happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, thus, to sum up: > There > is no practice. > How am I doing? ;-) 27631 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:46pm Subject: Kangaroos (was Re: October thoughts from Cooran) Hi Herman "The point is that it is not important to have an idea of nibbana, because any idea of nibbana will be wrong. Thinking about nibbana won't get you to Australia, if you know what I mean." k: You are right there is no need to know what is Nibbana bc whatever we label it, there is a strong likelihood of being attached to it. I think this sutta is a good reminder that even the path leading to Nibbana also cannot be cling to. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn024.html However, Buddha still have to describe though for worlding like me. It is just there. kind regards Ken O 27632 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 10:49pm Subject: Kangaroos (was Re: October thoughts from Cooran) Hi Herman again :) > I would say that the negation of a positive is never 1 (one). > > Can you tell me how quantity applies to the indefinite? Or how does > unity apply to the featureless? k: If you meant in this way, then definitely there is no definite number. One unconditioned dhamma is only for the sake of clarifying the dhamma. kind regards Ken O 27633 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:01pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James You are right to insist that the mind is indeed pure and bright and I am wrong about it. Here is another reference on luminous mind http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn140.html "There remains only consciousness: pure & bright. What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, the concomitant feeling -- the feeling of pleasure that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure -- ceases, is stilled.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pain... In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, there arises a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. When sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, the concomitant feeling -- the feeling of neither pleasure nor pain that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain -- ceases, is stilled.' k: You still have not tell me your position on how the original state of mind (or pure mind) is Anatta. To me your position there is something underlying in our consciouness. kind regards Ken O 27634 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 6:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi again, Nina - In a message dated 12/4/03 12:19:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Hi Howard, > Excellent, well said. > Nina. > P.S. I come back to nutriment, interesting subject. I want to pay more > attention to it. > op 03-12-2003 16:47 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >As I understand what you have said here, there is no practice taught > >by the Buddha other than studying what he said, reflecting on it, and > relating > >it to the present moment. Of course, and here I am following what your > general > >approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen or won't > >happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, thus, to sum up: > >There > >is no practice. > >How am I doing? ;-) > > ======================== Thank you, Nina. But I feel obliged to clarify a bit, because I don't want to give a false impression just to "curry favor." What I stated was my understanding of Jon's position, but it was not a concurring with that position - though I do find some "hopefulness" in his mention of relating the teachings to the present moment ;-). I think that the Buddha did, very much so, teach a path of practice. Besides wanting us to attend to his teachings, and reflect on them, I believe he taught us to put them into practice. Specifically, I believe he encouraged his followers to exercise volition in maintaining ongoing mindfulness, observing precepts, guarding the senses, and engaging in formal meditation, mastering the jhanas if possible. I believe that he taught his followers, again and again, in enumerable suttas, to train themselves (!) in a variety of ways. I've read many, many suttas to this effect, using exactly this language, including the Satipatthana Sutta. What is true is that, except conventionally, there is no "one" to exercise volition. But, in truth, volition can be exercised. The Buddha's teachings need to be studied to know what conditions are necessary to advance on the path of practice, and what steps need be taken, volitionally, to bring these conditions about. Certainly we cannot just "decide" that wisdom shall arise, but we can foster conditions which will lead to the suppression of hindrances and will hold the defilements in abeyance to enable clear seeing. We cannot merely wish that the mind be concentrated and thereby have it be so, but we can be moral in our actions, which will lead to calm and peace, and these will support our efforts at being increasingly mindful, and that cultivated mindfulness will condition concentration which will then condition futher calm which will make further mindfulness easier, etc, etc, and turning a concentrated, peaceful mind to the task of investigation of dhammas will lead to the direct knowing of the tilakkhana in all dhammas that arise, and to liberation. There is no control, but there is influence. Volition can be exercised, and volitional actions do have consequences. Proper volition (Right Intention) can foster conditions that ultimately lead to liberation. If this were not so, there would be no point whatsoever in being a Buddhist. That's the way I see the matter. 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) 27635 From: ashkenn2k Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi Howard, "Of course, and here I am following what your general > approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen or won't happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, thus, to sum up: There is no practice. How am I doing? ;-)" Just the chinese sayings wu wei er wei (no action yet there is action) literal translation. I would to share this interesting sutta paragraph with you http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-038.html "But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress." kind regards Ken O 27636 From: robmoult Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:28pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > The texts are very specific that the one who performs any misdeed > kills with ignorance of the results of kamma makes worse kamma than > someone who has any understanding about kamma. ===== Agreed - one who fulfills all five conditions of killing without a knowledge of kamma creates a more weighty result than one who fulfills all five conditons of killing with a knowledge of kamma. My interpretation of Christine's flight navigator is that there is no intention to kill; killing happens as an indirect consequence of the navigator's actions. This is why I gave the example of eating meat as not breaking the first precept. ===== > In the case of the flightnavigator who fires off the missile > resulting in the death of many beings, but who feels pleasure this > is rooted in moha of a very high degree. Killing at a distance is > still killing according to the scriptures and so is ordering another > to kill. So in fact the kamma of that act of killing will give its > unpleasant results to many: the one who pushed the button certainly; > and also his commander and probably even the person who ordered the > soldiers to fight in the first place. It is one of the reasons that > being the ruler of a country is seen as such grave and duty in the > Buddhist texts. ===== In Christine's example, the navigator is simply doing calculations to navigate the jet to avoid anti-aircraft fire, the navigator is not launching the bombs. To take my point to the extreme, consider the person who cut down the tree which was used to make the paper upon which the navigator did his calculations to guide the jet; is this tree-cutter going to suffer the unwholesome kamma of killing thousands of people? If we are discussing the kammic result of the person who releases the bomb, knowing full well that the bomb will kill, yet still taking joy in a job well done, then I agree with your comments about killing at a distance and the kammic weight of actions performed without a knowledge of kamma. Metta, Rob M :-) 27637 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:02am Subject: Vism thread and Rupas Hi Larry, Nina, Howard & All, > I thought I would wait until Nina catches up before going on with the > Visuddhimagga thread. > > Larry > --------------------- Good idea. Hopefully Jim will be back sometime too and he also likes to go slowly and to carefully check the Tiika. As we’re proceeding slowly with this difficult text, I have an idea for your consideration. Given the recent passages on primary and derived rupas and Howard’s questions about groups of rupas etc, would it be helpful to also post Nina’s excellent book on ‘Rupas’ (on-line, but not published) in extracts for support and clarification? It is full of good quotes, mostly from the suttas but also from other texts and I think it shows how the Abhidhamma ‘take’ on these is no different from that in the suttas. It’s quite a small book. Of course it could be anyone else that does the posting, though you do a particularly good job in this regard. The latest version will be here: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Glad to hear any comments. Metta, Sarah ====== 27638 From: Egberdina Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:13am Subject: Re: Path & Fruit(fly) Hi Howard, Sorry about the little addition to the title. Can't help myself :-) I'm not in a position to answer your question, but just wanted to add to the "texture" of your question. I never tire of reading the Samaññaphala Sutta, which is rendered as The Fruits of the Contemplative Life on http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn02.html My reading of this sutta leaves me with the same suspicions that you have re practice and enlightenment. I especially love the following line: "You aren't turning me over to my enemies, are you? How can there be such a large community of monks -- 1,250 in all -- with no sound of sneezing, no sound of coughing, no voices at all?" I don't think they were reading either. Peace Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I have a question: Abhidhamma presents the notion of path > consciousness and fruition consciousness (or path and fruit). Now, path and fruit are also > mentioned in the suttas. I'm not sure about this, but I suspect that in the > suttas, 'path' refers to a path of practice (leading to a stage of > enlightenment) and 'fruit' to the result of that path of practice, namely the given stage > of enlightenment. So, there is the path to stream entry, and its fruition > which consists of entering the stream. Likewise for once returning, non-returning, > and full enlightenment. Is there anywhere in the suttas mention of path and > fruit consciousness, or do they only appear in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the > commentaries? > > With metta, > Howard 27639 From: shakti Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:59am Subject: The Holy Relics of Lord Buddha Dear Thomas, Thank you for sharing the site about Lord Buddha's relics. I especially enjoyed the photos. Metta, Shakti nordwest wrote: Dear sangha, The Lord Buddha's Holy Relics - a collection the most holy objects of Buddhism NOTICE: Pictures of lord Buddha's corporal relics are displayed out of True reverence to the Master and should not be misconstrued as any thing other, by non Buddhists viewing this page. IF YOU DON'T APPRECIATE THIS INFORMATION, PLEASE KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF. DO NOT START DISCUSSING OR SLANDERING ABOUT THE HOLY RELICTS OF THE LORD BUDDHA. Thank you for your understanding and respect. You find the pictures and informations at http://www.shakumasu.com/ If you have visited the site before, you may have to "refresh" the page to see the link to "The Lord Buddha's Relics" Gassho, Thomas 27640 From: Egberdina Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 4:09am Subject: Re: The Holy Relics of Lord Buddha Hi Thomas, We have not typed to each other before. I have enjoyed browsing through the wide range material you have posted previously. I am asking your permission to discuss this current post of yours in the context of attachment. I cannot say whether I am a Buddhist or not. No harm done either way. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nordwest wrote: > Dear sangha, > > The Lord Buddha's Holy Relics - a collection the most holy objects of Buddhism 27641 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 5:53am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > Hi James k: You still have not tell me your position on how the original > state of mind (or pure mind) is Anatta. To me your position there is > something underlying in our consciouness. > > > > kind regards > Ken O Hi Ken O, I am hesitant to answer this question because I don't want it to turn into a debate. It seems that you have different ideas about consciousness and anatta than I do. I believe that your thinking on these matters have been greatly influenced by the Abhidhamma. Since you want me to explain what I believe as it compares to what you believe, I am going to have to address these differences. The Abhidhamma explains that all dhammas (nama and rupa) are impermanent, non-self, and suffering. I have some issues with the suffering characteristic for rupa, but I will leave that for now; what I believe that the Abhidhamma leaves out, which is very important to understanding, is that all dhammas are also impure. Phenomena are impure, thoughts are impure, the body is impure, etc., and even empty space is impure. The thing that makes all of this impure is impermanence, non-self, and suffering. The only thing that isn't impure is consciousness. Consciousness is pure; and its purity is like a light in comparison to the darkness of the impurity of samsara. If consciousness wasn't pure, Nibbana wouldn't be possible. The Abhidhamma describes consciousness in terms of sensory contacts: eye consciousness, nose consciousness, feeling consciousness, etc. and that each of these consciousnesses rise and fall. I won't dispute that, but I don't believe that it presents the entire picture. There are two levels to consciousness: the pure consciousness, and the consciousness that because of ignorance has created a false sense of self. I know that this thinking doesn't correspond with the Abhidhamma because the Abhidhamma is interested in an atomistic view of dhammas: that everything must be broken down to its smallest independent status. However, consciousness isn't like that. Consciousness can have a level of impurity, that is impermanent, non-self, and suffering, and a level of purity, to where those characteristics don't apply (and I don't mean the opposite, I mean they just don't apply). This is a very complicated subject and I hope you can follow me thus far. For some support, I want to go to one sutta, "An Analysis of the Statement": The Blessed One said this: "A monk should investigate in such a way that, his consciousness neither externally scattered & diffused, nor internally positioned, he would from lack of clinging/sustenance be unagitated. When -- his consciousness neither externally scattered & diffused, nor internally positioned -- from lack of clinging/sustenance he would be unagitated, there is no seed for the conditions of future birth, aging, death, or stress." After the Buddha spoke these words, the monks went to Ven. Maha Kaccana to explain them. He was hesitant to explain but he explained in part: "He doesn't assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. His consciousness changes & is unstable, but his consciousness doesn't -- because of the change & instability of consciousness -- alter in accordance with the change in consciousness. His mind is not consumed with any agitations born from an alteration in accordance with the change in consciousness or coming from the co-arising of (unskillful mental) qualities. And because his awareness is not consumed, he feels neither fearful, threatened, nor solicitous." Later, the Buddha verified that this was the correct explanation. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn138.html From this explanation it is demonstrated that there are in fact two levels to consciousness. One level can be unstable but the other level doesn't need to be unstable. I usually refer to the unstable level as `consciousness' and the stable, pure, luminous level as `awareness'. But, in actuality, they are two parts of the same thing. The terms used aren't important. Ken, I would suggest you read the entire sutta to get a good understanding of what I am saying. In summary, pure consciousness or pure mind doesn't suggest a self nor is it dependent on a self. What this is like I don't know, I don't have pure awareness yet (only glimpses). My understanding is only theoretical. Metta, James Ps. I may or may not reply to posts depending on certain conditions. If there is a time when I don't reply, please don't take it personally. 27642 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 1:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/4/03 2:28:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > "Of course, and here I am following what your general > >approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen > or won't happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, > thus, to sum up: There is no practice. How am I doing? ;-)" > > > Just the chinese sayings wu wei er wei (no action yet there is > action) literal translation. I would to share this interesting sutta > paragraph with you > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-038.html > > "But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], > there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being > no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that > consciousness doesn't land &grow, there is no production of renewed > becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed > becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging &death, > sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the > cessation of this entire mass of suffering &stress." > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, this is a lovely description of the unforced, "just happening", life flow of the arahant. But we do not operate at this level, or at least it doesn't *appear* that we do, and it won't help to pretend to ourselves that we do. We have to get up, rattle our cell door, push it, pull it, and finally get out of the cell before we first realize that the door was unlocked and ajar all the time. --------------------------------------------------- > > > kind regards > Ken O > > ======================== 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) 27643 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, James (and Ken) - In a message dated 12/4/03 8:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" > wrote: > >Hi James > k: You still have not tell me your position on how the > original > >state of mind (or pure mind) is Anatta. To me your position there > is > >something underlying in our consciouness. > > > > > > > >kind regards > >Ken O > > Hi Ken O, > > I am hesitant to answer this question because I don't want it to turn > into a debate. It seems that you have different ideas about > consciousness and anatta than I do. I believe that your thinking on > these matters have been greatly influenced by the Abhidhamma. Since > you want me to explain what I believe as it compares to what you > believe, I am going to have to address these differences. > > The Abhidhamma explains that all dhammas (nama and rupa) are > impermanent, non-self, and suffering. I have some issues with the > suffering characteristic for rupa, but I will leave that for now; > what I believe that the Abhidhamma leaves out, which is very > important to understanding, is that all dhammas are also impure. > Phenomena are impure, thoughts are impure, the body is impure, etc., > and even empty space is impure. The thing that makes all of this > impure is impermanence, non-self, and suffering. The only thing that > isn't impure is consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: We are not in agreement on this matter, James, in several respects. First of all, I don't see this matter as an Abhidhamma-versus-the-rest issue at all. Secondly, I don't know what impurity would be except to be infected by defilement, and it is not rupas that are infected by defilement, but mind. There is nothing particularly pure or impure about hardness or sights or sounds etc - they just are what they are. In fact, from the ultimate perspective, what is impure about craving, aversion, and sense of self? They are also simply empty phenomena rolling on. As far as the relative purity of consciousness as compared to rupas - well, it is consciousness that is "defiled," not rupas. The point of the sutta that says "luminous is the mind" is to point out that the defilements are not intrinsic to the mind, and are, thus, removable. ------------------------------------------------ Consciousness is pure; and its purity > is like a light in comparison to the > darkness of the impurity of > samsara. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Consciousness should not be related to samsara. That's just "apples and oranges." Consciousness operating in the presence of defilements, with a repeated "rebirth" of an apparent self grasping onto first one piece of flotsam in the stream and then another piece of jetsam, is called "samsara". Consciousness operating free of any influence of ignorance, craving, and aversion is (consciousness operating in the context of) nibbana. ---------------------------------------------------- If consciousness wasn't pure, Nibbana wouldn't be possible. > > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that, but by being "pure," I mean the fact of the defilements being adventitious, and not intrinsic - no more, no less. ------------------------------------------------ > The Abhidhamma describes consciousness in terms of sensory contacts: > eye consciousness, nose consciousness, feeling consciousness, etc. > and that each of these consciousnesses rise and fall. I won't > dispute that, but I don't believe that it presents the entire > picture. There are two levels to consciousness: the pure > consciousness, and the consciousness that because of ignorance has > created a false sense of self. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: And consciousnesses of the six types function whether afflicted by reification or not. The removal of defilements doesn't change consciousness into a world soul or some such thing; it merely frees consciousness to operate in its natural manner. ------------------------------------------------ I know that this thinking doesn't > > correspond with the Abhidhamma because the Abhidhamma is interested > in an atomistic view of dhammas: that everything must be broken down > to its smallest independent status. However, consciousness isn't > like that. Consciousness can have a level of impurity, that is > impermanent, non-self, and suffering, and a level of purity, to where > those characteristics don't apply (and I don't mean the opposite, I > mean they just don't apply). > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: James, it seems to me that there is a sense of what you write here that makes consciousness into some pure, substantial, permanent principle on the surface of which occur impermanent, non-self, and unsatisfactory phenomena. While consciousness is an operation that proceeds in a gapless fashion, this picture of it as an underlying pure ocean on the surface of which waves rise and fall, is, in my opinion, a kind of atta view. I think your position on consciousness is somewhat close to "Sati's error". --------------------------------------------------------- > > This is a very complicated subject and I hope you can follow me thus > far. For some support, I want to go to one sutta, "An Analysis of > the Statement": > > The Blessed One said this: "A monk should investigate in such a way > that, his consciousness neither externally scattered &diffused, nor > internally positioned, he would from lack of clinging/sustenance be > unagitated. When -- his consciousness neither externally scattered & > diffused, nor internally positioned -- from lack of > clinging/sustenance he would be unagitated, there is no seed for the > conditions of future birth, aging, death, or stress." > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: This refers to the state of non-clinging, the state of an unanchored mind, the state of freedom. It is the way consciousness functions when the defilements are gone. ------------------------------------------------ > > After the Buddha spoke these words, the monks went to Ven. Maha > Kaccana to explain them. He was hesitant to explain but he explained > in part: > > "He doesn't assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as > possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the > self as in consciousness. His consciousness changes &is unstable, > but his consciousness doesn't -- because of the change &instability > of consciousness -- alter in accordance with the change in > consciousness. His mind is not consumed with any agitations born from > an alteration in accordance with the change in consciousness or > coming from the co-arising of (unskillful mental) qualities. And > because his awareness is not consumed, he feels neither fearful, > threatened, nor solicitous." > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: IMO, this is a superb sutta, but the part you present here is the least clear, and I believe you have misinterpreted it to take the mind as a kind of immovable atman. My understanding of this bit of material is that it expresses that the change and instability of consciousness does not lead to agitation or fear in a mind that is freed of defilements. --------------------------------------------------- > > Later, the Buddha verified that this was the correct explanation. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn138.html > > From this explanation it is demonstrated that there are in fact two > levels to consciousness. One level can be unstable but the other > level doesn't need to be unstable. I usually refer to the unstable > level as `consciousness' and the stable, pure, luminous level > as `awareness'. But, in actuality, they are two parts of the same > thing. The terms used aren't important. Ken, I would suggest you > read the entire sutta to get a good understanding of what I am > saying. In summary, pure consciousness or pure mind doesn't suggest > a self nor is it dependent on a self. What this is like I don't > know, I don't have pure awareness yet (only glimpses). My > understanding is only theoretical. > > Metta, James > Ps. I may or may not reply to posts depending on certain conditions. > If there is a time when I don't reply, please don't take it > personally. > > =========================== 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) 27644 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 8:52am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hello RobertK, RobertK: Latent tendencies (anusaya) are subtle defilements that lie dormant 'waiting' for the opportunity to arise as pariyutthana where they are active forms of craving, dosa and wrong view. Michael: This description gives the (wrong) impression that the anusaya are not subject to change and may even have some sort of substance. So, which would be a proper description that would dispel this impression? Is there something in the commentaries to this effect? Metta Michael 27645 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:05am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hello KenH, KenH: However, if it is a form of concentration other than jhana (as it is in modern, popular, traditions), then, no, it is not a part of vipassana development. It is not a method taught by the Buddha.. Michael: I am curious now, can you please provide more details on what would be those popular forms of concentration? You are also saying that jhana is part of the Vipassana movement, have I understood it right? If yes, can you be more specific which/where Vipassana movement? KenH: I'd like to remind you that, in the Tipitaka, some ariyans developed jhana followed by vipassana, some developed vipassana followed by jhana, some developed jhana and vipassana together and some developed vipassana alone (no jhana). Michael: I think it is always good to qualify what comes from the basic scriptures in the Tipitaka from the commentaries. And I presume your conclusions are drawn from the commentaries, right? I am also curious how is jhana and vipassana developed together? I can understand alternating both, or in a sequence, but together, how does that work? Metta Michael 27646 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:09am Subject: anapanasati 5 a anapanasati 5 a Explanations about satipatthana by Sarah and Jon: I checked the detail in the Satipatthana Sutta commentary and sub-commentary on the use of sati-sampajanna and quote below from Soma Thera’s translation p.34: ***** "Sampajano = "Clearly comprehending." Endowed with knowledge called circumspection [sampajañña]. Clearly comprehending = Discerning rightly, entirely and equally [samma samantato samañca pajananto]. Rightly = Correctly [aviparitam]. Entirely = By knowing in all ways [sabbakarapajananena]. Equally = By reason of proceeding through the conveying of higher and higher spiritual attainments [uparupari visesavaha-bhavena pavattiya]. Satima = "Mindful." Endowed with mindfulness that lays hold of the body as a subject of meditation, because this yogavacara (the man conversant with contemplative activity) contemplates with wisdom after laying hold of the object with mindfulness. There is nothing called contemplation without mindfulness. Therefore the Master said: "Mindfulness is necessary in all circumstances, O bhikkhus, I declare."[17] Necessary in all circumstances = Everywhere in the state of becoming, in every sluggish and unbalanced state of mind, it is desirable. Or, that by the help of which the other proper Factors of Enlightenment [bojjhanga] are capable of being developed, is "necessary in all circumstances." Here, contemplation takes place by means of wisdom that is assisted by mindfulness. To point out the things by the influence of which the meditation of the yogi prospers, is the purpose of the words, "Ardent, clearly comprehending, and mindful." " ***** 27647 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:09am Subject: Re: Nutriment condition Hi Howard, I understand completely your point of view, and you are not the only one who thinks in this way. I also heard this from others ;-) ;-) It is good you speak directly, why not. Different angles again, I just sent you something about nutrition, what a coincidence. You may not like it. I am not interested in science at all, only in conditioning factors. Nutritive essence is so small, arising and falling away immediately. It performs its function within a unit of rupas. I have no inclination to compare it with modern science notions of food, these are not helpful to me, only in the kitchen!!! I am just interested in how the study of realities will help me to become detached from the notion of control, I can control. Not only in the Abhidhamma, see Dhammasangani and Patthana, also in Suttanta Nutriment is mentioned: M 9, Discourse on Right Understanding. Four kinds of nutriment: material food, sense impression, volition (manosa~ncetana) and consciousness. Sariputta spoke this sutta (Transl: Ven. Soma):"...Since a disciple of the Pure Ones really knows nutriment, the origin of nutriment, the ceasing of nutriment, he, even to that extent, is a person with right understanding. What is nutriment? For the stability or assistance of beings born or beings seeking birth, four are the kinds of nutriment. What are the four? Material food, coarse or fine, sense-impression (N:contact) is the second, ideational activity [N: volition] is the third, consciousness is the fourth...." Coarse or fine food. Why is this said? Not to give us a scientifical explanation about food. When we read conventional terms we should go straight to reality, otherwise we always miss the essence, the message of the sutta. In the commentary there are more explanations. <...for the material body of beings subsisting on material food such food is a particular condition...> Do you see this: conditions are explained. And: This refers to the group of eight inseparable rupas: the four elements, colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. In D 33, also these four kinds of nutriment are mentioned, and also in other suttas. Nutrition is one of the four factors that produce rupa, the others being kamma, citta and heat. Nutriment-condition is among the twentyfour classes of conditions of the Patthana. We read in the ³Guide to Conditional Relations²(U Narada): This brings us to the goal of the teachings. The more you see the intricacy of conditions the less will you believe in a self who controls. Only phenomena rolling on by their own conditions. When examples are given of coarse and fine food, there is no need to stumble over these. We have to go to the essence. Nutrition-condition is very important and we also have to remember as mentioned the three immaterial kinds of nutrition. You ask me whether I think it is a reality? Yes, yes, but I do not claim to be able to pinpoint it and sift it out in a unit of rupas. I find all that is taught in the Tipitaka, Abhidhamma included, very reasonable, and more than that: precious, beneficial, worthy of study and reflection. Here I remember patient acquiescence I quoted from B.B. Do you have more pet peeves that prevent you from the study of the Abhidhamma? It is better to have it all out. Nina. op 03-12-2003 16:37 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Nina, in this post I touch on one of my "pet peeves" with regard to > Abhidhamma. In itself, it isn't a topic of major importance, but it points to > what I see as a more important issue - the taking of prescientific, > conventional > notions and turning them into alleged "realities". 27648 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. thread Hi Larry, Do you have any suggestions for me? There is no co. to 38-42. Then I skipped the footnotes 16- 22, which are actually from the tiika. Because I find it too long, about theories of others, and I rather pay attention to what I see as more relevant. Therefore, as I said, I am with the eye, Vis. 47. My intentions: I cannot translate all, too difficult for me. I have no help! Choosing what I can do, skipping sentences that make no sense to me, difficult grammar and unlisted words. Since nobody said that he/she likes me to list Pali words with the transl. I shall not do this, because it is time consuming. But I am listening to your suggestions, Larry. After 47, one line 48, one line on 49 (ear), then no co until 53: antsheap, then 54, after that there is Co to 58, feminity faculty, but this is in the footnote of Vis text, easy for me. I think I take it all together with the Pali. Nina. op 03-12-2003 23:51 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Where are you in the translations of the Vism. commentary and what are > your intentions? 27649 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:17am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James (and Ken) - ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > We are not in agreement on this matter, James, in several respects. Hi Howard, Hehehe…okay! Calm down! ;-) I didn't expect for you to agree with me as I have read in some of your posts that you do not believe in a larger consciousness. I am not making it an Abhidhamma-versus-the- rest, this is just my take, at this moment in time, based on what I know. I am comfortable with this mental construct for the time being until such time as I realize more. Until a Buddha appears before me and tells me what is what, I reserve the right to think what I want (though I highly respect you, you are not a Buddha). Small notes: I don't mean impure in the way you think; I don't mean pure awareness in the way you think. (I won't elaborate because I don't want to debate.) And if you feel I have misinterpreted the sutta, feel free to explain its real meaning to me. Take care. Metta, James 27650 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 7:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nutriment condition Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/4/03 1:12:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > I understand completely your point of view, and you are not the only one who > thinks in this way. I also heard this from others ;-) ;-) It is good you > speak directly, why not. > Different angles again, I just sent you something about nutrition, what a > coincidence. You may not like it. > I am not interested in science at all, only in conditioning factors. > Nutritive essence is so small, arising and falling away immediately. It > performs its function within a unit of rupas. I have no inclination to > compare it with modern science notions of food, these are not helpful to me, > only in the kitchen!!! I am just interested in how the study of realities > will help me to become detached from the notion of control, I can control. > Not only in the Abhidhamma, see Dhammasangani and Patthana, also in Suttanta > Nutriment is mentioned: M 9, Discourse on Right Understanding. Four kinds of > nutriment: material food, sense impression, volition (manosa~ncetana) and > consciousness. > Sariputta spoke this sutta (Transl: Ven. Soma):"...Since a disciple of the > Pure Ones really knows nutriment, the origin of nutriment, the ceasing of > nutriment, he, even to that extent, is a person with right understanding. > What is nutriment? For the stability or assistance of beings born or beings > seeking birth, four are the kinds of nutriment. What are the four? > Material food, coarse or fine, sense-impression (N:contact) is the second, > ideational activity [N: volition] is the third, consciousness is the > fourth...." > > > You ask me whether I think it is a reality? Yes, yes, but I do not claim to > be able to pinpoint it and sift it out in a unit of rupas. I find all that > is taught in the Tipitaka, Abhidhamma included, very reasonable, and more > than that: precious, beneficial, worthy of study and reflection. Here I > remember patient acquiescence I quoted from B.B. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I thank you for all the details, Nina. To me, the sutta references all treat 'nutriment' as simply a very general conventional term that lumps together a number of different conventional things that serve as a sort of "sustenance" for other things. Making of it into a hard-to-pinpoint, hard-to-sift-out "ultimate reality" is simply an exercise in unnecessary scholasticism, IMO. (Sorry. ;-) ------------------------------------------------------ > Do you have more pet peeves that prevent you from the study of the > Abhidhamma? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: My "pet peeves" don't prevent me from studying Abhidhamma. I do study it, and do gain from that study, but I don't study it as deeply, seriously, or with the same enthousiasm as you and others here. Oh, yes, "life principle" is another pet peeve of mine. I think it is a piece of primitive nonsense probably growing out of the experience of people who frequently got to see the moment of death of others without the "shielding" often provided by modern day hospitals and hospices. I see jivitindriya (sp?) as another presumed but never observed hidden something that there is no reason to believe in. -------------------------------------------------- It is better to have it all out.> > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, we're getting there! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------- Nina. > > op 03-12-2003 16:37 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > > Nina, in this post I touch on one of my "pet peeves" with regard to > >Abhidhamma. In itself, it isn't a topic of major importance, but it points > to > >what I see as a more important issue - the taking of prescientific, > >conventional > >notions and turning them into alleged "realities". > > > ========================== 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) 27651 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 7:42am Subject: Magnificent Wallpaper Hi, all - I am currently using the picture to be found at the following address as wallpaper: http://www.concentration.org/moon.jpg I think it is magnificent! Enjoy. :-) 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) 27652 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 0:46pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi Michael, Hope you don't mind if another "Rob" butts in here... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > RobertK: > Latent tendencies (anusaya) are subtle defilements that lie > dormant 'waiting' for the opportunity to arise as pariyutthana where > they are active forms of craving, dosa and wrong view. > > Michael: > This description gives the (wrong) impression that the anusaya are not > subject to change and may even have some sort of substance. So, which would > be a proper description that would dispel this impression? Is there > something in the commentaries to this effect? I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for more information. If this additional perspective confuses rather than clarifies, I apologize. Metta, Rob M :-) 27653 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 1:06pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Dear RobertK, RobM, and all, It sits better with my idea of justice and fairness that anyone involved in the killing of beings should have consequences - and the level of intention should make a difference to the consequences. I understand that belief (or not) in kamma will probably affect future behaviour, but it doesn't affect the consequences of an already performed action. Intention does/should. If my loved one was killed by a ragingly angry person filled with spite and hate, or by someone unknowingly backing a truck over them, I will be just as grief stricken, they are just as dead. But the intent of the actor is different. If it doesn't depend entirely on the mind state of the actor, and it depends on the result - how is it that unknowingly stepping on ants doesn't break the precept? The ants are not individually known, and their death is a secondary side effect of walking. I wonder how giving an order to fly on a bombing mission to destroy a water reticulation plant which results in the death of beings who are not individually known or intended as victims (i.e. a secondary side effect) is different to that. With regard to meat eating - ordering/buying meat from the butcher - the result of each order is death of a being at a later time, even though the identity of particular individual beings aren't known in advance. Now that I think it over, the buying of meat from a butcher seems hard to justify. The Buddha didn't ask for, order, or pay money for meat - but we do ... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > -Dear RobM and Christine, > The texts are very specific that the one who performs any misdeed > kills with ignorance of the results of kamma makes worse kamma than > someone who has any understanding about kamma.In the commentaries > they give the example of the baby who > reaches out for a hot pot on a stove. They are completely ignorant > of the danger and so burn themselves badly. The adult takes hold of > the same pot, but very gingerly moving it quickly. They feel the > heat but don't get burned much, if at all. > Say someone is poor and makes a living as a hunter supporting his > family in this way. But he knows it is akusala, so as soon as > another opportunity arises he gives up that action and never kills > again. On the other hand, the person ignorant of Dhamma might even > do hunting as a sport, enjoying the killing, and looking for any > chance to go hunting. Hunting is always akusala but we see how the > ignorant one is in the more dangerous position. > In the case of the flightnavigator who fires off the missile > resulting in the death of many beings, but who feels pleasure this > is rooted in moha of a very high degree. Killing at a distance is > still killing according to the scriptures and so is ordering another > to kill. So in fact the kamma of that act of killing will give its > unpleasant results to many: the one who pushed the button certainly; > and also his commander and probably even the person who ordered the > soldiers to fight in the first place. It is one of the reasons that > being the ruler of a country is seen as such grave and duty in the > Buddhist texts. > ================ > "robmoult" > My opinion is, Yes, the killer of the > wasp conditions more bad kamma > > for himself than the flight navigator. > ======= > In fact killing a human is considered more serious than killing an > animal or insect in the Buddhist texts. > ============== > rob.moult@j...>The flight navigator INDIRECTLY caused tens of > thousands to die; in > > the same way, my dinner last night INDIRECTLY caused a chicken to > be > > killed. According to Theravada, I am not guilty of breaking the > > first precept by eating meat. Extending the same argument, the > > flight navigator is also not guilty of breaking the first precept. > ========== > As I said above killing at a distance is not an excuse in Buddhism, > thus the airman certainly killed. Do you believe the buddha and > arahants were indirect killers when they ate meat or fish? > > RobertK > 27654 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 1:57pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > It sits better with my idea of justice and fairness that anyone > involved in the killing of beings should have consequences - and the > level of intention should make a difference to the consequences. I > understand that belief (or not) in kamma will probably affect future > behaviour, but it doesn't affect the consequences of an already > performed action. Intention does/should. If my loved one was killed > by a ragingly angry person filled with spite and hate, or by someone > unknowingly backing a truck over them, I will be just as grief > stricken, they are just as dead. But the intent of the actor is > different. > If it doesn't depend entirely on the mind state of the actor, and it > depends on the result - how is it that unknowingly stepping on ants > doesn't break the precept? The ants are not individually known, and > their death is a secondary side effect of walking. I wonder how > giving an order to fly on a bombing mission to destroy a water > reticulation plant which results in the death of beings who are not > individually known or intended as victims (i.e. a secondary side > effect) is different to that. ===== Christianity talks of "justice and fairness" with God making judgements and handing out rewards / punishments. These concepts are deeply ingrained in our psyche and our social systems. Buddhism talks of natural laws (laws of nature); no judgements. It does not make sense to say that it is "right" or "wrong" for an object to fall; the law of gravity is absolute. The natural law of kamma is also absolute (no "judgement" involved). When a javana citta arises, the cetana (volition) cetasika creates the potential for a future vipaka citta and kamma-born rupa. The nature of the future vipaka depends on the nature of the javana citta. When the blind monk unknowingly stepped on insects, some other monks complained to the Buddha but the Buddha said that the blind monk was innocent of killing as there had been no intention to kill (the fact that there was consequential death was not an issue). Knowledge of kamma will impact the strength of cetana. When a person who knows the law of kamma does an unwholesome thing, fully aware of the law of kamma, the strength of the volition will be weaker than if the same person did the same action without any awareness of the law of kamma. I recently read a line somewhere that has really stuck with me (and has found its way into a number of my posts): "Modern society focuses on the external; the law of kamma focuses on the internal." Christine, I understand your feeling that an intentional act of murder vs. the accidential backing of a truck both result in death and therefore are of a similar nature (same result), but that is not the view of Buddhism. In our social system, we call murder "1st degree" and we call accidential death "2nd degree" (at least that is how it is labeled in the US TV shows). We have judges to make a judgement as to the "degree". ===== > > With regard to meat eating - ordering/buying meat from the butcher - > the result of each order is death of a being at a later time, even > though the identity of particular individual beings aren't known in > advance. Now that I think it over, the buying of meat from a butcher > seems hard to justify. The Buddha didn't ask for, order, or pay money > for meat - but we do ... ===== Buddhism doesn't buy into INDIRECT consequences. Eating meat is an act of eating, not an act of killing. Buying meat is an act of buying, not an act of killing. The butcher who slaughters the animals is guilty of killing; the person who pays the butcher for the meat and the person who eats the meat are not guilty of killing. On the other hand, the person who goes into a live seafood restaurant and says, "I want to eat that particular fish..." is guilty of "killing at a distance". Metta, Rob M :-) 27655 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:21pm Subject: Justice and Fairness Hi Christine, A person meticulously plans and executes a murder because of hatred. A person is a hired killer. A person kills as a momentary crime of passion (i.e. he finds his wife's lover). A person kills in self defence. A person kills by accidently backing a truck. A person kills because it is their job to execute condemned prisoners. A person kills because they are a soldier and face an enemy on the field of battle. A person kills because they are a judge and the law of the land requires capital punishement be given out for certain offences. In all eight cases listed above, there is a dead body at the end of the day. In modern society, some of these people are called "bad", some are "neutral" (doing their job) and the soldier may even be labeled as a "hero". "Justice and fairness" is a social concept that creates a lot of confusion (that is why we have "judges" to make "judgements"). The Buddhist definition of akusala kamma patha, killing has five constituent factors: - A living being - Knowledge that there is a living being - Desire to kill - Effort to kill - Consequential death The Buddhist approach makes a lot more sense to me. In fact, my opinion has no relevance here... kamma is a law of nature, like gravity. It doesn't matter if I believe in gravity, accept gravity or "if gravity makes sense to me"... gravity just IS. Metta, Rob M :-) 27656 From: nordwest Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Holy Relics of Lord Buddha Dear Herman, thank you for your letter. I am glad you like the site. I believe in free speech, so you don't need my permission, and I apologize for my harsh words to "forbid" talking about it. That was a mistake. I understand you concerns in the context of attachment. Gassho, Thomas Egberdina wrote: Hi Thomas, We have not typed to each other before. I have enjoyed browsing through the wide range material you have posted previously. I am asking your permission to discuss this current post of yours in the context of attachment. I cannot say whether I am a Buddhist or not. No harm done either way. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nordwest wrote: > Dear sangha, > > The Lord Buddha's Holy Relics - a collection the most holy objects of Buddhism 27657 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism thread and Rupas Hi Sarah, If anyone had an interest in bringing in additional material that would certainly be welcome, but the thread is moving so slowly I fear it is in danger of becoming extinct if we have even more distractions. The ideal scenario would be if everyone dropped all other threads and focused only on this one. That way we could have a nice systematic discussion on everything in due order. Larry ------------------------ Sarah: As we're proceeding slowly with this difficult text, I have an idea for your consideration. Given the recent passages on primary and derived rupas and Howard's questions about groups of rupas etc, would it be helpful to also post Nina's excellent book on 'Rupas' (on-line, but not published) in extracts for support and clarification? It is full of good quotes, mostly from the suttas but also from other texts and I think it shows how the Abhidhamma 'take' on these is no different from that in the suttas. It's quite a small book. 27658 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. thread Hi Nina, --- nina van gorkom wrote: >Since nobody said that he/she > likes me > to list Pali words with the transl. I shall not do this, because it is > time > consuming. .... I think I misunderstood your other comments, so others may have too. Pls list or explain any key words with the transl. This is always very helpful. Whatever you have time and inclination for. Have to dash. Metta, Sarah ======== 27659 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. thread Nina: "Hi Larry, Do you have any suggestions for me?" Hi Nina, My only suggestion is that you need to tell me when to stop and then when to resume. I can't tell what needs to be translated or what is left to translate. I agree there is a lot of material that doesn't need to be translated. I would like to pick up the pace unless we run into some point that merits a more extensive analysis. But I think we need to stay together. So if you see something that should be translated then we stop. Okay? Larry 27660 From: Egberdina Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 4:19pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine and everyone, This post isn't "aimed" at you in particular, but is just a general statement about the March Fly discussion. It is clear that there are lots of basic presuppositions, and I just want to challenge some of them. That seems to be what I do best :-) We talk about beings. Fair enough. At the level of beings, there are beings. We call them living beings. But that is not half the story. Beings are always living-dying beings. To live is to die. To take a snapshot of a living being is all good and well, but even under the most safe and nurturing conditions, all living beings die. To view a life as precious, whether it be a baby or a fly, must entail viewing it's death as precious. They are inseperable. As a consequence of selecting only the bit we like, we are constantly very actively repressing any awareness of the cyclical nature of life/death. I think all of us would aspire to a state of goodwill amongst all beings, but the reality is that the life of beings always takes the death of other beings as nutriment, so to speak. Life conditions death, and death conditions life. We talk about individual beings. Yet an individual never comes about on its own. There are no "higher order" beings that did not require the coming together of at least two other beings. We can conceive of individual beings, but no being can exist on its own. We talk about food chains, they are nothing more than life/death chains. Life/death is very complexly interwoven. We talk about individual beings, but we know that the bodies of beings are in a constant process of dying/regenerating. Take me, for example. Even as I write this, literally hundreds of thousands of body cells are dying, and a similar number are coming into being. There are millions of cells in my body, whose only function is to hunt out other cells and devour them. You recently wrote about samsara-ing, which I liked very much. In the context of the march fly, seeing it as a seperate living being only is samsara-ing. Seeing your own body as a seperate living being only is samsara-ing. The urge to defend or to attack comes from one source, and that is the belief of seperateness, me against the world, my life against death. I hate flies. Peace Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear RobertK, RobM, and all, > > It sits better with my idea of justice and fairness that anyone > involved in the killing of beings should have consequences - and 27661 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 11:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, James - In a message dated 12/4/03 1:20:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, James (and Ken) - > ---------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > We are not in agreement on this matter, James, in several > respects. > > > Hi Howard, > > Hehehe…okay! Calm down! ;-) I didn't expect for you to agree with > me as I have read in some of your posts that you do not believe in a > larger consciousness. I am not making it an Abhidhamma-versus-the- > rest, this is just my take, at this moment in time, based on what I > know. I am comfortable with this mental construct for the time being > until such time as I realize more. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Hey, whatever works at any given time! ;-) ---------------------------------------- Until a Buddha appears before me > > and tells me what is what, I reserve the right to think what I want > (though I highly respect you, you are not a Buddha). ----------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) Well, you sure got *that* right!! ---------------------------------------- Small notes: I > > don't mean impure in the way you think; I don't mean pure awareness > in the way you think. (I won't elaborate because I don't want to > debate.) > --------------------------------------- Howard: That's fine. -------------------------------------- And if you feel I have misinterpreted the sutta, feel free > > to explain its real meaning to me. -------------------------------------- Howard: As soon as I really know (several millenia from now, Nina ;-)), I'll do that! -------------------------------------- Take care.> > ------------------------------------ Howard: You, too. :-) ----------------------------------- > Metta, James > > ================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27662 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 4:59pm Subject: Vism.XIV 46 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 46. Now among these [sensitivities thus] possessed of difference due to difference of kamma, the eye and the ear apprehend non-contiguous objective fields, since consciousness is caused even if the supporting [primaries] of the objective fields do not adhere to the [faculties'] own supporting primaries.22 The nose, tongue and body apprehend contiguous objective fields, because consciousness is caused only if their objective fields' [primaries] adhere to their own supporting [primaries], [that is to say, if the objective fields' primaries adhere] as support [in the case of odours and flavours], and themselves [directly in the case of tangible data, which are identical with the three primaries excluding water]. --------------------- Note 22. See also par. 134 and notes 60, 61. The amplification in this paragraph is from Pm., which continues: 'There is another method: the eye and the ear have non-contiguous objective fields because arising of consciousness is caused while their objective fields are separated by an interval and apart (adhika). Some say that the ear has a contiguous objective field. If it did, then sound born of consciousness would not be the object of ear-consciousness, for there is no arising externally of what is consciousness-originated. And in the texts sound as object is spoken of as being the object of ear-consciousness without making any distinction. Besides, there would be no defining the direction and position of the sound because it would then have to be apprehended in the place occupied by the possessor of the objective field, as happens in the case of an odour. Consequently it remains in the same place where it arose, if it comes into focus in the ear avenue (so the Burmese ed.). Are not the sounds of washermen [beating their washing on stones] heard later by those who stand at a distance? No; because there is a difference in the way of apprehending a sound according to the ways in which it becomes evident to one nearby and to one at a distance. For just as, because of difference in the way of apprehending the sound of words according to the way in which it becomes evident to one at a distance and to one nearby, there comes to be [respectively] not apprehending, and apprehending, of the differences in the syllables, so also, when the sound of washermen (a) becomes [an occurrence] that is evident throughout from beginning to end to one who is nearby, and (b) becomes an occurrence that is evident in compressed form in the end or in the middle to one who is at a distance, it is because there is a difference in the apprehending and definition, which occur later in the cognitive series of ear-consciousness, that there comes to be the assumption (abhimaana) "Heard faintly is heard later". But that sound comes into the ear's focus at the moment of its own existence and in dependence on the place where it arises (see Ch. XIII, par.112; DhsA. 313). If there is absolutely no successive becoming of sound, how does an echo arise? The sound, though it remains at a distance, is a condition for the arising of an echo and for the vibration of vessels, etc., elsewhere as a magnet (ayo-kanta) is for the movement of iron' (Pm. 446-47). 27663 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 5:01pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hello RobM, RobM: I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for more information. Michael: Yes, this would make more sense to me. But is this taken from the commentaries or is it your own conclusion? Metta Michael 27664 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 5:19pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Doomed March Fly Hello RobM & Christine, RobM: The natural law of kamma is also absolute (no "judgement" involved). When a javana citta arises, the cetana (volition) cetasika creates the potential for a future vipaka citta and kamma-born rupa. The nature of the future vipaka depends on the nature of the javana citta. When the blind monk unknowingly stepped on insects, some other monks complained to the Buddha but the Buddha said that the blind monk was innocent of killing as there had been no intention to kill (the fact that there was consequential death was not an issue). Michael: I have been following this thread with great interest and although I fully agree with what you say, there is something still nagging me and I cannot put a finger on it. I think it is unreasonable to assume that only the mental state of the being who commits the action has a bearing on kamma and that the degree of harm caused by the action on others has no bearing on kamma. The only thing that comes to my mind is the interconnection of everything in samsara but at this stage I really don’t know how to elaborate this further. Also comes to mind the advice of the Buddha to his son to consider any action before, during and after performing it, if it caused any affliction to himself or others. If only his mental state would be the crucial element I guess his advice would be rather different. Metta Michael 27665 From: Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 6:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 46 Hi all, I take this to mean eye and ear consciousness can apprehend objects at a distance but nose, taste, and touch consciousness cannot. [I wonder about nose??] I assume sound and visible object travel from the distant place to their respective organs by means of "death" and "rebirth" (in a slightly different place) of the sound and visible object rupas. Having non-contiguous objects does not rule out contact (phassa). Larry -------------------------- The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 46. Now among these [sensitivities thus] possessed of difference due to difference of kamma, the eye and the ear apprehend non-contiguous objective fields, since consciousness is caused even if the supporting [primaries] of the objective fields do not adhere to the [faculties'] own supporting primaries.22 The nose, tongue and body apprehend contiguous objective fields, because consciousness is caused only if their objective fields' [primaries] adhere to their own supporting [primaries], [that is to say, if the objective fields' primaries adhere] as support [in the case of odours and flavours], and themselves [directly in the case of tangible data, which are identical with the three primaries excluding water]. 27666 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 6:55pm Subject: Re: Anusaya Hi Michael, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > RobM: > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for > more information. > > Michael: > Yes, this would make more sense to me. But is this taken from the > commentaries or is it your own conclusion? As far as I know, the term "pakatupanissaya" only arises in the Patthana. Only one third of the Patthana has been translated into English and that one third is extremely long and has a bizzare way of organizing the material; for example, you won't find a section titled "pakatupanissaya". In brief, I can't quote a specific text that says, "anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support condition". However, I would defend this position as making logic sense after studying the concepts of anusaya and pakatupanissaya. Metta, Rob M :-) 27667 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 7:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hello Michael, I was holding court on the evils of popular Buddhist meditation :-) Your response was: ----------- > I am curious now, can you please provide more details on what would be those popular forms of concentration? ------------ KH: Consider the Satipatthana and Anapanasati Suttas; These utterly profound teachings are, today, interpreted in a way that renders them banal and worthless. By heeding the ancient commentaries, we can avoid such terrible misinterpretation: When the Buddha spoke of 'mindfulness while walking,' he did not mean the kind of mindfulness we share with lesser beings: When dogs and jackals walk, they know they are walking; Also, a baby at the breast knows pleasant feeling. We should not slander the Buddha by suggesting that these commonplace forms of mindfulness [of body and feeling] are the same as his unique, profound teaching: satipatthana. ---------------- MK: > You are also saying that jhana is part of the Vipassana movement, have I understood it right? If yes, can you be more specific which/where Vipassana movement? ----------------- Sorry Michael, we are on different wavelengths here. I made no reference to "Vipassana movement." Did you think I was referring to the Goenka group? ----------------- KenH: > > I'd like to remind you that, in the Tipitaka, some ariyans developed jhana followed by vipassana, some developed vipassana followed by jhana, some developed jhana and vipassana together and some developed vipassana alone (no jhana). Michael: > I think it is always good to qualify what comes from the basic scriptures in the Tipitaka from the commentaries. And I presume your conclusions are drawn from the commentaries, right? ----------------- Not this time. I was thinking of certain suttas quoted by Nina in message # 12371. I would be good to have your comments on that message if you wouldn't mind. ---------------- MB : > I am also curious how is jhana and vipassana developed together? I can understand alternating both, or in a sequence, but together, how does that work? --------------- I don't specifically remember the explanation of this. In anapanasati, the object of consciousness is not a concept of breath (e.g., the movement of the abdomen), it is the actual rupa -- the paramattha dhamma -- that is conventionally known as breath. As you know, vipassana (satipatthana), also has a paramattha dhamma as object. If jhana and vipassana could possibly share one and the same object, then they might well be said to be developed together. That is, if they could have, not only the same type of object (rupa), but the same actual rupa. I think this is exactly what happens in anapana-sati (the most difficult of all practices). Being able to enter and leave jhana at will, and being able to enter and leave satipatthana at will, the meditator is able to make one rupa the object of both jhana consciousness and [the immediately following] vipassana consciousness. Corrections welcome. Kind regards, Ken H 27668 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 7:11pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Michael, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello RobM & Christine, > > RobM: > The natural law of kamma is also absolute (no "judgement" involved). > When a javana citta arises, the cetana (volition) cetasika creates > the potential for a future vipaka citta and kamma-born rupa. The > nature of the future vipaka depends on the nature of the javana > citta. > > When the blind monk unknowingly stepped on insects, some other monks > complained to the Buddha but the Buddha said that the blind monk was > innocent of killing as there had been no intention to kill (the fact > that there was consequential death was not an issue). > > > Michael: > I have been following this thread with great interest and although I fully > agree with what you say, there is something still nagging me and I cannot > put a finger on it. I think it is unreasonable to assume that only the > mental state of the being who commits the action has a bearing on kamma and > that the degree of harm caused by the action on others has no bearing on > kamma. The only thing that comes to my mind is the interconnection of > everything in samsara but at this stage I really don't know how to elaborate > this further. Also comes to mind the advice of the Buddha to his son to > consider any action before, during and after performing it, if it caused any > affliction to himself or others. If only his mental state would be the > crucial element I guess his advice would be rather different. According to the Patthana, the conditioning state for kamma condition is the cetana cetasika arising in the 33 kamma-producing cittas. Moving "backwards", what conditions the cetana cetasika? The answer is "strong past citta/cetasika, strong past rupa, strong past concepts" through pakatupanissaya. See my message 26956 for details where I wrote: It is natural decisive support that "decides" how strong the cetana will be and therefore the weightiness of the resulting kamma. I believe that this is why the Buddha gave that specific advice to Rahula. Here is a similar snip from my 26956 post: An understanding of how this law of nature called natural decisive support works can be a condition for the creation of kusala kamma: - We should look for opportunities to perform wholesome deeds. This searching for and planning a wholesome deed is, in itself, a wholesome deed. We should ensure that all wholesome deeds are done with strong volition, mindfulness and clear intention. We should review and rejoice in wholesome deeds performed and share the merits of our actions. Each of these activities creates good kamma and good accumulations; a condition to support the performing of more good deeds in the future. Metta, Rob M :-) 27669 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Path & Fruit Hi Howard, as I wrote to Michael, in the suttas we find : four pairs of men. In the abh: the lokuttara cittas are enumerated as eight four maggacittas and four phalacittas. The meaning is the same. Nina. op 04-12-2003 04:57 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Is there anywhere in the suttas mention of path and > fruit consciousness, or do they only appear in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the > commentaries? 27670 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Hi Michael, I read it differently: such mighty beings as stream-winners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry: to realize the fruit of stream-entry, they have realized the path-consciousness and this is immediately followed by the fruition-consciousness. In separating these two, we have eight pairs. I think that is the point. Since it is Udana we can look up Peter Masefield transl. I have not yet. Yes, I have, Ch on Sona, II, p. 774: Thus all of these are ariyans. The incomparable field of merit for the world, this is said of enlightened ones you give gifts to. Nina. op 03-12-2003 20:07 schreef Michael Beisert op mbeisert@h...: > Michael: > From the two suttas below it is possible to verify that not all of them have > to be enlightened to be a member of that assembly. In fact of the eight > individual types described below, which comprise the assembly worthy of > gifts, etc., only one type is fully enlightened, while the one practicing to > realize the fruit of stream entry has no realization whatsoever. > > The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well... who > have practiced straight-forwardly... who have practiced methodically... who > have practiced masterfully -- in other words, the four types [of noble > disciples] when taken as pairs, the eight when taken as individual types -- > they are the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples: worthy of gifts, worthy > of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, the incomparable > field of merit for the world." AN XI.12 > > The Eight taken as Individual Types: > Just as the ocean is the abode of such mighty beings as whales, > whale-eaters, and whale-eater-eaters; asuras, nagas, and gandhabbas, and > there are in the ocean beings one hundred leagues long, two hundred... three > hundred... four hundred... five hundred leagues long; in the same way, this > Doctrine and Discipline is the abode of such mighty beings as stream-winners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry; once-returners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of once-returning; non-returners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of non-returning; Arahants and > those practicing for Arahantship... This is the eighth amazing and > astounding fact about this Doctrine and Discipline." Ud V5 27671 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi Michael, My study in Thai speaks also about eradication of them sucessively. But I am still in the beginning of my study. Nina. op 04-12-2003 17:52 schreef Michael Beisert op mbeisert@h...: > his description gives the (wrong) impression that the anusaya are not > subject to change and may even have some sort of substance. So, which would > be a proper description that would dispel this impression? Is there > something in the commentaries to this effect? 27672 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:28pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > The texts are very specific that the one who performs any misdeed > > kills with ignorance of the results of kamma makes worse kamma > than > > someone who has any understanding about kamma. > > > > ===== > > Agreed - one who fulfills all five conditions of killing without a > knowledge of kamma creates a more weighty result than one who > fulfills all five conditons of killing with a knowledge of kamma. > > My interpretation of Christine's flight navigator is that there is > no intention to kill; killing happens as an indirect consequence of > the navigator's actions. This is why I gave the example of eating > meat as not breaking the first precept. > > ===== > ===== > > In Christine's example, the navigator is simply doing calculations > to navigate the jet to avoid anti-aircraft fire, the navigator is > not launching the bombs. > _________ Dear RoBM , Ah ha that would explain your earlier comments. Christine said"@They may have a feeling of camaraderie with other colleagues in the plane and the ground crew - hi fives all round ... no hate, no anger. No great physical effort needed - except enjoyable mental concentration and the merest press of a button", so she was apparently referring to the guy on board the plane who pushes the button firing the missiles. ______Robk > To take my point to the extreme, consider the person who cut down > the tree which was used to make the paper upon which the navigator > did his calculations to guide the jet; is this tree-cutter going to > suffer the unwholesome kamma of killing thousands of people? > > If we are discussing the kammic result of the person who releases > the bomb, knowing full well that the bomb will kill, yet still > taking joy in a job well done, then I agree with your comments about > killing at a distance and the kammic weight of actions performed > without a knowledge of kamma. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 27673 From: robmoult Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 9:37pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Rob K, So let's blame Christine for creating this misunderstanding between us :-) :-) Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Metta to you too, Christine :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > In Christine's example, the navigator is simply doing calculations > > to navigate the jet to avoid anti-aircraft fire, the navigator is > > not launching the bombs. > > _________ > > Dear RoBM , > Ah ha that would explain your earlier comments. Christine said"@They > may have a feeling > of camaraderie with other colleagues in the plane and the ground > crew - hi fives all round ... no hate, no anger. No great physical > effort needed - except enjoyable mental concentration and the merest > press of a button", > so she was apparently referring to the guy on board the plane who > pushes the button firing the missiles. 27674 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi RobM & Michael (Herman in p.s.), --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Michael, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: > > RobM: > > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for > > more information. > > > > Michael: > > Yes, this would make more sense to me. But is this taken from the > > commentaries or is it your own conclusion? ..... RobM, I’m not sure about your phrase above, but I meant to point out this passage from a recent post (by Larry) on the Vism thread. This note (just a part of it) is taken from the commentary to the Vism and given at the end of the Nanamoli translation: Notes: 14. <...> 'Here it may be asked, "Is the arising of the faculties of the eye, etc., due to kamma that is one or to kamma that is different?" Now the ancients say, "In both ways". Herein, firstly, in the case of the arising of an eye, etc., due to kamma that is different there is nothing to be explained since the cause is divided up. But when their arising is due to kamma that is one, how does there come to be differentiation among them? It is due to dividedness in the cause too. For it is craving, in the form of longing for this or that kind of becoming that, itself having specific forms owing to hankering after the sense-bases included in some kind of becoming or other, contrives, acting as ***decisive-support***, the specific divisions in the kamma that generates such a kind of becoming. <...>’(Pm. 444). ***** Also, there are many references in the Vism to anusaya (latent tendencies). For example, still on craving as anusaya: Vism XV1, 64 “..Of that same craving: of that craving which, it was said, ‘produces further becoming’, and which was classed as ‘craving for sense desires’ and so on...........eradication of inherent tendencies (anusaya).” Metta, Sarah p.s Herman, Vism chXV1, 67f, lots of Qs on Nibbana which I think you'd appreciate. The first one: Qu 1: "Is nibbana non-existent because it is unapprehendable, like the hare's horn?" One more: Qu 3: "Then is the absence of present [aggregates] as well nibbana?" Lots more. If you don't have the text, we can share them with you plus the answers. Same qus then and now. ================================ 27675 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 11:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Doomed March Fly Hi Andrew & All, --- Andrew wrote: > It's a good idea but I can't remember ever seeing KenH (the main fly > target) wearing a hat. Also, as his post discloses, they were > attacking his heel! .... I’ve a good mind to start a fund for hats and socks, preferably with corks too;-) Instead of just the still, fly-attracting, fire-gazing meditation, you could lead a legs up dynamic version. Shake your right leg in, shake your right leg out...that kind of thing. ..... A: > In nama terms, what is "intending to kill"? Is it the universal > cetasika, cetana (volition)? As Christine and RobM have been > discussing, when we conventionally talk about "killing something", > this is a concept that may take seconds, minutes or even hours > (depending on what we are trying to kill - see George Orwell's famous > essay about "Killing an Elephant" in Burma). ..... Exactly so. Whether we’re talking about fly dances or acts of killing we tend to forget there are no people, no flies, no elephants, no perpetrator, no victim. We often quote expressions from the texts, like the one from the Visuddhimagga about ‘Life, person, pleasure, pain’ flicking by in ‘one conscious moment’ but forget there is only one conscious moment, one citta ever. Even when we talk about ‘intending to kill’, there are many different cittas and cetasikas (mental factors) involved. Now there is no intention to kill, so it’s just thinking about it. It can be thinking with attachment, aversion, regret, wrong view or anything else. Most precious of all is any present understanding and awareness which knows and is detached from the thinking or seeing or hearing now. Without the development of this understanding, there will always be an idea that there are flies and people, someone or something that dies, me, my family and so on. In other words, without the development of understanding or vijja (knowledge) there will be more and more avijja (ignorance). It is only by understanding the paramattha dhammas that the first noble truth of dukkha can be understood. ‘One conscious moment that flicks by’, one experience at a time, whether pleasant or unpleasant, it arises and is completely gone, it’s dukkha. .... A: >This time covers an > awful lot of 17-set mind-moments. As the overall intention is to > kill, must all the cittas in the time span be akusala (due > to "killing" cetana)? As you can see, I am still having difficulty > switching to mind-moment thinking from conventional thinking. The > root of what I am asking is - if I had killed that march fly, could I > have experienced some kusala cittas (karuna?) while "doing it" > (conventional mode of expression)? .... RobertK already answered, I think. We can test it out now as we read or write. Anger, compassion, kindness, seeing, hearing, touching and all other dhammas arise and pass away, ‘are all alike, gone never to return’. When we wonder whether there could have been some compassion or other wholesome qualities, then of course, anything’s possible. But what about now, is there any clinging to self as we wish to have more noble qualities or cling to past noble moments? In the end, whether it’s ‘my’ compassion, ‘yours’ or the ‘fly’s’ or ‘elephant’s’ it’s just a mental factor that arises and falls away. Hatred is hatred, metta is metta, seeing is seeing - no self at all that sees, hates or develops metta. ..... S:> > Like the point you made about the raft, there can be clinging to > anything > > - even to following good sila or to developing wisdom. > A:> ...which makes akusala what would otherwise be kusala? .... Which makes different cittas with accompanying factors arise and pass away very quickly according to different conditions. .... A: > Thanks Sarah > I will keep trying. Am doing work for a Swedish publisher at the > moment and we are in the editor's panic phase, so there is lots to do > here. .... Just as well you like action;-) Always good to see you around, Andrew. I’ve rambled on far more than I intended (mostly reflections to myself, partly prompted by a tape I was listening to earlier;-)). Of course, it’s not the words or language that count, as James always reminds us, but the direct understanding of the dhammas. I hope we also get to Noosa before too, too long;-) Metta, Sarah =================== 27676 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 11:55pm Subject: Dhamma Got this question from a friend recently: What is Dhamma? You ask this question to Ajarn Sujin. I can not remember what her answers are. An answer: Dhamma is an absolute reality, it is something that is real. For example, you are seeing these letters right now. If somebody tells you that you are not seeing, is that true or false? Seeing is a reality. The Buddha teaches about realities (dhamma) and teaches about their impermanence, suffering, and anattaness. When we learn what is truly real, then we can begin to understand ourselves and become less disillusioned by our own misconceptions about the worlds. There are something that we mis-conceive about the worlds, and we can only get rid of the misconception by learning more and more about the (true) realities (dhamma). Dhamma, as an absolute reality, is directly experienced without us thinking about it. Heat is a dhamma, and heat can be experienced by everybody: us, a new-born baby, and animals. Other examples of realities are hardness, vibration, lobha, dosa, and moha. There are other things besides realities that our mind perceive as well: those that are not realities are concepts. For example, a person is a concept. A person cannot be experienced without us thinking about what we see, and what we hear. When you think of me, you form an idea around the realities that were experienced: what you saw, and what you heard. Ever heard a sound that you couldn't (at least initially) figure out what it was? You heard the sound (reality), and eventually form an idea (concept) about the sound, that it is a person's, an animal's, a car's, etc. All we really hear is a sound, but we create a story about the sound, that it is praise, it is scowling, that it is blame. kom 27677 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 0:54am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly I DID mean that the person plotting the course also pressed the button. It's called multi-skilling - my budget doesn't stretch to a cast of thousands you know. But that's O.K. you chaps - just talk among yourselves, don't mind me, I'm just sitting here tapping my chest with a closed fist and chanting Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa (oops, sorry - past accumulations). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > So let's blame Christine for creating this misunderstanding between > us :-) :-) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > PS: Metta to you too, Christine :-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > > > In Christine's example, the navigator is simply doing > calculations > > > to navigate the jet to avoid anti-aircraft fire, the navigator > is > > > not launching the bombs. > > > _________ > > > > Dear RoBM , > > Ah ha that would explain your earlier comments. Christine > said"@They > > may have a feeling > > of camaraderie with other colleagues in the plane and the ground > > crew - hi fives all round ... no hate, no anger. No great physical > > effort needed - except enjoyable mental concentration and the > merest > > press of a button", > > so she was apparently referring to the guy on board the plane who > > pushes the button firing the missiles. 27678 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:06am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine / Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > I DID mean that the person plotting the course also pressed the > button. It's called multi-skilling - my budget doesn't stretch to a > cast of thousands you know. > But that's O.K. you chaps - just talk among yourselves, don't mind > me, I'm just sitting here tapping my chest with a closed fist and > chanting Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa (oops, sorry - past accumulations). > Oops... Looks like Rob K's interpretation was more accurate. To summarize; the plotting of the course is not breaking the first precept but pushing the button was breaking the first precept. Metta, Rob M :-) 27679 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi RobM & Michael (Herman in p.s.), > > --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Michael, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > > wrote: > > > RobM: > > > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > > > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for > > > more information. > > > > > > Michael: > > > Yes, this would make more sense to me. But is this taken from the > > > commentaries or is it your own conclusion? > ..... > RobM, I'm not sure about your phrase above, but I meant to point out this > passage from a recent post (by Larry) on the Vism thread. This note (just > a part of it) is taken from the commentary to the Vism and given at the > end of the Nanamoli translation: > > Notes: > > 14. <...> > 'Here it may be asked, "Is the arising of the faculties of the eye, > etc., due to kamma that is one or to kamma that is different?" Now > the ancients say, "In both ways". Herein, firstly, in the case of the > arising of an eye, etc., due to kamma that is different there is > nothing to be explained since the cause is divided up. But when their > arising is due to kamma that is one, how does there come to be > differentiation among them? It is due to dividedness in the cause > too. For it is craving, in the form of longing for this or that kind > of becoming that, itself having specific forms owing to hankering > after the sense-bases included in some kind of becoming or other, > contrives, acting as ***decisive-support***, the specific divisions in the > kamma that generates such a kind of becoming. <...>'(Pm. 444). > ***** > > Also, there are many references in the Vism to anusaya (latent > tendencies). For example, still on craving as anusaya: > > Vism XV1, 64 > > "..Of that same craving: of that craving which, it was said, `produces > further becoming', and which was classed as `craving for sense desires' > and so on...........eradication of inherent tendencies (anusaya)." It would appear that there is textual support (at least indirect textual support) for my position. Sarah, I seem to recall that you enjoy wading through the Patthana. Have you come across anything relevant there? Metta, Rob M :-) 27680 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:29am Subject: Christmas Hi James, It's Christmas in 20 days, and it's going to be so exciting.Big feast, Christmas trees, and the presents. What are the important festeivals in Buddhism? What do they do to celebrat?What's the theme? Refering to the letter you sent to me last time about rebirth. I've never really felt that during my last death, if I had one. Is it because this only supposed to happen to Buddhists? By the way,why can't I say recarnation? Metta, Hilary 27681 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:31am Subject: Buddhist Dear Kom, Thank you for the letter you sent me! How was your trip to Thailand? Did you enjoy yourself? Well I have some new questions for you: 1: When does the Kamma help you? 2:How do normal people become monks? 3:Does every Buddhist have a Buddha statue at home? Metta, Janice 27682 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:33am Subject: hello! Hi James! How are you? Thank you for your reply, I really apreciated your letter. Now I know why you understand Phillip and other kids as well. :) There are more questions which I like to ask you: 1. What do you mean by 'Nowadays, Buddhist countries aren't really all that Buddhist anyway'? 2. Do you know why Buddhism isn't a part of the culture in the Middle East, Europe and North/South America. Why did the monks travel to China, Tibet? (East) Please reply, thank you for taking your time and I will study hard in school :) Anne-Catherine :) 27683 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James k: Okay lets not debate on consciouness :). j: The Abhidhamma describes consciousness in terms of sensory > contacts: eye consciousness, nose consciousness, feeling >consciousness, etc. and that each of these consciousnesses rise and >fall. I won't dispute that, but I don't believe that it presents >the entire picture. k: Anyway the consciousness in terms of sensory contacts is not by Abdhidhamma. It can be found all over the sutta where Buddha talks about eye consciouness .... intellect consciouness. Since depend on form and eye, there arise eye consciouness - this represent the rise and fall - condition - impermanence. j: the Abhidhamma is interested in an atomistic view of dhammas: that everything must be broken down to its smallest independent status. k: There is a reason why consciouness speed is so fast, have to be atomised. Let look at the analogy of watching a show. We seem to see and listen simultaneously. Basing on logic, our human mind is only capable of thinking one thing at a time. Even though we can have many ideas floating at our mind, but we can only think of one idea one a at time. Just like when we first learn to type, we look at the keyborad one at a time consciously. So now after learning to type again and agin, when we type, we dont even look at the key board anymore, bc it like part of us. Our mind is like that, after eons of conditioning, things appear simultaneously which in fact it is our consciouness that is so fast that carry the perception of the object to our consciouness for our seeing and listening. If is not fast enough and atomised, we are like a 8 RAM Video card computer running a 3D game, it appear lagging, frame by frame, and it is like the lightning, we will see the light but later the sound. That is why it has to be fast and atomised for us to see and listen simultaneously kind regards Ken O 27684 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 3:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi RobM, --- robmoult wrote: > > > > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > > > > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message > 26956) for > > > > more information. ..... To be honest, I don’t really understand what this means. I looked at your other clear message and am still at a loss. (By the way, I greatly appreciated your last flurry of great posts on accumulations, nat. decisive support, desirable objects and so on;-) ;-)). I had wanted to bring the Vism comy quote to your attention before(but you were travelling), because it related to comments we’d made about nat decisive support condition being necessary for kamma to bring its result. I also gave the one on anusaya (latent tendencies) as an indication of the many references to anusaya in texts such as the Vism. Perhaps you mean that tendencies and accumulations now arise as a result of nat decisive support and many other conditions. One quote I can give from the Patthana that is a good reminder and may be relevant to the poor fly thread is this: “Lust, hate, delusion, conceit, wrong views, wish is related to confidence, precept, learning, generosity, wisdom by strong-dependence condition. After having killed, (one) offers the offering, undertakes the precept, fulfils the duty of observance, develops jhana, develops insight, develops Path, develops superknowledge, develops attainment, to counteract it.” (423, Strong-dependence). In other words, lust, hate etc can condition wholesome states such as wise reflection, generosity or even insight into their characteristics immediately following. .... R:> It would appear that there is textual support (at least indirect > textual support) for my position. > > Sarah, I seem to recall that you enjoy wading through the Patthana. > Have you come across anything relevant there? .... I’ll need further clarification before any wading;-) Nina is also translating a series on anusaya (latent tendencies) which I’m sure will include a lot of helpful information too. Metta, Sarah p.s I’ll have very limited wading/posting time at the weekend. Ken O and Ken H, I had intended to write to you both, but maybe Monday. KenH, did you see my post to you on MN117 at the start of the Cooran w’end? (A reply is never called for, just thought you might have missed it). ====== 27685 From: Egberdina Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 3:47am Subject: Grasping at mind states Hi All, A question, or two. Why feed yourself with a solid diet of texts, commentaries on texts, and commentaries on commentaries, if your intention is to not cling to any mindstates? And why insist that the eye doesn't see form, but only one rupa at a time? What theme of a single rupa is there to grasp at? From http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn02.html The Fruits of the Contemplative Life (Sense Restraint) "And how does a monk guard the doors of his senses? On seeing a form with the eye, he does not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. On hearing a sound with the ear... On smelling an odor with the nose... One tasting a flavor with the tongue... On touching a tactile sensation with the body... On cognizing an idea with the intellect, he does not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the intellect -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. Endowed with this noble restraint over the sense faculties, he is inwardly sensitive to the pleasure of being blameless. This is how a monk guards the doors of his senses. Peace Herman 27686 From: Sarah Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nutriment condition Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > My "pet peeves" don't prevent me from studying Abhidhamma. I do > study > it, and do gain from that study, but I don't study it as deeply, > seriously, or > with the same enthousiasm as you and others here. > Oh, yes, "life principle" is another pet peeve of mine. ***** Hi Howard, Thanks for raising your pet peeves;-) You may find these two extracts of use over the weekend: 1. Buddhist Dictionary - Nyantiloka http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/a/ahara.htm >áhára 'nutriment', 'food', is used in the concrete sense as material food and as such it belongs to derived corporeality (s. khandha, Summary I.) In the figurative sense, as 'foundation' or condition, it is one of the 24 conditions (paccaya) and is used to denote 4 kinds of nutriment, which are material and mental: 1. material food (kabalinkáráhára), 2. (sensorial and mental) impression (phassa), 3. mental volition (mano-sañcetaná), 4. consciousness (viññána). 1. Material food feeds the eightfold corporeality having nutrient essence as its 8th factor (i.e. the solid, liquid, heat, motion, colour, odour, the tastable and nutrient essence; s. rúpa-kalápa). 2. Sensorial and mental impression is a condition for the 3 kinds of feeling (agreeable, disagreeable and indifferent); s. paticcasamuppáda. 3. Mental volition (= karma) feeds rebirth; s. paticca-samuppáda. 4. Consciousness feeds mind and corporeality (náma-rúpa; ib., 2) at the moment of conception" (Vis.M. XI). Literature (on the 4 Nutriments): * M. 9 & Com. (tr. in 'R. Und.'), * M 38; * S. XII, 11, 63, 64 - * The Four Nutriments of Life, Selected texts & Com. (WHEEL 105/106). ************************************************ 2. ‘Conditions’ by Nina http://www.abhidhamma.org/Patthana%203%20chapter_7.htm The "Paììhåna" (Faultless Triplet, Investigation Chapter, §435, VII, d,e) mentions food and also physical life-faculty (rúpa-jívitindriya)separately under presence-condition. We read: Edible food is related to this body by presence-condition. Physical life-faculty is related to kamma-produced rúpa by presence-condition. After edible food has been taken and it has pervaded the body, thenutritive essence it contains supports the internal nutritive essence present in the groups of rúpa of the body, so that new groups of rúpa can be produced. When we consider the relation of nutrition to the body it helps us to see that we go on living because of conditions. The rúpa which is nutritive essence present in each group of rúpas of the body can produce new rúpas, but it cannot do so without the support of the nutritive essence present in food. Nutritive essence is one of the four factors which can produce rúpas of the body, the other being kamma, citta and temperature. Edible food conditions the rúpas of the body by way of presence-condition, it supports and consolidates them. As regards physical life faculty, rúpa-jívitindriya, this is always present in the groups of rúpa produced by kamma. It does not occur in the groups of rúpa produced by citta, heat or nutrition. Eyesense, for example, is produced by kamma, and thus there must also be jívitindriya together with it in that group of rúpas. The same is true for the other senses. We read about life faculty in the "Visuddhimagga" (XIV, 59): The life faculty has the characteristic of maintaining conascent kinds of matter. Its function is to make them occur. It is manifested in the establishing of their presence. And although it has the capacity consisting in the characteristic of maintaining, etc., yet it only maintains conascent kinds of matter at the moment of presence, as water does lotuses and so on. Though dhammas arise due to their own conditions, it maintains them, as a wet-nurse does a prince.... Past kamma is cause in the production of rúpa, but it is not present in the same way as the other three factors which produce rúpa: citta, temperature and nutrition. A deed, done in the past has fallen away, but the intention or volition which motivated that deed is accumulatedfrom moment to moment. The force of past kamma is carried on and therefore kamma still has the power to produce rúpa at present. Life faculty takes as a "wetnurse" the place of kamma, the "mother", in maintaining the life of the kamma-produced rúpas. Thus, life faculty conditions these rúpas by way of presence-condition. Life faculty maintains the life of the rúpas it arises together with in a group, it consolidates them, and then it falls away together with them. However, life faculty also plays its part in the successive arising of kamma-produced rúpas throughout life. Life faculty performs its task of consolidating kamma-produced rúpas from birth to death. Life faculty is a condition for distinguishing kamma-produced rúpa from other kinds of rúpa. We cling to the body which is alive, we cling to eyesense and earsense and take them for self. They are only elements maintained by life faculty, a kind of rúpa which is not self. They arise only because there are the appropriate conditions for their arising......< ***** Look forward to more of your pet peeve discussions - helpful for all;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 27687 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Path & Fruit Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/5/03 12:18:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Hi Howard, > as I wrote to Michael, in the suttas we find : four pairs of men. In the > abh: the lokuttara cittas are enumerated as eight four maggacittas and four > phalacittas. The meaning is the same. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The meaning may well be the same, or perhaps not. In the suttas it seems that each pair consists of one training for a stage of enlightenment (e.g. path in preparation for once returner), and the fruit of that training (the stage of once returner). In Abhidhamma, there are the notions, never clearly spelled out, BTW, of path consciousness and fruition consciousness. My question was whether or not there is anywhere in the suttas that the specific ideas of path consciousness and fruition consciousness are mentioned. (If not, that doesn't imply that the notions of path consciousness and fruition consciousness don't reflect reality or aren't the Buddha's teaching, but, on the other hand, if these notions *do* appear in the suttas, that would lend support both to their reality and their Buddhic origin.) ---------------------------------------------------- > Nina. > > op 04-12-2003 04:57 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >Is there anywhere in the suttas mention of path and > >fruit consciousness, or do they only appear in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and > the > >commentaries? > > ============================= 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) 27688 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Hi, Nina (and Michael) - In a message dated 12/5/03 12:19:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > I read it differently: such mighty beings as stream-winners > >and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry: to realize the > fruit of stream-entry, they have realized the path-consciousness and this is > immediately followed by the fruition-consciousness. ========================= It seems to me that your interpretation is a biiiig stretch that constitutes an honest attempt on your part to give support to Abhidhammic and commentarial positions that just don't make sense as a means of understanding this sutta. In particular, the idea of one practicing for fruition-consciousness having already had path-consciousness when it is given that the former immediately follows the latter makes no sense at all to me. What sort of "practicing" is that? Please look again at the following straightforward, conventional-language material for possible reconsideration: > ... stream-winners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry; once-returners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of once-returning; non-returners > and those practicing to realize the fruit of non-returning; Arahants and > those practicing for Arahantship... 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) 27689 From: ukvegans Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 6:00am Subject: Question on ego and self .. I am confused about the subject of ego and self. I understand that western psychology says that if we believe that we have no self or identity - we therefore risk low self esteem and lack of personal identity which can lead to psychological problems - any comments welcome ... many thanks, Alan 27690 From: Htoo Naing Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 8:24am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 06 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The Dhamma practitoiner has decided to march to Nibbana and to get through the Samsara. As a base, he has built up his Sila to the puremost form and he keeps it throughout his life and he maintains his Sila. He is practising Vipassana meditation. It is Mahasatipatthana. Mahasatipattha is four-fold. The first Satipatthana is mindfulness on body matter. The second is mindfulness on Vedana or feeling. The third is mindfulness on his mind. And the fourth is mindfulness on Dhamma of different kinds. Mahasatipatthana, even though it has four folds, in essence it is Sati. If the Dhamma practitioner is practising Mahasatipatthana, he is developing Samma-Sati which is a part of Noble Eightfold Path, which again is the only way to Nibbana and the only means to get through the Samsara. Mahasatipatthana is a wide subject. Almost all Buddhists have heard of Mahasatipatthana. Mahasatipatthana is being taught at most practical Dhamma courses. As it is a wide subject, it will be better to go bit by bit and digest bit by bit so that the practitioner can well absorb the matter and keep it clear in the mind and bring it with him all the time. Whatever he is, the Dhamma practitioner will need to plan his available time to be used effectively. Nowadays, most people will argue that they do not have enough time to learn Dhamma and practise Dhamma. The most frequent words they would say is I will do these matters when I become old :-)) . This happens because they do not know that they are growing old and they have been growing old since they were born. When I was preparing this message, one of my friends read up some words and said that he was not interested in these matters but he said he would one day learn Dhamma and possibly practise it when he became old. Actually he is round about his fifties. He was trying to avoid Dhamma, as he thought that he is still young and he did not need to do such things. Probably, he may do these things when he retires. Vipassana has to be always with the Dhamma practitioner. When he stood aside me, I knew that I noticed. Heard his words and knew that I heard. When I am typing this message, I know that this is my thought, this is my learned wisdom, this is my wisdom arising from my practice and so on. And this finger is moving, that finger is putting on that letter and so on. Vipassana starts when the Dhamma practitioner wakes up. As soon as he wakes up he has to recognize that he is conscious. If there is no strong stimuli or strong sense he will focus on his breath for a while before he actually gets up. After a while, he decides to get up. He knows that he has decided. Each movement is recognized bit by bit including the thought that pushes these movements. He has to know, he is conscious, he gets up and gets down from the bed, goes to toilet, standing, walking, sitting, releasing, flushing, cleaning, washing and so on. Each movement has to be under consciousness. This is a kind of clear understanding of all bodily actions. Then he does his usual homage to triplegem routinely and now he is ready to sit for an hour for formal sitting breathing meditation. May you all be conscious to all events that you encounter at the very present With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing Journey To Nibbana 27691 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:23am Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Alan, There is no self. There is no identity. So there need not to be a self esteen. Hto Naing ------------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ukvegans" wrote: > I am confused about the subject of ego and self. > > I understand that western psychology says that if we believe that we > have no self or identity - we therefore risk low self esteem and lack > of personal identity which can lead to psychological problems - any > comments welcome ... > > many thanks, > Alan 27692 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:43am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hello RobM, RobM: However, I would defend this position as making logic sense after studying the concepts of anusaya and pakatupanissaya. Michael: OK. Fair enough. Tks. Metta Michael 27693 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Hello Nina, Nina: such mighty beings as stream-winners and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry: to realize the fruit of stream-entry, they have realized the path-consciousness and this is immediately followed by the fruition-consciousness. Michael: Yes, I see that, in fact after I sent you the message I thought about that. But still one inconsistency. If the fruition consciousness follows immediately after the path consciousness why do they have to practice to realize the fruit? The fruit has already happened immediately after path consciousness. You see the point? Metta Michael 27694 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 46 Hi Larry, First of all, I looked up this: see Ch. XIII, par.112; DhsA. 313. As to Vis XIII, it is explained : someone is in the dark, then comes to a well lit place: it takes a few processes before he sees clearly. Or hearing a sound at a distance: he does not hear the sound at first, but it takes a few processes. I looked at DhsA, the Expositor, this has paralel passages I find clearer. For visible object: the moon: it strikes the eyesense, from a distance. It is a kind of impingement different from the impingement of odour. We should remember that wind is a condition for bringing it to the nose, and for tastingsense wetness is a condition for impingement of flavour: the tongue should not be dried out. We read in the Expositor: The tongue has for object It may seem a story of conventional terms, but in fact conditions are demonstrated here. So many conditions are needed to experience odour or flavour, we never thought of that before. We take it all for granted. Nina. op 05-12-2003 03:48 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I take this to mean eye and ear consciousness can apprehend objects at > a distance but nose, taste, and touch consciousness cannot. [I wonder > about nose??] I assume sound and visible object travel from the distant > place to their respective organs by means of "death" and "rebirth" (in a > slightly different place) of the sound and visible object rupas. Having > non-contiguous objects does not rule out contact (phassa). 27695 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. thread Hi Larry, Okay. Sarah, Listing the Pali words is okay, but they will take a lot of space and the post maybe too long. They are very many. Nina. op 05-12-2003 00:53 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: But I think we need to stay > together. So if you see something that should be translated then we > stop. Okay? 27696 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:38am Subject: anapanasati 5 b anapanasati 5 b I think the following quotes, (p.22) also help us to see importance of panna (wisdom) as being foremost, even when we are discussing satipatthana: ***** "Since there is nothing called spiritual development [bhavana] without laying hold on something whatsoever in material form, feeling, consciousness and mental objects [kaya vedana citta dhammesu kiñci dhammam anamasitva] they (Santati and Patacara) too overcame sorrow and lamentation just by this Way of Mindfulness. For the hearers [savaka], namely, the disciples of the Buddha, there is no attainment of the Noble Path [Ariya Magga] possible, except by practicing the subject of meditation [kammatthana] of the Four Truths [Catu Sacca]. Spiritual development usually called meditation, is the development of wisdom [pañña bhavana]. Just the contemplation of material form (corporeality), of feeling, consciousness or mental objects, constitutes the cultivation of the Arousing of Mindfulness." ***** Sarah: In the commentary notes under kayanupassi’, we read more detail about the objects of sati-sampajanna, what read about the paramattha dhammas (p33): ***** "In this body, apart from the above mentioned collection, there is seen no body, man, woman or anything else. Beings engender wrong belief, in many ways, in the bare groups of things mentioned above. Therefore the men of old said: What he sees that is not (properly) seen; What is seen, that he does not (properly) see; Not seeing (properly) he is shackled clean; And he, the shackled fool, cannot get free. What he sees = What man or woman he sees. Why, is there no seeing of man or a woman with the eye? There is. "I see a woman," "I see a man." -- these statements refer to what he sees by way of ordinary perception. That perception, owing to wrong comprehension, does not get at the sense-basis [rupayatana] in the highest sense, philosophically, through the falsely determined condition of material form [viparita gahavasena miccha parikappita rupatta]. Or the meaning is: the absence of perception which is called the seeing of primary and derived materiality, beginning with things such as the hair of the head, owing to non-cognizability of the collective nature of an object like a man or woman by eye-consciousness [kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam ditthi na hoti acakkhuviññana viññeyyatta]. What is seen that he does not properly see = He does not see, according to reality by the eye of wisdom, the sense-basis which exists, the collection of primary and derived materiality beginning with hair of the head and the like [yam rupayatanam kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam dittham tam pañña-cakkhuna bhutato na passati]. Not seeing properly he is shackled = Not seeing this body as it actually is, with the eye of wisdom, he thinks: "This is mine, this am I, this is my self," and is bound with the fetter of defilement [imam attabhavam yathabhutam paññacakkhuna apassanto etam mama esohamasmi eso me attati kilesa bandhanena bajjhati]." ***** 27697 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 11:11am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hello Ken, Sorry to insist on this, but some of your answers raise more doubts .... see inline >From: "kenhowardau" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran >Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 03:08:09 -0000 > >Hello Michael, > >I was holding court on the evils of popular Buddhist >meditation :-) Your response was: >----------- > > I am curious now, can you please provide more details >on what would be those popular forms of concentration? >------------ > >KH: Consider the Satipatthana and Anapanasati Suttas; >These utterly profound teachings are, today, interpreted >in a way that renders them banal and worthless. > MB: Can you briefly explain what you mean? Which are those interpretations that you are referring to? >By heeding the ancient commentaries, we can avoid such >terrible misinterpretation: When the Buddha spoke of >'mindfulness while walking,' he did not mean the kind of >mindfulness we share with lesser beings: When dogs and >jackals walk, they know they are walking; Also, a baby at >the breast knows pleasant feeling. We should not slander >the Buddha by suggesting that these commonplace forms of >mindfulness [of body and feeling] are the same as his >unique, profound teaching: satipatthana. > >---------------- >MK: > You are also saying that jhana is part of >the Vipassana movement, have I understood it right? If >yes, can you be more specific which/where Vipassana >movement? >----------------- > >Sorry Michael, we are on different wavelengths here. I >made no reference to "Vipassana movement." Did you think >I was referring to the Goenka group? MB: OK. I was thinking nothing. But I clearly remember you referring to 'Vipassana movement'. My mistake, don't worry :) > >----------------- >KenH: > > I'd like to remind you that, in the Tipitaka, >some ariyans developed jhana followed by vipassana, some >developed vipassana followed by jhana, some developed >jhana and vipassana together and some developed vipassana >alone (no jhana). > >Michael: > I think it is always good to qualify what >comes from the basic scriptures in the Tipitaka from the >commentaries. And I presume your conclusions are drawn >from the commentaries, right? >----------------- > >Not this time. I was thinking of certain suttas quoted >by Nina in message # 12371. I would be good to have your >comments on that message if you wouldn't mind. > MB: OK. I read the message and it was great. I had no sutta reference for sukkha vipassaka. Now I have, tks. >---------------- >MB : > I am also curious how is jhana and vipassana >developed together? I can understand alternating both, or >in a sequence, but together, how does that work? >--------------- > >I don't specifically remember the explanation of this. In >anapanasati, the object of consciousness is not a concept >of breath (e.g., the movement of the abdomen), it is the >actual rupa -- the paramattha dhamma -- that is >conventionally known as breath. As you know, vipassana >(satipatthana), also has a paramattha dhamma as object. >If jhana and vipassana could possibly share one and the >same object, then they might well be said to be developed >together. That is, if they could have, not only the same >type of object (rupa), but the same actual rupa. > MB: I am not sure I follow you here. The object might be the same but the jhana citta and panna citta are different, two different moments, so they cannot be simultaneous. >I think this is exactly what happens in anapana-sati (the >most difficult of all practices). Being able to enter >and leave jhana at will, and being able to enter and >leave satipatthana at will, the meditator is able to make >one rupa the object of both jhana consciousness and [the >immediately following] vipassana consciousness. > >Corrections welcome. > >Kind regards, >Ken H Metta Michael 27698 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: life faculty Hi Howard, Lodewijk said, greetings to Howard! H:My "pet peeves" don't prevent me from studying Abhidhamma. I do study > it, and do gain from that study, but I don't study it as deeply, seriously, or > with the same enthousiasm as you and others here. > Oh, yes, "life principle" is another pet peeve of mine. I think it is > a piece of primitive nonsense probably growing out of the experience of people > who frequently got to see the moment of death of others without the > "shielding" often provided by modern day hospitals and hospices. I see > jivitindriya > (sp?) as another presumed but never observed hidden something that there is no > reason to believe in. > -------------------------------------------------- N: It is better to have it all out.> >> ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we're getting there! ;-)) N: It is a kind of relief, isn't it? ;-)) If you always swallow things politely I do not know where the trouble spots are. I try to take away people's irritation about the Abhidhamma, but I am sure I cannot succeed immediately. When people go on studying, like you do, you will see how all is connected, hangs together. I appreciate your study. It is like in mathematics, later on when you go back to the beginning it all makes more sense. The Buddha gave us the Abhidhamma, something very precious, but people may not see that there is Abhidhamma also in the Vinaya and the Suttanta. Then one always misses the essence of the Buddha's message, as I said. Life-faculty, jivitindriya, there is mental jivitindriya and material jivitindriya. As to mental jivitindriya, this is one of the cetasikas, the universals, accompanying each citta. It has a function, preserving the life of the accompanying citta and cetasikas. This is hard to understand, and I do not pretend that I experience this cetasika. But it makes sense to me, especially when seeing it as one of the conditions as taught in the Patthana. I come back to this. The rupa which is jivitindriya: life faculty or vitality, is also called aayu. When you walk outside to save an insect, you know that there is life faculty, you do not save the life of a twig of your tree or of a stone. It is only in living bodies, and originates from kamma. Not difficult: kamma produced your rebirthconsciousness and rupas at the same time. The akusala kamma patha of killing: you know that there is a living being, with life faculty. It is what makes the difference between a living body and dead matter. Rupas of the body do not arise in isolation, but in clusters or groups, very tiny ones. Those groups that are produced by kamma always have the lifefaculty which is rupa included. Difficult? In M I, 43, there is a conversation between Sariputta and Maha-Kotthita, and also vitality is mentioned. it is explained that vitality and heat depend on one another. It is explained that a dead body is different from the body of a monk who has realized the stopping of perception and feeling: Do you see the difference? Guide to Conditional Relations (U Narada):< Physical Life-Faculty: The conditioning state, relates by controlling kamma-produced matter (that was caused by past kamma) so as to prolong its life (i.e. to bring about the succession of kamma-produced matter), although there is no cause for it by present kamma, is known as pysical life-faculty condition.> He explains that this faculty has the function of maintaining life and of making that group arise in continuous succession. Kamma was in the past, but physical life faculty maintains that group of rupas. It is like a wet-nurse, taking care of a motherless child. Mental jivitindriya: Expositor I, p. 197: <...that persistence which is in immaterial states means the persisitence which, in the sense of establishing them, is in the immaterial states. For when it is present, the immaterial states occur, go on, continue; hence it is called persistence [aayu: life, is causative of i, to go, is explained]. This word gives the nature of the faculty of life. And inasmuch as these associated immaterial states- when there is persistence- subsist, occur, maintain themselves, progress, continue, preserve themselves...> Citta and cetasikas fall away together, but they are succeeded by a following citta and cetasikas. There is a new life faculty with them each time they arise, and it makes them subsist during that short moment. More details, Vis. XIV, 59, and footnote 25 which is the Tiika. We come to that with Larry later on. May I shout to you? Nina. 27699 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Dear Michael, See The ³Knowledge of beings¹ biases and underlying tendencies² mentioned in the ³Path of Discrimination² , ³Paìisambhidåmagga² of the Khuddaka Nikåya, in the Måtika (Table of Contents), among the seventythree kinds of knowledge. See also Ch 69, p. 124. These latent tendencies are further explained in its Commentary, the ³Saddhammappakåsiní² under the Explanation (Niddesa) of Knowledge of beings¹ biasses and underlying tendencies (åsayånusaya ñåna). Also in the Yamaka of the Abhidhamma (See Guide through the Abhidhamma Pitaka, p. 104). Nina. op 05-12-2003 02:01 schreef Michael Beisert op mbeisert@h...: > RobM: > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message 26956) for > more information. > > Michael: > Yes, this would make more sense to me. But is this taken from the > commentaries or is it your own conclusion? 27700 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 6:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi, Htoo (and Alan) - In a message dated 12/5/03 12:32:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, htootintnaing@y... writes: > > Hi Alan, > > There is no self. There is no identity. So there need not to be a > self esteen. > > Hto Naing =========================== When self-esteem is missing, in the usual, conventional sense, the sense of self or personal identity is *very* much present, and it is a particularly unheathy and destructive sense. To have self-esteem merely means to have a positive, perhaps even joyful attitude with regard to one's life, what one is doing, and how one comports oneself. The term 'self-esteem' sounds like a kind of conceit, but that is not its real meaning. (English can be very odd at times.;-) 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) 27701 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 7:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: life faculty Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/5/03 3:28:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Hi Howard, > Lodewijk said, greetings to Howard! > ====================== Thank you! My very best to him!! :-) Nina, thank you for the very detailed reply you give (and which I snipped off in this reply to you). I appreciate the great efforts you go to. I will read your words carefully, and I will look further at these topics in other places as well, out of respect for you and for your great dedication. I don't *expect* to be persuaded on these matters ;-), but I *will* afford a fair opportunity for that to happen. 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) 27702 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 1:03pm Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Alan, Welcome... I haven't see you post before. I hope that more "lurkers" come out of the woodwork :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ukvegans" wrote: > I am confused about the subject of ego and self. > > I understand that western psychology says that if we believe that we > have no self or identity - we therefore risk low self esteem and lack > of personal identity which can lead to psychological problems - any > comments welcome ... From my personal observations, the people who tend to focus a lot on non-self (anatta in Pali), do not have psychological problems related to poor self esteem. In fact, quite the reverse... some of them have excessively high self esteem :-) One of the core features of Buddhism is three characterisitics of reality: - Impermanence (anicca) - Stress (dukkha) - Non-self (anatta) When people with tendencies to low self consider these three topics, they find the first two to be empowering, "Oh, now I see that impermanence and stress (sometimes translated as suffering) are the nature of reality... they are not 'my fault'..." People with low self esteem are rarely drawn into a seemingly theoretical argument of "there is no self" associated with anatta. In the Suttas (collected speeches of the Buddha), we can see that the Buddha did not try to explain the subject of anatta to lay people. Hope this helps. Metta, Rob M :-) 27703 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 8:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: life faculty Hi again, Nina - A few comments interspersed below. In a message dated 12/5/03 3:28:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Life-faculty, jivitindriya, there is mental jivitindriya and material > jivitindriya. > As to mental jivitindriya, this is one of the cetasikas, the universals, > accompanying each citta. It has a function, preserving the life of the > accompanying citta and cetasikas. This is hard to understand, and I do not > pretend that I experience this cetasika. But it makes sense to me, > especially when seeing it as one of the conditions as taught in the > Patthana. I come back to this. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: We're alike in one respect to this: I don't experience it either! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------- > The rupa which is jivitindriya: life faculty or vitality, is also called > aayu. When you walk outside to save an insect, you know that there is life > faculty, you do not save the life of a twig of your tree or of a stone. It > is only in living bodies, and originates from kamma. Not difficult: kamma > produced your rebirthconsciousness and rupas at the same time. The akusala > kamma patha of killing: you know that there is a living being, with life > faculty. It is what makes the difference between a living body and dead > matter. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are many differences between living and nonliving "things", but I don't believe that something called "vitality" or "life principle", observed by no one, is one of them. ---------------------------------------------------- > Rupas of the body do not arise in isolation, but in clusters or groups, > very > tiny ones. Those groups that are produced by kamma always have the > lifefaculty which is rupa included. Difficult? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Neither difficult nor easy. Just no reason for believing. ------------------------------------------------------ > In M I, 43, there is a conversation between Sariputta and Maha-Kotthita, > and > also vitality is mentioned. it is explained that vitality and heat depend on > one another. It is explained that a dead body is different from the body of > a monk who has realized the stopping of perception and feeling: this body, your reverence, when three things are got rid of: vitality, heat > and consciousness, then does this body lie cast away, flung aside like unto > a senseless log of wood.> Do you see the difference? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course there are differences between living bodies and dead ones - several, and obvious. The term 'vitality' is an ordinary conventional expression that we apply to any living body. I have no objection to using the term or considering it meaningful. I simply consider that making a dhamma out of it is silly. -------------------------------------------------- > Guide to Conditional Relations (U Narada):< Physical Life-Faculty: The > conditioning state, relates by controlling kamma-produced matter (that was > caused by past kamma) so as to prolong its life (i.e. to bring about the > succession of kamma-produced matter), although there is no cause for it by > present kamma, is known as pysical life-faculty condition.> > He explains that this faculty has the function of maintaining life and of > making that group arise in continuous succession. Kamma was in the past, but > physical life faculty maintains that group of rupas. It is like a wet-nurse, > taking care of a motherless child. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: A good story, but no more. No reason for believing it. (No irreparable harm, however, if one *does* believe it! ;-) -------------------------------------------------- > Mental jivitindriya: Expositor I, p. 197: <...that persistence which is in > immaterial states means the persisitence which, in the sense of establishing > them, is in the immaterial states. For when it is present, the immaterial > states occur, go on, continue; hence it is called persistence [aayu: life, > is causative of i, to go, is explained]. This word gives the nature of the > faculty of life. And inasmuch as these associated immaterial states- when > there is persistence- subsist, occur, maintain themselves, progress, > continue, preserve themselves...> > Citta and cetasikas fall away together, but they are succeeded by a > following citta and cetasikas. There is a new life faculty with them each > time they arise, and it makes them subsist during that short moment. > More details, Vis. XIV, 59, and footnote 25 which is the Tiika. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: What are instances of the mental life principle *not* being present? Why should it be deemed necessary. Cittas, cetasikas, and rupas arise according to conditions. Why the need for a special "life principal" to sustain them??? ---------------------------------------------- We come to > > that with Larry later on. May I shout to you? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Please do! ;-) --------------------------------------------- > Nina. > > ======================== 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) 27704 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 1:34pm Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ukvegans" wrote: > I am confused about the subject of ego and self. > > I understand that western psychology says that if we believe that we > have no self or identity - we therefore risk low self esteem and lack > of personal identity which can lead to psychological problems - any > comments welcome ... > > many thanks, > Alan Hi Alan, This is a very good question. There are a number of psychological disorders, like depersonalization disorder and disassociative personality disorder, which seem to suggest the Buddha's teaching of anatta (non-self). The important difference is that these disorders negatively impact daily functioning and cause great stress while recognition of non-self has quite the opposite effect; it is supposed to be liberating and peaceful. Brain studies reveal that self identity originates in the frontal lobe area of the brain. There are also studies that show that internal dialogue; mental talking to oneself about oneself strengthens this area of the brain-- that we form a strong part of our identity by what we tell ourselves. Some research has demonstrated that those who practice long periods of meditation, specifically Zen masters, have less blood flow to this area of the brain. It might be assumed that this is because internal dialogue is significantly reduced during long periods of meditation. Anyway, the result isn't a psychological disorder but a brain that expends less energy on self awareness and thus opens the doors for deeper awareness and wisdom. This is a scientific response to your question since it was a scientific question; others might describe this process in a more philosophical way. But I know what you mean. Those people who constantly say they have no self and tell others that, regardless of their awareness and the awareness of their audience, sound a little nuts to me also! ;-) Metta, James 27705 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 0:35pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > --- robmoult wrote: > > > > > I see anusaya as the manifestation of natural decisive support > > > > > condition (pakatupanissaya). See my recent post (message > > 26956) for > > > > > more information. > ..... > To be honest, I don't really understand what this means. I looked at your > other clear message and am still at a loss. ===== In Nyanatiloka's Dictionary, under "anusaya", a reference is made to Vis.M. XXII,60: "These things are called 'proclivities' since, in consequence of their pertinacity, they ever and again tend to become the conditions for the arising of ever new sensous greed, etc." In other words, "anusaya" refers to mental states that tend to be somewhat self-sustaining. Now what is the underlying mechanism that would allow a mental state to become somewhat self-sustaining? It is pakatupanissaya. For example, the arising of sensous greed creates a "strong past citta/cetasika" which becomes the conditioning state for a new citta of sensous greed via pakatupanissaya. I see anusaya as the manifestation (outcome) and I see pakatupanissaya as the underlying mechanism supporting this outcome. Does this clarify or confuse? Metta, Rob M :-) 27706 From: clarehanson2000 Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:12pm Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > This is a very good question. There are a number of psychological > disorders, like depersonalization disorder and disassociative > personality disorder, which seem to suggest the Buddha's teaching of > anatta (non-self). The important difference is that these disorders > negatively impact daily functioning and cause great stress while > recognition of non-self has quite the opposite effect; it is supposed > to be liberating and peaceful. > > Brain studies reveal that self identity originates in the frontal > lobe area of the brain. There are also studies that show that > internal dialogue; mental talking to oneself about oneself > strengthens this area of the brain-- that we form a strong part of > our identity by what we tell ourselves. Some research has > demonstrated that those who practice long periods of meditation, > specifically Zen masters, have less blood flow to this area of the > brain. It might be assumed that this is because internal dialogue is > significantly reduced during long periods of meditation. Anyway, the > result isn't a psychological disorder but a brain that expends less > energy on self awareness and thus opens the doors for deeper > awareness and wisdom. This is a scientific response to your question > since it was a scientific question; others might describe this > process in a more philosophical way. > > But I know what you mean. Those people who constantly say they have > no self and tell others that, regardless of their awareness and the > awareness of their audience, sound a little nuts to me also! ;-) > > Metta, James Thank you James for sharing this point of view. I never met anybody making claim to no self. No yet anyhow. Besides, who would be a-doin' the claiming other than a self? Maybe a tape recorder underneath the tongue? Just teasing. 27707 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 3:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hello Nina, Nina: See The ³Knowledge of beings¹ biases and underlying tendencies² mentioned in >the ³Path of Discrimination² , ³Paìisambhidåmagga² of the Khuddaka Nikåya, >in the Måtika (Table of Contents), among the seventythree kinds of >knowledge. See also Ch 69, p. 124. These latent tendencies are further >explained in its Commentary, the ³Saddhammappakåsiní² under the Explanation >(Niddesa) of Knowledge of beings¹ biasses and underlying tendencies >(åsayånusaya ñåna). Also in the Yamaka of the Abhidhamma (See Guide through >the Abhidhamma Pitaka, p. 104). Michael: Tks for your thorough response. In fact I was not so much questioning anusaya but the idea that they lie 'dormant' somewhere. This concept has an essenciialist flavor to it which I find hard to swalow. Now the idea of anusaya as a condition, devoid of substance, makes more sense to me. My questiion then was whether this view of anusaya as a condition is supported in the commentaries. Metta Michael 27708 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 3:52pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hello James, James: research has demonstrated that those who practice long periods of meditation, specifically Zen masters, have less blood flow to this area of the brain Michael: Hey James, this was funny, some piece of subliminal advertising. Why not Theravada monks, ot Tibetan monks or Chinese monks :) Or just meditators... In fact some research being done in the US involves Tibetan monks, as far as I know no zen masters. Metta Michael 27709 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 4:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on ego and self .. Hi Alan, "Not self" just means that nothing is lasting and worthy of being regarded as me or mine. Whatever arises ceases. Clinging is futile. Self esteem, either high or low, is a reality (theoretically). It boils down to like and dislike. Can you find like and dislike in your experience? Take a good look. Don't be fooled by words and feelings. Larry 27710 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 5:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anusaya --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello RobertK, > > RobertK: > Latent tendencies (anusaya) are subtle defilements that lie > dormant 'waiting' for the opportunity to arise as pariyutthana where > they are active forms of craving, dosa and wrong view. > > Michael: > This description gives the (wrong) impression that the anusaya are not > subject to change and may even have some sort of substance. So, which would > be a proper description that would dispel this impression? Is there > something in the commentaries to this effect? =================================== Dear Michael, the whole of the Tipitaka and commentaries show and detail how every phenomena is conditioned - except for nibbana. Anusaya are certainly conditioned. The anusaya are: lust for sense pleasure (kamaraganusaya) the latent tendency of aversion (patighanusaya) the latent tendency of conceit (mananusaya) the latent tendency of wrong view (ditthanusaya) the latent tendency of doubt (vicikicchanusaya) the latent tendency of lust for becoming (bhava-raganusaya) the latent tendency of ignorance (avijjanusaya) If there were no anusaya then there could be no conditions for any greed , wrong view or aversion. The arahants have eradicated all anusaya. Before knowing the Buddha`s teaching we used to think 'I' am angry, or greedy or bored. But these phenomena are only pariyutthana - the active stage of the defilements conditioned by anusaya- not us. There are many types of spritual pratice in the world but even the best - except for vipassana- only supress the outward signs of defilements, they do not even touch the anusaya: The Visuddhimagga (XXII, 60) ... For it is owing to their inveteracy that they are called inherent tendencies (anusaya) since they inhere (anusenti) as cause for the arising of greed for sense desires, etc., again and again." What are the conditions for the anusaya? Here is a section from the Mahanidana sutta commentary, (from bodhi The great discourse on causationp65)about Paticcasamupadda: Deep is the meaning of volitional formations as volitionally forming, accumulating, lustfulness, and lustlessness. Almost every moment there is the accumulating of new tendencies. Now perhaps we are kind, polite people but tendencies change - and next life we may be born somewhere we we cannot hear dhamma and we gradually develop strong tendencies to roughness and stupidity. How are the tendencies eradicated? Only by clear seeing (vipassana). The first anusaya to be eradicated is wrong view, and this too is a gradual process of wearing away. Accumulating is happening right now - the accumulating of understanding (or not) that can be a condition as upanissiya paccaya (support condition) or asevena paccya (repetition condition) for more understanding and so it keeps accumulating until there are enough conditions for insight to arise. Not by self or wanting or freewill but by the right conditions. RobertK 27711 From: Egberdina Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 6:10pm Subject: Re: The Holy Relics of Lord Buddha Hi Thomas, Thank you for your kind note. It is true, hundreds of thousands of people believe they have great faith in the Buddha, and in his power to make positive changes in their lives. Even the dead remnants and reminders of his existence are invested with great powers to heal suffering of all kinds. I wrote above that people believe they have faith because the on-the- surface similarity between faith and attachment is so great that the two are often confused. Faith arises naturally, when attachment is dropped. Unshakeable faith arises naturally, when understanding sees the true nature of reality. When the true nature of reality becomes clearer there is less need for attachment to it. The way things really are is despite you, not because of you. If there is the slighest hint of the urge to jump to the assistance or defense of the object one believes one has invested with faith, you can have faith that this is just attachment. Beyond stream-entry lies unshakeable faith. Before it lies attachment to things that are not real. Peace Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nordwest wrote: > Dear Herman, > > thank you for your letter. I am glad you like the site. I believe in free speech, so you don't need my permission, and I apologize for my harsh words to "forbid" talking about it. That was a mistake. > > I understand you concerns in the context of attachment. > > Gassho, > Thomas > 27712 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 11:20pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Jhana and vipassana together Michael --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello KenH, ... > Michael: > I think it is always good to qualify what comes from the basic > scriptures in > the Tipitaka from the commentaries. And I presume your conclusions > are drawn > from the commentaries, right? I am also curious how is jhana and > vipassana > developed together? I can understand alternating both, or in a > sequence, but > together, how does that work? You asked about jhana and vipassana jhana being 'developed together'. This is the sort of terminology used in the sutta below in reference to the third way of attaining enlightenment ('in tandem', sometimes also translated as 'yoked') Jon Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 Yuganaddha Sutta -- In Tandem On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-170.html 27713 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 11:41pm Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Michael: > Hey James, this was funny, some piece of subliminal advertising. Why not > Theravada monks, ot Tibetan monks or Chinese monks :) Or just meditators... > In fact some research being done in the US involves Tibetan monks, as far as > I know no zen masters. > > > Metta > Michael Hi Michael, Subliminal Advertising? What? Do you think I am a salesman for the Zen Masters of America or something? ;-))) I was trying to be as accurate as I could be based on my memory. I actually spent a long time on the Internet trying to find the article but I couldn't find it*. I had read it as a print article in my city newspaper (since I am now in Cairo, I can't go to the library to find it). I had read some articles about brain research and Tibetan monks but as I remember they were studying something else, levels of seritonin and brain activity during `metta' meditation. This article was about a different matter conducted at a later time and I thought it involved a different set of monks; I thought it was about Zen monks, but I could be wrong. It was studying the effects of long term meditation on normal brain activity. It could have been about Tibetan monks. Actually, when I was typing that post I paused for a long time trying to decide and remember if it was Zen monks or Tibetan monks, I went with the Zen monks because I think they meditate a lot longer, practically around the clock! I did even consider if I should just type `meditators', since I couldn't remember for sure and couldn't find the article, but I thought that would give the false impression that this effect occurs with just anyone who meditates. No, it has to be A LOT of meditation. So, there is the long explanation for why I chose that phrase. It sounds like your memory is not exactly stellar on this matter either. If you would care to find the article and research and officially correct my misstatement, rather than guessing, that would be great with me. I appreciate accuracy. Please don't assume the worst about me. Metta, James *Side note: It is getting harder and harder to find free stuff on the Internet anymore. Good articles require subscriptions to various web sites. Nothing good ever seems to last! ;-) 27714 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 11:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Grasping at mind states Herman Good questions and a great sutta quote. --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi All, > > A question, or two. > > Why feed yourself with a solid diet of texts, commentaries on > texts, > and commentaries on commentaries, if your intention is to not cling > to any mindstates? The use of texts does not *necessarily* involve, or lead to, clinging to mindstates. Appropriately done, it can lead to less clinging to mindstates, because of the great wisdom embodied in the teachings. On the other hand, a limited and selective use of texts may leave one with a wrong understanding of the intended meaning. Of course, I am not saying that 'more reading of texts means greater understanding'; it all depends on the individual case. But if indeed reading is accompanied by or leads to more clinging, the problem is not in the texts themselves but in the expectations or wrong view of the reader. > And why insist that the eye doesn't see form, but only one rupa at > a time? What theme of a single rupa is there to grasp at? I haven't checked the passage below, but I think you'll find that 'form' is a translation of the Pali 'rupa', here meaning 'visible object' rather than rupa of rupa-khandha. This is different from 'form' as in 'object' or 'detail'. To my reading of the passage, the visible object ('rupa') is being contrasted with the 'theme and details' (nimitta anubyancana), i.e., the outward appearance. Now here's a question for you. Given the speed with which clinging arises when sense-door objects are experienced, what is your understanding of the means by which it would be possible for a person to 'not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him'? Jon > From http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn02.html > The Fruits of the Contemplative Life > > (Sense Restraint) > "And how does a monk guard the doors of his senses? On seeing a > form > with the eye, he does not grasp at any theme or details by which -- > if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye > -- > evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail > him. On hearing a sound with the ear... On smelling an odor with > the nose... One tasting a flavor with the tongue... On touching a > tactile sensation with the body... On cognizing an idea with the > intellect, he does not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if > he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the > intellect -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress > might assail him. Endowed with this noble restraint over the sense > faculties, he is inwardly sensitive to the pleasure of being > blameless. This is how a monk guards the doors of his senses. 27715 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 0:44am Subject: Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Dear Group, Yoniso-manasikaara = wise, reasoned, methodical attention or reflection. Is it possible to cause wise attention to arise? And what, exactly, is wise attention as it would be experienced in daily life? How could one tell wise from unwise attention? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27716 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:24am Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Michael and James, Perhaps this is my fault. I mentioned this research to James on one of his first DSG posts and I may have mistakenly said Zen monks. I first read about it in a Readers Digest article. I read some medical papers on-line and finally went out to buy the book: "Why God Won't Go Away" by Andrew Newberg, Eugene D'Aquili and Vince Rause. In fact, the volunteer meditator used in this study was a layperson (not a monk) who followed a Tibetian meditation practice. His name is Robert :-) . Sorry for any confusion caused. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: > > > Michael: > > Hey James, this was funny, some piece of subliminal advertising. > Why not > > Theravada monks, ot Tibetan monks or Chinese monks :) Or just > meditators... > > In fact some research being done in the US involves Tibetan monks, > as far as > > I know no zen masters. > > > > > > Metta > > Michael > > Hi Michael, > > Subliminal Advertising? What? Do you think I am a salesman for the > Zen Masters of America or something? ;-))) I was trying to be as > accurate as I could be based on my memory. I actually spent a long > time on the Internet trying to find the article but I couldn't find > it*. I had read it as a print article in my city newspaper (since I > am now in Cairo, I can't go to the library to find it). I had read > some articles about brain research and Tibetan monks but as I > remember they were studying something else, levels of seritonin and > brain activity during `metta' meditation. This article was about a > different matter conducted at a later time and I thought it involved > a different set of monks; I thought it was about Zen monks, but I > could be wrong. It was studying the effects of long term meditation > on normal brain activity. It could have been about Tibetan monks. > Actually, when I was typing that post I paused for a long time trying > to decide and remember if it was Zen monks or Tibetan monks, I went > with the Zen monks because I think they meditate a lot longer, > practically around the clock! I did even consider if I should just > type `meditators', since I couldn't remember for sure and couldn't > find the article, but I thought that would give the false impression > that this effect occurs with just anyone who meditates. No, it has > to be A LOT of meditation. > > So, there is the long explanation for why I chose that phrase. It > sounds like your memory is not exactly stellar on this matter > either. If you would care to find the article and research and > officially correct my misstatement, rather than guessing, that would > be great with me. I appreciate accuracy. Please don't assume the > worst about me. > > Metta, James > *Side note: It is getting harder and harder to find free stuff on the > Internet anymore. Good articles require subscriptions to various web > sites. Nothing good ever seems to last! ;-) 27717 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi RobM, James, Michael & All, A quick qu. --- robmoult wrote: <..> > In fact, the volunteer meditator used in this study was a layperson > (not a monk) who followed a Tibetian meditation practice. His name > is Robert :-) . .... You’ve also mentioned one or two other scientific reports along similar lines such as in this post: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m18268.html ..... My qu is not about before and after results (I have no doubt there are measurable, scientific changes), but about the conclusions drawn from them. In particular, I question the conclusions about ‘Buddhist’ meditation/practice and inferences about ideas of self and reductions in wrong views/clinging to self in these studies or any measurements of wholesome/unwholesome states of any kind. Of course, subjects may report feeling happier or calmer afterwards or even wiser. These reports may well correlate with observable changes in brain scans and so on. To get to the qu, is there any evidence that the same results wouldn’t have been achieved with yogic pranayama meditation, or Jain/Hindu/Christian/Muslim meditation without any understanding or interest in anatta or wisdom as taught by the Buddha? I think the conclusions of these research articles show more about the understanding of ‘practice’ of those conducting the studies than anything else;-) Comments welcome. Metta, Sarah ===== 27718 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:23am Subject: Re: Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Dear Chrisitine, While asking yourself whether you can make yoniso manisikara arise what are the dhammas that are present? Is there any hint of idea of being able to control or make things appear as you want them to? If so do such views agree with what the Buddha taught about conditionality and anatta? Only by knowing the present moment in various ways can ditthi be seen, if it is not seen then it will always block insight or even be taken as insight. So thinking is just as conditioned as any other reality , it happens often so should be object of awareness. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > Yoniso-manasikaara = wise, reasoned, methodical attention or > reflection. > Is it possible to cause wise attention to arise? And what, exactly, > is wise attention as it would be experienced in daily life? How could > one tell wise from unwise attention? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27719 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:51am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hello RobertK, RobertK: the whole of the Tipitaka and commentaries show and detail how every phenomena is conditioned - except for nibbana. Anusaya are certainly conditioned Michael: Thank you for the very detailed explanation. I wasn't questioning that but just the use of the words 'lying dormant' which may give the impression that you are referring to something that is substantial and not conditioned/impermanent phenomena. Just being picky maybe :) Metta Michael 27720 From: Sarah Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Hi Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Group, > > Yoniso-manasikaara = wise, reasoned, methodical attention or > reflection. > And what, exactly, > is wise attention as it would be experienced in daily life? How could > one tell wise from unwise attention? .... As you know, manasikaara is a universal cetasika (mental factor). The proximate cause is the object and the citta (consciousness) always needs manasikaara to ‘attend to’ or direct to the object. Just as unwholesome cittas must be accompanied by unwise attention in order to experience their objects, wholesome (and other sobhana) cittas must be accompanied by wise attention which is often given as the proximate cause of wholesome states. Just as there are different kinds of wholesome cittas and accompanying sati, samadhi and so on, there are also different kinds and degrees of wise attention accordingly. Wise attention that accompanies dana will have a different object to that accompanying insight, for example. .... > Is it possible to cause wise attention to arise? ..... Who or what would cause it to arise? Is this a hope of finding a loop-hole amongst the 24 conditions, I wonder? I think it’s rather like the questions about intention, contact, concentration and so on. Pls elaborate, Chris, if I’ve misunderstood your question. ..... > And what, exactly, > is wise attention as it would be experienced in daily life? How could > one tell wise from unwise attention? ..... I think it’s very difficult (and not helpful to try) to pin-point exactly ‘this is phassa’, ‘this is manasikara’, ‘this is intention’ and so on. It’s bound to be just thinking about it at these times as we’ve discussed before. Like phassa, it’s nothing like our conventional idea of ‘attending’ or ‘contacting’ as it directs the citta and other cetasikas onto the object. If it’s a moment of generosity, metta or understanding (even if only theoretical right understanding), for example, then clearly the ‘attending’ is wise. If it’s a moment of clinging, aversion of not knowing anything, then clearly the ‘attending’ is unwise. Hope this helps a little. Let us know more about your ideas and what you’ve been reading, Chris, perhaps with a few links;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 27721 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:59am Subject: RE: [dsg] Jhana and vipassana together Hello Jon, Jon: You asked about jhana and vipassana jhana being 'developed together'. This is the sort of terminology used in the sutta below in reference to the third way of attaining enlightenment ('in tandem', sometimes also translated as 'yoked') Michael: Maybe it was my misunderstadning, I thought together ment simultaneaously. I cannot understand simultaneously. But in tandem, which means one after the other, makes sense to me. Yoked also makes sense meaning that they are tied together but again does not indicate that the development is simultaneous. Metta Michael 27722 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:08am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hello James, James: So, there is the long explanation for why I chose that phrase. It sounds like your memory is not exactly stellar on this matter either. If you would care to find the article and research and officially correct my misstatement, rather than guessing, that would be great with me. I appreciate accuracy. Please don't assume the worst about me. Michael: Please accept my apologies I was not assuming the worst about you, in a clumsy way I tried to be funny. Sorry. The article about the research being done in the US involving Tibetan monks appeared in the Trycicle Magazine not too long ago. There is a DVD called Yogis of Tibet which provides a glimpse of the intense meditation practices followed by some practitioners there. I never heard about something similar in relation to Zen masters in our present days. Metta Michael 27723 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anusaya --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello RobertK, > > RobertK: > the whole of the Tipitaka and commentaries show and detail how > every phenomena is conditioned - except for nibbana. Anusaya are > certainly conditioned > > Michael: > Thank you for the very detailed explanation. I wasn't questioning that but > just the use of the words 'lying dormant' which may give the impression that > you are referring to something that is substantial and not > conditioned/impermanent phenomena. Just being picky maybe :) > Dear Michael, Thanks, understood:) I want to add as many details as possible, as I would be very happy if you come to see that the monks of old were true to the Dhamma - as recorded in the commentaries of Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and Anuruddha:) robertk > > .com 27724 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:35am Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: . > > Michael: > Please accept my apologies I was not assuming the worst about you, in a > clumsy way I tried to be funny. Sorry. The article about the research being > done in the US involving Tibetan monks appeared in the Trycicle Magazine not > too long ago. There is a DVD called Yogis of Tibet which provides a glimpse > of the intense meditation practices followed by some practitioners there. I > never heard about something similar in relation to Zen masters in our > present days. > > Metta > Michael Hi Michael, Okay, no problem. So, the research was officially on Tibetan monks. Sorry for the misstatement. I either remembered wrong or the article I read stated it wrong (which does happen). That DVD that you mention, `Yogis of Tibet', sounds really interesting. When I get back to the states I will have to search for it. Metta, James 27725 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:49am Subject: Buddhism questions James and everyone else: Thanx for your explanation about killing life. Anyway, can you answer a few more questionx? 1. In many comic strips and cartoons, they give me an image that all monks know a lot of kungfu, that means they know a lot about fighting and karate and Judo and all that stuff. Do you need to know these things in order to become a monk? 2. They also say that monks spend lots and lots of time to practice kungfu on top of hills. Is that true? Is it necessary for you to do it? Thanx for answering. Thanx a lot. Philip 27727 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:52am Subject: Questions Hi James, Thank you for your the letter that you gave me. I have some questions to ask you: 1 Each time when you write you name, why you always put "Metta, James"? Is "metta" part of you name? 2 How old are you? 3 Do you usually have time to play or exercise? 4 Have you ever been to a temple in some places? I will be waiting for your answer. Janet 27728 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:54am Subject: The Buddha Dear James, Thankyou for the brilliant reply! What did the Buddha exactly seek for? Have a good weekend! Metta, Sandy 27730 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Hi Sarah Just a simple question, every now and then, there is this word about wise attention. What is it? Does it equate to panna or sati or both? Vice versa what is unwise attention. >I think it’s very difficult (and not helpful to try) to pin-point > exactly ‘this is phassa’, ‘this is manasikara’, ‘this is >intention’ and so on. In short just tell her dont purposely do it bc any purposedly actions are likely to rise in tandem with self kind regards Ken O 27731 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:59am Subject: Response to Cal Carl: Thank you for writing me to tell me about killing in Buddhism. I appreciate it very much. Philip 27732 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 6:01am Subject: The Universe Dear Robert, Do you have any good ideas on why we live on planet earth, why couldn't we live on Pluto, Mercury, Veanis, the moon, or Mars. What do Buddhists think about the reason for life on Earth? From Charles (almost 10 now) 27733 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 6:04am Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi RobM, James, Michael & All, > > A quick qu. My qu is not about before and after results (I have no doubt there are > measurable, scientific changes), but about the conclusions drawn from > them. > > In particular, I question the conclusions about `Buddhist' > meditation/practice and inferences about ideas of self and reductions in > wrong views/clinging to self in these studies or any measurements of > wholesome/unwholesome states of any kind. Of course, subjects may report > feeling happier or calmer afterwards or even wiser. These reports may well > correlate with observable changes in brain scans and so on. > > To get to the qu, is there any evidence that the same results wouldn't > have been achieved with yogic pranayama meditation, or > Jain/Hindu/Christian/Muslim meditation without any understanding or > interest in anatta or wisdom as taught by the Buddha? > > I think the conclusions of these research articles show more about the > understanding of `practice' of those conducting the studies than anything > else;-) > > Comments welcome. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== > Hi Sarah, I don't completely understand your question. Studies show that those who practice meditation consistently, like Buddhist monks, have more happiness, calm, and less attachment to the idea of self than people who don't consistently practice meditation (like me because I am too busy writing these posts! ;-)). And these differences can be measured with brain scans. Aren't these wholesome states of mind? How could they possibly be considered unwholesome? You write, "I think the conclusions of these research articles show more about the understanding of `practice' of those conducting the studies than anything else;-)" Well, of course. These studies don't really `prove' anything and might be influenced by the preconceptions and expectations of the researchers. For example, I suspect that if you were a scientist and conducted these studies you would come to far different conclusions! ;-)). This is just one bit of information that might be combined with other information later on to form a more complete picture. Science is about forming hypotheses and continually revising those hypotheses. Metta, James 27734 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 6:06am Subject: Re: The Universe Hi Charles, You are getting big! Alex asked the same thing. It is because of kamma that we are born as humans and at this time the earth has the right environment for humans. Does that sound right to you? robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > Do you have any good ideas on why we live on planet > earth, why couldn't we live on Pluto, Mercury, Veanis, > the moon, or Mars. > What do Buddhists think about the reason for life on > Earth? > > From Charles (almost 10 now) > > > 27735 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 6:17am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hello James, James: That DVD that you mention, `Yogis of Tibet', sounds really interesting. When I get back to the states I will have to search for it. Michael: It is quite interesting although most of what is reported relates to the recent history of Tibet. As I said there are only 'glimpes' on the practices of those yogis, not going into too much depth. But nevertheless worthwhile. You can find the DVD at Amazon. Metta Michael 27736 From: Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:02am Subject: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Nina Hi, Nina - I've been thinking over a bit about the Abhidhammic "take" on various matters. I mentioned to you that I *do* study it a bit. Actually, I mull over aspects of it more than I study it, per se. Often this results in my finding elements of it that I think are either superfluous to the Dhamma, or contrary to it, or just silly, as, of course, you have come to see, no doubt with little pleasure. But there is much in Abhidhamma that I find useful as well. One thing that I have come to find quite valuable is its at-the-moment perspective on all matters, and, specifically, on the factors of the eightfold path. In particular, I've been thinking over Right Livelihood. Right Livelihood amounts to Right Intention (and carrying it through) in the area of earning a living. This factor of Right Livelihood, certainly on the face of it, seems to be a conventional notion pertaining to one aspect of how one conducts one's life. And this is true. But there is a more important sense of Right Livelihood, I think, and I suspect you will agree with this. It seems to me that what really happens at all happens at a moment in time, on some occasion. Much of the time one is not engaging in one's occupation, and even when he/she is, the issue of rightness or wrongness doesn't enter in. The issue of rightness or wrongness enters in at times of decision (i.e. volition that is determinative). At the moment (or at the moments) that one chooses (or re-chooses) a livelihood, it is a moment of Right Livelihood or Wrong Livelihood. When one is working, at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work but resists that, that is a moment of Right Livelihood; at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work and does not resist that, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood; at the moment one is inclined to act beneficially through one's work and does so, that is a moment of Right Livelihood; and at the moment one is inclined to act beneficially through one's work but does not, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood. The same applies to Right Action and Right Speech. All of these have their "critical points" occurring at moments in time, on specific occasions, and they are matters, in specific areas, of volition that is immediately expressed in action or is determinative of future action. The rest of the time, there is a sort of "coasting" that is rather neutral. Or so it seems to me. 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) 27737 From: Alan Bell Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 6:37am Subject: Desire and the path to truth .... Dear All, I understand the end to suffering is through the end of desire. However, if I have a desire to be healthy, a desire to meditate twice per day, and parctise Yoga each day, still a desire that need to be eliminated ... ? Thanks in advance, Alan ps - many thanks for the replies on my recent post of ego and self ! 27738 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina (and Michael) - > > In a message dated 12/5/03 12:19:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, > nilo@e... > writes: > > > I read it differently: such mighty beings as stream-winners > > >and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry: to > realize the > > fruit of stream-entry, they have realized the path-consciousness > and this is > > immediately followed by the fruition-consciousness. > ========================= > It seems to me that your interpretation is a biiiig stretch > that constitutes an honest attempt on your part to give support to > Abhidhammic and > commentarial positions that just don't make sense as a means of > understanding this > sutta. In particular, the idea of one practicing for > fruition-consciousness > having already had path-consciousness when it is given that the > former > immediately follows the latter makes no sense at all to me. What > sort of "practicing" is that? I think Nina's comments are merely a restatement of the commentaries and Abhidhamma, so if there's any 'biiig stretch' it is in those texts. As to the use of 'practice' to describe the momentary progress from magga citta to phalla citta, we need to understand how the term 'practice' is used in the texts. Generally, it is used to mean progressing along the path, that is, actual insight, particularly for the person who is already a stream enterer or above. The 'path' itself is in fact the four stages of enlightenment. I'm not aware of any instances in the texts of 'practice' being used in the sense that you seem to use it, namely, of something (not itself mindfulness/insight) undertaken in order to arouse mindfulness/insight or other forms of kusala. So a 'streamwinner practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry' is simply a streamwinner progressing to the corresponding fruition moment. Jon > Please look again at the following straightforward, > conventional-language material for possible reconsideration: > > > ... stream-winners > > and those practicing to realize the fruit of stream-entry; > once-returners > > and those practicing to realize the fruit of once-returning; > non-returners > > and those practicing to realize the fruit of non-returning; > Arahants and > > those practicing for Arahantship... 27739 From: Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi, Michael (and Robert) - In a message dated 12/6/03 7:52:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Michael: > Thank you for the very detailed explanation. I wasn't questioning that but > just the use of the words 'lying dormant' which may give the impression that > > you are referring to something that is substantial and not > conditioned/impermanent phenomena. Just being picky maybe :) =========================== I believe that "latent/dormant tendencies" rise and fall all the time, with subsequent tendencies being conditioned by previous ones in much the same way as the last mindstate in a "life" conditions the first mindstate of the next, and in much the same way as the motion of one billiard ball conditions the moving af another. It is not a matter of "the same tendency" continuing, though subsequent tendencies are often little different in form/pattern from prior ones. (But I agree that the terminology is off-putting, being suggestive of substantiality and permananence.) 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) 27740 From: Alan Bell Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:22am Subject: RE: [dsg] Desire and the path to truth .... sorry, what I am trying to get at is - aren't some types of desire 'healthy' and 'necessary' ? Alan >From: "Alan Bell" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] Desire and the path to truth .... >Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:37:26 +0000 > >Dear All, > >I understand the end to suffering is through the end of desire. > >However, if I have a desire to be healthy, a desire to meditate twice per >day, and parctise Yoga each day, still a desire that need to be eliminated >... ? > >Thanks in advance, Alan >ps - many thanks for the replies on my recent post of ego and self ! 27741 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 8:03am Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > To get to the qu, is there any evidence that the same results wouldn't > have been achieved with yogic pranayama meditation, or > Jain/Hindu/Christian/Muslim meditation without any understanding or > interest in anatta or wisdom as taught by the Buddha? > > I think the conclusions of these research articles show more about the > understanding of `practice' of those conducting the studies than anything > else;-) Here is an extract from "Why God Won't Go Away" (p7) which supports your view: Robert was one of eight Tibetan meditators who participated in our imaging study. Each was subjected to the same routine, and in virtually every case, the SPECT scans showed a similar slowing of activity in the orientation area, occuring during the peak moments of meditation. Later, we broadened the experiment and used the same techniques to study several Franciscan nuns at prayer. Again, the SPECT scans revealed similar changes that occured during the sisters' most intensely religious moments. Unlike the Buddhists, however, the sisters tended to describe this moment as a tangible sense of the closeness of God and a mingling with Him. Their accounts echoed those of Christian mysteries of the past, including that of thirteenth century Franciscan sister Angela of Foligno: "How great is the mercy of the one who realized this union ... I posessed God so fully that I was no longer in my previous customary state but was led to find a peace in which I was united with God and was content with everything. My opinion is that the scientists were observing something and then trying to fit their observations into their religious beliefs. I looked at the same observations and used it to support the validity of anatta, though this interpretation is not even hinted at in the book. Metta, Rob M :-) 27742 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 10:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:millenia and ariyans Hi Howard, a millenia is nothing compared to a kappa or aeon. Actually, we all need a lot of patience to keep on studying, reflecting, being aware. It never is enough. I am busy this weekend hiking and rehearsing for our concert, may write later on about the four pairs of holy people. I have to pull out texts and look at the Pali with Michael! Nina. op 05-12-2003 01:30 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > As soon as I really know (several millenia from now, Nina ;-)), I'll > do that! 27743 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 11:32am Subject: Re: Christmas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > It's Christmas in 20 days, and it's going to be so > exciting.Big feast, Christmas trees, and the presents. > What are the important festeivals in Buddhism? What do > they do to celebrat?What's the theme? > > Refering to the letter you sent to me last time about > rebirth. I've never really felt that during my last > death, if I had one. Is it because this only supposed > to happen to Buddhists? By the way,why can't I say > recarnation? > > > Metta, > Hilary Hi Star Kid Hilary! I am glad that you are getting excited about Christmas coming. It is a nice holiday for children. Personally, I don't like Christmas too much because everyone is so stressed out, and I can sense that. One nice thing about being here in Cairo is that I will miss the whole season! Ho ho ho!! ;-) (My parents call me `The Grinch' at this time of year because I can't wait for Christmas to be over! ;-) The most significant Buddhist holiday is Visaka Puja Day, also known as `Buddha Day', and it is the celebration of the Buddha's birth, enlightenment, and death—which all occurred on the same day: the first full moon day in May (June during leap years). During this holiday I would go to my temple and listen to various dhamma talks and participate in Thai cultural activities. Every temple celebrates this day a little differently. You also ask, "I've never really felt that during my last death, if I had one. Is it because this only supposed to happen to Buddhists?" No, according to Buddhism, this happens to everyone. Don't worry about not remembering, I don't remember my last death either. Most Buddhists don't remember their previous lives. According to the Pali Canon, only those people who achieve high levels of meditation and open certain areas of their mind are able to recall past lives. Many ascetics in the Buddha's time were able to do this but they didn't know what caused all of the lives or how to stop them, until the Buddha reached enlightenment and taught everyone who wanted to know. You also ask, "By the way, why can't I say recarnation?" I didn't tell you not to say reincarnation. Most Buddhists don't use the word `reincarnation' because it gives the idea that a `soul' is reborn into body after body, when that isn't what happens. What happens is that an individual is reborn again and again, which doesn't imply a soul moving from body to body but more a transformation of the same entity that never has a soul or lasting essence. Personally, I am not that strict about the use of either word because people are still going to think what they want to think regardless of the word used. If you want to use the word reincarnation or rebirth, they are both fine by me. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James Ps. You might want to ask Mrs. Abbott how she celebrates `Abhidhamma Day' That is the day that celebrates the occasion when the Buddha is said to have gone to the Tushita Heaven to teach his mother the Abhidhamma. It occurs the first full moon day in October. Mrs. Abbott loves the Abhidhamma! :-) 27744 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Desire and the path to truth .... Hello Alan, This link may be of some interest - it was posted on another list and there hasn't been discussion on it, so I'm not sure if there are any glaring errors in the logic and scripture interpretation. It's called "Three Cheers for Tanha" http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol2/tanha.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Bell" wrote: > sorry, what I am trying to get at is - aren't some types of desire 'healthy' > and 'necessary' ? > > Alan > > > >From: "Alan Bell" > >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > >Subject: [dsg] Desire and the path to truth .... > >Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:37:26 +0000 > > > >Dear All, > > > >I understand the end to suffering is through the end of desire. > > > >However, if I have a desire to be healthy, a desire to meditate twice per > >day, and parctise Yoga each day, still a desire that need to be eliminated > >... ? > > > >Thanks in advance, Alan > >ps - many thanks for the replies on my recent post of ego and self ! > > 27745 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:49pm Subject: Re: Desire and the path to truth .... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Bell" wrote: > Dear All, > > I understand the end to suffering is through the end of desire. > Hello Alan, I'd go one step further here, and suggest that the end of suffering comes thro the ending of ignorance. While there is ignorance about what is real and what is concept, there will be desire, or lobha, and thus clinging. > However, if I have a desire to be healthy, a desire to meditate twice per > day, and parctise Yoga each day, still a desire that need to be eliminated > ... ? > Well, yes.... however I state this warily, bc it is easy to say 'eliminate' but impossible to do if we think we can do this ....ooh! this is sounding a bit zen-ish. Have just returned home from night shift and am a bit muddled headed. What I mean is that to know desire for what it is - just desire, not me, not mine, not myself; desire or lobha is a cetasika which arises with a moment of consciousness and falls away again, very rapidly. By understanding what this moment really is, is, I believe, the only way to 'eliminate' ignorance and therefore end suffering. > Thanks in advance, Alan > ps - many thanks for the replies on my recent post of ego and self ! > > Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 27746 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 3:05pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Hi Sarah, A belated 'thank you' for this message. I remember now, that I read it in a hurry and looked forward to studying it carefully after the weekend. Then, [predictably], I forgot all about it. Thanks for the reminder. The Mahacattarika sutta has always been one of my favourites, I've quoted it several times on dsg. It's time I understood what it says :-) The translation I have (by David Maurice), says "There is right understanding that is good and has good results but yet has some blemishes and so ripens to clinging. It is the opposite of wrong understanding but still has elements of self and thought of self. You have explained, I think, that this is mundane right view (satipatthana). And also, it is the mundane right view of a worldling, not of an ariyan. Ariyan right view, be it mundane or supramundane, does not condition rebirth (ripen to clinging). Then you add: ---------- S: > "MA [the comy] says that this is the right view of insight which understands wrong view as an object by penetrating its characteristic of impermanence, etc, and which understands right view by exercising the function of comprehension and by clearing away confusion." ----------- So it is telling us that mundane insight can have wrong understanding and right understanding as object. (In this context, the significance of 'impermanence' and 'clearing away' escapes me.) ----------- S: > Working back, in footnote 1100 for `pubbangamaa', lit. "the forerunner", he gives: "MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight [as being discussed above], which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering, and non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements." ------------- Is this a commentary on the preceding stanza which reads: "And how does right understanding come first? If one realises that wrong understanding is wrong understanding and right understanding is right understanding, then that is one's right understanding." I have been trying to sort this out in terms of wrong, mundane and supramundane views and whether there is one that understands all three. If you can explain it simply, that would be good; otherwise, I'm happy to leave it in the too-hard basket for a while longer. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi KenH, > > A little more on the Mahacattarika sutta - just my best guess for now with > limited commentary & Pali assistance and even more limited knowledge;-). 27747 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 3:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Michael, > >KH: Consider the Satipatthana and Anapanasati Suttas; > >These utterly profound teachings are, today, interpreted > >in a way that renders them banal and worthless. > > > MB: Can you briefly explain what you mean? Which are those interpretations > that you are referring to? The interpretations I meant were the ones I referred to as found in the commentaries to the Satipatthana Sutta. (about jackalls and babies) In my early days of Dhamma study, there were popular Buddhists books telling me how to 'practise satipatthana.' The idea was that I should concentrate on (be mindful of) everything I did in daily life: 'When you are making a pot of tea, know you are making a pot of tea . . as you see the tea pot, know you are seeing the tea pot . . as you reach for it, . . as you feel the elbow straighten . . the fingers straighten . . the touch of the tea pot . . .' These silly, impractical instructions are impossible to comply with for more than a few seconds; More to the point, they are ineffective and counterproductive and they make a mockery of the Dhamma. > MB: I am not sure I follow you here. The object might be the same but the > jhana citta and panna citta are different, two different moments, so they > cannot be simultaneous. > As you know, it is possible for wholesome consciousness to experience unwholesome consciousness. By normal logic, this should not be possible. But, in the billionth of a second (or so) after a dhamma has ceased to exist, the succeeding mental factors can know its characteristics just as clearly as if it were still there. That's all I was trying to describe in my previous message -- vipassana consciousness sharing the same object as the previous jhana consciousness and so, effectively, the two operating together. By the way, these are just my conclusions, I haven't actually seen 'jhana and vipassana in-tandem-development' explained in this way. Kind regards, Ken H 27748 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:14pm Subject: Re: Justice and Fairness Hello RobM, I like this post - can you tell me where the reference to akusala kamma patha comes from? When people talk about Kamma and how it makes sense - it is true, it does on paper, and with the simple examples given, and when it is not 'me'. When you compare it to gravity, it seems straight forward - The result of breaking the laws of gravity, in this world, is immediate, predictible, consistent and the result is able to be precisely replicated. However, the law of kamma, on the contrary, isn't immediate, predictable, consistent and the result is not able to be precisely replicated. I can see the type of kamma that gets results right now - shout an obscenity at a tired policeman and predictable things will happen. But we have no proof that bad things happening to good people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time are vipaka. To state they are could be just 'tidying up the story'. I think a lot about this because it hits me in the face everyday. I'm not sure whether you read this post of mine recently - rather than repeat parts of it again, I'll give the link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24985 Anyway, it's something I have to deal with, and the 'adze handle' of not understanding kamma may wear through one day ... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > A person meticulously plans and executes a murder because of hatred. > > A person is a hired killer. > > A person kills as a momentary crime of passion (i.e. he finds his > wife's lover). > > A person kills in self defence. > > A person kills by accidently backing a truck. > > A person kills because it is their job to execute condemned > prisoners. > > A person kills because they are a soldier and face an enemy on the > field of battle. > > A person kills because they are a judge and the law of the land > requires capital punishement be given out for certain offences. > > In all eight cases listed above, there is a dead body at the end of > the day. In modern society, some of these people are called "bad", > some are "neutral" (doing their job) and the soldier may even be > labeled as a "hero". > > "Justice and fairness" is a social concept that creates a lot of > confusion (that is why we have "judges" to make "judgements"). > > The Buddhist definition of akusala kamma patha, killing has five > constituent factors: > - A living being > - Knowledge that there is a living being > - Desire to kill > - Effort to kill > - Consequential death > > The Buddhist approach makes a lot more sense to me. In fact, my > opinion has no relevance here... kamma is a law of nature, like > gravity. It doesn't matter if I believe in gravity, accept gravity > or "if gravity makes sense to me"... gravity just IS. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 27749 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:18pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hiya Herman, and all, You can aim any posts you like at me :-) I probably won't notice mild to medium arrows - subtlety and hinting bounces off - polite but direct language usually catches my attention. :-) I understand and agree with your point - about conditionality and dependent origination - because of which there is no fixed static being, everything is a constantly changing process. But still, though beings are changing all the time, and we can talk about moment to moment death and re-birth - there is only one of these moments when the Continuum 'vanishes' from this Plane and leaves a decomposing pile of rupa behind. We are taught that human birth is a rare opportunity to hear the Dhamma with no guarantees that we will be reborn as a human able to hear the Dhamma anytime this next aeon. Just as 'I' am in this predicament, so too are you and other continuums. And it is out of compassion and goodwill towards them (whether presently in human form or not) that in the instant 'I' am aware of any action of mine that can affect them, I try to express compassion and goodwill in that action (or non action). Kamma and its consequences hover in the background continually. Now Herman - as a dhamma-friend, it is my delight :-) to help you overcome this unbecoming (!) dosa towards flies. You might BE one, one-day - and perhaps if you are, it would be better for you to come across the picnic lunch of someone who felt that they had "a sense of awe and wonder for these amazing beings. Let us all do what we can to protect their ability to survive and thrive in the wild". His photos of flies (and a few mossies) are at the link below, they're wonderful! enjoy!:-) (you may have to cut and paste - does anyone know the trick of making l-o-o-ng addresses work?) http://www.photovault.com/Link/Orders/EntomologyInsects/FliesDiptera/O EFVolume01.html metta and peace, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" wrote: > Hi Christine and everyone, > > This post isn't "aimed" at you in particular, but is just a general > statement about the March Fly discussion. > > It is clear that there are lots of basic presuppositions, and I just > want to challenge some of them. That seems to be what I do best :-) > > We talk about beings. Fair enough. At the level of beings, there are > beings. We call them living beings. But that is not half the story. > Beings are always living-dying beings. To live is to die. To take a > snapshot of a living being is all good and well, but even under the > most safe and nurturing conditions, all living beings die. To view a > life as precious, whether it be a baby or a fly, must entail viewing > it's death as precious. They are inseperable. As a consequence of > selecting only the bit we like, we are constantly very actively > repressing any awareness of the cyclical nature of life/death. > > I think all of us would aspire to a state of goodwill amongst all > beings, but the reality is that the life of beings always takes the > death of other beings as nutriment, so to speak. Life conditions > death, and death conditions life. > > We talk about individual beings. Yet an individual never comes about > on its own. There are no "higher order" beings that did not require > the coming together of at least two other beings. We can conceive of > individual beings, but no being can exist on its own. We talk about > food chains, they are nothing more than life/death chains. > Life/death is very complexly interwoven. > > We talk about individual beings, but we know that the bodies of > beings are in a constant process of dying/regenerating. Take me, for > example. Even as I write this, literally hundreds of thousands of > body cells are dying, and a similar number are coming into being. > There are millions of cells in my body, whose only function is to > hunt out other cells and devour them. > > You recently wrote about samsara-ing, which I liked very much. In > the context of the march fly, seeing it as a seperate living being > only is samsara-ing. Seeing your own body as a seperate living being > only is samsara-ing. The urge to defend or to attack comes from one > source, and that is the belief of seperateness, me against the > world, my life against death. > > I hate flies. > > Peace > > > Herman > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear RobertK, RobM, and all, > > > > It sits better with my idea of justice and fairness that anyone > > involved in the killing of beings should have consequences - and 27750 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:24pm Subject: Re: Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Dear RobK, Sarah, KenO and All, I know I am misunderstanding something - and I can't see what it is. When thinking about what yoniso manisikara is, and whether it can be cultivated - the dhammas that are present are variations of 'frustration' 'wanting to progress' 'wanting to be certain of the right path' and, yes, I know, the same old craving ... 'wanting a method'. I know 'no control' has been discussed many times. I intellectually understand there is no self, no 'one' who can make things happen, just nama and rupa, rising and falling away immediately. On this list, people often talk about 'developing' panna, 'developing' right understanding. Can this also not be done? I feel there must be some way of influencing, directing, choosing and intending actions. If *I* can go to work, keep appointments, study dhamma - isn't that being able to choose and act? It can't all be random or accidental... I understand about conditionality (up to a point). My job is the result of conditions (e.g. I need to eat, buy clothes,put a roof over my head;I have sufficient education in the right area to have obtained a position, which was available at the right time, can drive a car, have remained alive and healthy, am sufficient skilled in the duties of the position to be permanently employed .. ad infinitum) If the conditions weren't there would I even have been interested in applying for the job? No. And so, if the conditions weren't there, would I even wish to develop wise attention? And if, because of no self, one can't 'develop' or 'do' anything, how is it that I can choose to read the Dhamma - isn't that a choosing of an object and a focusing of attention? And touching on the Justice and Fairness thread - if 'I' can't choose, how come 'I' get to pay the kammic bill? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Chrisitine, > While asking yourself whether you can make yoniso manisikara arise > what are the dhammas that are present? Is there any hint of idea of > being able to control or make things appear as you want them to? > If so do such views agree with what the Buddha taught about > conditionality and anatta? > Only by knowing the present moment in various ways can ditthi be > seen, if it is not seen then it will always block insight or even be > taken as insight. So thinking is just as conditioned as any other > reality , it happens often so should be object of awareness. > RobertK > > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > Yoniso-manasikaara = wise, reasoned, methodical attention or > > reflection. > > Is it possible to cause wise attention to arise? And what, > exactly, > > is wise attention as it would be experienced in daily life? How > could > > one tell wise from unwise attention? > > > > metta and peace, > > Christine > > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27751 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:40pm Subject: Re: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Nina Hello Howard, and all, I also would like to hear Nina (or anyone's) ideas on this. While we're waiting for further elucidation, allow me to butt in a little ... I hope I've toned the post down a little (it's been struggling to get out of my drafts folder for 12 hours) - apologies if it is still a little reactive - it's not you in any way Howard, it's the topic. And so, Howard, when you are employed at the Abattoir and are on the Chain Line - it is Right Livelihood for all the millions of moments (sharpening your knives, checking the stun gun, making sure the gutters and pipes to catch run-off are clear) except for those few moments when you actually slaughter the animal? - then it's back to Right Livelihood again until the next being is dragged in front of you? Gosh! the balance sheet at the end of the day is looking pretty good! Pity about the precept - but there I go, silabbata-paramasa strikes again!... :-) The job of Slaughterman in an Abattoir is to kill living beings. How would one *resist* Wrong Livelihood here? I think it does matter how Buddhists make a buck, and certain trades and professions are Wrong Livelihood. If one works in any trade or profession not advised against by the Buddha, then, yes, within a day's work, there is also the possibility of performing kamma by good and bad thoughts, intentions and actions with resultant vipaka. There are, definitely, kinds of Livelihood the Buddha taught were to be avoided. I don't see where the Buddha meant Livelihood was a moment - he seems to have spoken about roles. In 'The Noble Eightfold Path' by Bhikkhu Bodhi: "Right livelihood is concerned with ensuring that one earns one's living in a righteous way. For a lay disciple the Buddha teaches that wealth should be gained in accordance with certain standards. One should acquire it only by legal means, not illegally; one should acquire it peacefully, without coercion or violence; one should acquire it honestly, not by trickery or deceit; and one should acquire it in ways which do not entail harm and suffering for others. The Buddha mentions five specific kinds of livelihood which bring harm to others and are therefore to be avoided: dealing in weapons, in living beings (including raising animals for slaughter as well as slave trade and prostitution), in meat production and butchery, in poisons, and in intoxicants (AN 5:177). He further names several dishonest means of gaining wealth which fall under wrong livelihood: practising deceit, treachery, soothsaying, trickery, and usury (MN 117). Obviously any occupation that requires violation of right speech and right action is a wrong form of livelihood, but other occupations, such as selling weapons or intoxicants, may not violate those factors and yet be wrong because of their consequences for others." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina - > > I've been thinking over a bit about the Abhidhammic "take" on various > matters. I mentioned to you that I *do* study it a bit. Actually, I mull over > aspects of it more than I study it, per se. Often this results in my finding > elements of it that I think are either superfluous to the Dhamma, or contrary > to it, or just silly, as, of course, you have come to see, no doubt with little > pleasure. But there is much in Abhidhamma that I find useful as well. One > thing that I have come to find quite valuable is its at-the-moment perspective on > all matters, and, specifically, on the factors of the eightfold path. In > particular, I've been thinking over Right Livelihood. Right Livelihood amounts to > Right Intention (and carrying it through) in the area of earning a living. > This factor of Right Livelihood, certainly on the face of it, seems to be a > conventional notion pertaining to one aspect of how one conducts one's life. And > this is true. But there is a more important sense of Right Livelihood, I > think, and I suspect you will agree with this. > It seems to me that what really happens at all happens at a moment in > time, on some occasion. Much of the time one is not engaging in one's > occupation, and even when he/she is, the issue of rightness or wrongness doesn't enter > in. The issue of rightness or wrongness enters in at times of decision (i.e. > volition that is determinative). At the moment (or at the moments) that one > chooses (or re-chooses) a livelihood, it is a moment of Right Livelihood or > Wrong Livelihood. When one is working, at the moment one is inclined to act > harmfully through one's work but resists that, that is a moment of Right Livelihood; > at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work and does > not resist that, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood; at the moment one is > inclined to act beneficially through one's work and does so, that is a moment of > Right Livelihood; and at the moment one is inclined to act beneficially through > one's work but does not, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood. The same > applies to Right Action and Right Speech. All of these have their "critical points" > occurring at moments in time, on specific occasions, and they are matters, in > specific areas, of volition that is immediately expressed in action or is > determinative of future action. The rest of the time, there is a sort of > "coasting" that is rather neutral. Or so it seems to me. > > With metta, > Howard 27752 From: Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Nina Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/6/03 10:41:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Hello Howard, and all, > > I also would like to hear Nina (or anyone's) ideas on this. While > we're waiting for further elucidation, allow me to butt in a > little ... I hope I've toned the post down a little (it's been > struggling to get out of my drafts folder for 12 hours) - apologies > if it is still a little reactive - it's not you in any way Howard, > it's the topic. > > And so, Howard, when you are employed at the Abattoir and are on the > Chain Line - it is Right Livelihood for all the millions of moments > (sharpening your knives, checking the stun gun, making sure the > gutters and pipes to catch run-off are clear) except for those few > moments when you actually slaughter the animal? - then it's back to > Right Livelihood again until the next being is dragged in front of > you? Gosh! the balance sheet at the end of the day is looking pretty > good! Pity about the precept - but there I go, silabbata-paramasa > strikes again!... :-) > The job of Slaughterman in an Abattoir is to kill living beings. > How would one *resist* Wrong Livelihood here? > I think it does matter how Buddhists make a buck, and certain trades > and professions are Wrong Livelihood. If one works in any trade or > profession not advised against by the Buddha, then, yes, within a > day's work, there is also the possibility of performing kamma by good > and bad thoughts, intentions and actions with resultant vipaka. There > are, definitely, kinds of Livelihood the Buddha taught were to be > avoided. I don't see where the Buddha meant Livelihood was a moment - > he seems to have spoken about roles. > > In 'The Noble Eightfold Path' by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > "Right livelihood is concerned with ensuring that one earns one's > living in a righteous way. For a lay disciple the Buddha teaches that > wealth should be gained in accordance with certain standards. One > should acquire it only by legal means, not illegally; one should > acquire it peacefully, without coercion or violence; one should > acquire it honestly, not by trickery or deceit; and one should > acquire it in ways which do not entail harm and suffering for others. > The Buddha mentions five specific kinds of livelihood which bring > harm to others and are therefore to be avoided: dealing in weapons, > in living beings (including raising animals for slaughter as well as > slave trade and prostitution), in meat production and butchery, in > poisons, and in intoxicants (AN 5:177). He further names several > dishonest means of gaining wealth which fall under wrong livelihood: > practising deceit, treachery, soothsaying, trickery, and usury (MN > 117). Obviously any occupation that requires violation of right > speech and right action is a wrong form of livelihood, but other > occupations, such as selling weapons or intoxicants, may not violate > those factors and yet be wrong because of their consequences for > others." > > metta and peace, > Christine > ========================= Christine, I began my discussion of Right Livelihood by saying: "Right Livelihood amounts to Right Intention (and carrying it through) in the area of earning a living." I went on to say the following: "This factor of Right Livelihood, certainly on the face of it, seems to be a conventional notion pertaining to one aspect of how one conducts one's life. And this is true." I then went on to discuss what I think is the most important aspect of this matter, namely the points at which one does something or can do something about this matter. I pointed out that "The issue of rightness or wrongness enters in at times of decision (i.e. volition that is determinative)." Moments of volition are not rare - they occur all the time. In discussing such moments I began with the decision points that are of greatest importance, namely the points of decision as to choice of occupation. And this is not a one-time thing. This moment of decision recurs again and again. What I said was: "At the moment (or at the moments) that one chooses (or re-chooses) a livelihood, it is a moment of Right Livelihood or Wrong Livelihood." An immoral decision made with regard to choice of occupation, of course, conditions repeated instances of immoral actions stemming from the performance of that job. This is why that moment of decision is the primary one, and was listed first by me. I then went on to point out other moments of decision that are of moral relevance once one already has chosen a particular occupation, good or bad, but the choice of occupation is of primary importance. I, of course, do not consider the choice of butcher as an instance of Right Livelihood. It happens that I eat no meat and no foul for exactly this reason. With regret I admit that I do eat seafood. Christine, are you certain that we are not in agreement on this issue? 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) 27753 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 0:18am Subject: Re: Grasping at mind states Thanks Jon, for your answer, and thank you for your question. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > Now here's a question for you. Given the speed with which clinging > arises when sense-door objects are experienced, what is your > understanding of the means by which it would be possible for a person > to 'not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if he were to dwell > without restraint over the faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful > qualities such as greed or distress might assail him'? > > Jon > My answer will be my interpretation of what seems to be happening only, and I would be very happy for anyone to modify, add or subtract. When awareness arises that there is clinging or grasping, it is possible to intend to not cling or grasp. That intention or decision has effect over a period longer than just the momentary arising of that intention. Sooner or later that intention wears off, and there is grasping or clinging again. At some point of time the awareness of clinging arises again, and the process can repeat if so intended. I was down at the cricket nets this arvo with three of my lads, and I was batting very well. I was aware that I was batting with a very deliberate non-attachment to anything that would come to mind. Thoughts would come and go , nothing would stick. Of course, from the moment the bowler started his run up there was intense concentration on that only, which is very akin to clinging, and also very deliberate (full of intention). I was bowling like crap. I became aware that I was thinking about my bowling action while bowling. From time to time only, I was able to suspend thinking about my bowling action while bowling, and the results were a lot better. But all up I still bowled like crap. Too much thinking, and unable to stop it. My guess is that in the case of cricket, you just have to repeat the required actions so often, that the whole process can occur without any conscious participation. No substitute for practice if you wanna become any good. Peace Herman 27754 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Desire and the path to truth .... Hi Alan, Welcome to DSG. Thanks for the good qus. Keep them up! I’m glad to see you got many welcomes and replies to your first post;-) Do you live in England? (I ask because I saw a uk in your first address and I’m from England myself.) Actually we have another lurking friend from England who is also Alan (W) and runs this website where most Nina’s books can be found: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ ..... --- Alan Bell wrote: > sorry, what I am trying to get at is - aren't some types of desire > 'healthy' > and 'necessary' ? and > >I understand the end to suffering is through the end of desire. > > > >However, if I have a desire to be healthy, a desire to meditate twice > per > >day, and parctise Yoga each day, still a desire that need to be > eliminated ? ..... There’s desire as soon as we wake up, see, hear, feel, think about what’s happening and so on. Desire is a natural part of life, but we can begin to see that it’s nature is quite different from that of ‘healthy’ qualities such as kindness, generosity, equanimity or wisdom. As you say, most the activities we pursue in a day would not be pursued without desire. This doesn’t mean we should change our lifestyles, but rather, begin to understand these different qualities in a day. Trying to imitate an arahant (who has no desire) would be an indication of not only desire, but also wrong practice, I think. Any lessening of desire occurs only very gradually and as a result of growth of understanding, not of forced actions motivated by more desire. ..... > >Thanks in advance, Alan > >ps - many thanks for the replies on my recent post of ego and self ! .... I think that whether there is high or low self esteem, the problem is the attachment (or ‘desire’) to oneself and the finding oneself so very important. At these times, there’s no consideration for others, no metta, no generosity and so on. Understanding that in truth there is no self, no being at all, is a condition for more equanimity, more detachment, more metta and other wholesome states.For example, in stead of blaming others for behaving in a certain way, there can be more acceptance that everything occurs by conditions. Metta can be anytime to anyone, even to those conducting wars;-) On your particular qu about self esteem, James wrote a memorable post to a young teenager on the topic of high and low self esteem. I think you’ll enjoy reading about Patty and Dominique. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/17116 (Some of his other gems written to children can be found at this link under: ‘Children, Letters written to’ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Metta, Sarah p.s If you’d care to share anything more about your interest in the Buddha’s Teachings and how you found your way here, we’d be glad to hear. ====== 27755 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Clare (?), --- clarehanson2000 wrote: > Thank you James for sharing this point of view. I never met anybody > making claim to no self. No yet anyhow. Besides, who would be a-doin' > the claiming other than a self? Maybe a tape recorder underneath the > tongue? Just teasing. .... ;-) Welcome here as well and thanks for your witty comments. We look forward to more. Maybe it's only a matter of time before there's an I-Pod that can go under the tongue - multi-tasking again;-) Can we persuade you to de-lurk a little more and to tell us a little about your background or where you live? Metta, Sarah p.s We ask everyone on DSG to sign off with a (preferably real) name which we can use to address you. We'd also appreciate it if all new (and old) members would kindly trim posts when replying. ================================= 27756 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:48am Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Christine, Thanks for your reply. I am suitably chastened by what you had to say about flies :-), and am, as always, very impressed by your research skills. Nice photos of all sorts of marvelous creatures. (I hate how flies go for the eyes of anything, regardless of whether the ability exists to shoo them away - think sick or dying mammals) With regards to the possibility of me becoming a fly. I have unshakeable faith that this will never happen. What may happen is that a fly one time may think "I am" , another time a mosquito may think "I am", and so on. This is not the perpetuation of a specific, individual , seperate "I". The thought "I am" is real enough, but momentary. It occurs anywhere, anytime, all the time. But the "I" as a persisting subject has never been found anywhere by anyone, anytime. (In my sometimes humble, but almost always confident opinion :-)) Peace, love and joy Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hiya Herman, and all, > > You can aim any posts you like at me :-) I probably won't notice > mild to medium arrows - subtlety and hinting bounces off - polite but > direct language usually catches my attention. :-) > Now Herman - as a dhamma-friend, it is my delight :-) to help you > overcome this unbecoming (!) dosa towards flies. You might BE one, > one-day - and perhaps if you are, it would be better for you to come > across the picnic lunch of someone who felt that they had "a sense of > awe and wonder for these amazing beings. 27757 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:52am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Howard Goodness, Howard! You're not still supposed to be up at that time - I rely on you North Americans having a respectable bedtime, so I can drop surprise posts on you while you're asleep and still have hours to think of a riposte to your reply. :-) In hindsight, what I should have done was visit my mother BEFORE I posted to you, not after. Two hours in a very small car with a very large disgruntled dog gets things into perspective very quickly. Looking over your original post, I see straight away what I was reacting to - it was a post by someone about six to nine months ago in which they mentioned (something like) Right Livelihood was a single moment. They may or may not have mentioned or alluded to the abattoir job, but my memory is that they may have, or at least I thought about it at that time, or in response to their post. Is this what the Buddha referred to as 'eel wriggling'? Reading your post closely yet again (and I assure you I did read it about five times previously) to see where I assumed a meaning you didn't intend - I feel it was probably just the flow of the sentence that allowed me to think you were maintaining that Right Livelihood was a mind moment only, period. [For me, though probably not for anyone else, the omission of the bracketed words "(or re-chooses)" and the inclusion of the word 'ALSO' after each mention of Right Livelihood in the quote below, would have dampened any proclivity to jump to erroneous conclusions]. ----------------------- Howard: "At the moment (or at the moments) that one chooses .. [(or re-chooses)] .. a livelihood, it is a moment of Right Livelihood or Wrong Livelihood. When one is working, at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work but resists that, that is a moment of Right Livelihood [ALSO]; at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work and does not resist that, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood; at the moment one is inclined to act beneficially through one's work and does so, that is a moment of Right Livelihood [ALSO]; and at the moment one is inclined to act beneficially through one's work but does not, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood." --------------------- I think that we are in agreement on this issue. :-) Thank you for your restrained and courteous reply. Palms together and deep bow to you Howard. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Christine, I began my discussion of Right Livelihood by saying: "Right > Livelihood amounts to Right Intention (and carrying it through) in the area > of earning a > living." I went on to say the following: "This factor of Right Livelihood, > certainly on the face of it, seems to be a conventional notion pertaining to > one aspect of how one conducts one's life. And this is true." I then went on > to discuss what I think is the most important aspect of this matter, namely the > points at which one does something or can do something about this matter. I > pointed out that "The issue of rightness or wrongness enters in at times of > decision (i.e. volition that is determinative)." Moments of volition are not rare > - they occur all the time. In discussing such moments I began with the > decision points that are of greatest importance, namely the points of decision as to > choice of occupation. And this is not a one-time thing. This moment of > decision recurs again and again. What I said was: "At the moment (or at the moments) > that one chooses (or re-chooses) a livelihood, it is a moment of Right > Livelihood or Wrong Livelihood." An immoral decision made with regard to choice of > occupation, of course, conditions repeated instances of immoral actions > stemming from the performance of that job. This is why that moment of decision is the > primary one, and was listed first by me. I then went on to point out other > moments of decision that are of moral relevance once one already has chosen a > particular occupation, good or bad, but the choice of occupation is of primary > importance. > I, of course, > do not consider the choice of butcher as an instance of Right Livelihood. It > happens that I eat no meat and no foul for exactly this reason. With regret I > admit that I do eat seafood. > Christine, are you certain that we are not in agreement on this issue? > > With metta, > Howard 27758 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi RobM, --- robmoult wrote: > Here is an extract from "Why God Won't Go Away" (p7) which supports > your view: > Robert was one of eight Tibetan meditators who participated in our > imaging study. Each was subjected to the same routine, and in > virtually every case, the SPECT scans showed a similar slowing of > activity in the orientation area, occuring during the peak moments > of meditation. > Later, we broadened the experiment and used the same techniques to > study several Franciscan nuns at prayer. Again, the SPECT scans > revealed similar changes that occured during the sisters' most > intensely religious moments. <...> > > My opinion is that the scientists were observing something and then > trying to fit their observations into their religious beliefs. I > looked at the same observations and used it to support the validity > of anatta, though this interpretation is not even hinted at in the > book. ..... So you are correlating a decreased activity in part of the brain as shown on a SPECT scan (I keep thinking of SPECTRE in a James Bond film;-)) with either a) an understanding of anatta as I think was suggested before or b) the truth of anatta, regardless of any understanding or in spite of a wrong understanding by the participants. If similar decreased activity were to show up after say, a swimming or hiking marathon or yogic meditation, would this lead you to draw the same conclusions? What about reduced heart activity as shown on an ECG? As I say, I have no problem following the studies (how scientific is another qu), but I do have trouble following the conclusions - yours and others I’ve read following other similar research. I’ll be glad for any further clarification. Metta, Sarah ===== 27759 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:58am Subject: Links to questions about nibbana Hi Sarah, I recall that recently while skimming through a number of posts, I saw something there from you re questions in the Vis along the lines of what I had been asking. I didn't reply to your post immediately, and now I can't find it! I don't have a Vis at home, and would appreciate any links you could post. Peace, love and joy Herman 27760 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi James, Thanks for your comments. --- buddhatrue wrote: > I don't completely understand your question. Studies show that those > who practice meditation consistently, like Buddhist monks, have more > happiness, calm, and less attachment to the idea of self than people > who don't consistently practice meditation (like me because I am too > busy writing these posts! ;-)). And these differences can be > measured with brain scans. Aren't these wholesome states of mind? > How could they possibly be considered unwholesome? ..... I agree that most studies show the subjects reporting more happiness and calm from their meditation practice. In a recent Time magazine article, many of these made interesting reports. As I indicated, my yoga friends, swimming friends or hiking friends would all report the same after an hour or two of their choice activity. My mother would make similar comments after gardening or cooking whilst listening to opera. Now, the Buddhist meditators would in addition report ‘less attachment to the idea of self’, but are you sure this addition to that of other meditators or yogis can be measured on a brain scan? A non-Buddhist meditator (even a T-M one;-)) is likely to show the same scan result, whilst others might report ‘less attachment to the idea of self’ after a couple of hours of reflecting on dhamma here without any meditation. Wholesome/unwholesome......who knows? Can a scan correlate reduced activity with wholesome states? I don’t think so. It might show the same during deep sleep. Are reports about happiness and calm any indication of increased wholesome states? Again, I’d say there’s no scientific or other evidence of this. My yoga friends or mother or a sun-bather might report the same. Reported happiness is usually an indication of increased pleasant feeling which can be wholesome or unwholesome. .... > This is just one bit of information that might be combined with other > information later on to form a more complete picture. Science is > about forming hypotheses and continually revising those hypotheses. ...... I appreciate this and I’m not saying it’s useless and I’m not saying anything about the mind-states or wisdom (or lack of) of the meditators selected. I have no idea about this other than what is reported. I’m merely indicating a difficulty I have with the conclusions. Can you say whether the mind-states are wholesome or unwholesome at this very moment? Is the pleasant feeling now accompanying attachment or wisdom? Doesn't it change all the time? Are you sure it’s always wholesome when you meditate? Metta, Sarah p.s Good letters to the StarKids -never any need to hurry with replies whatever they may say to the contrary;-) ===== 27761 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 2:39am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Doomed March Fly Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > I have been following this thread with great interest and although I > fully > agree with what you {RobM}say, there is something still nagging me and I > cannot > put a finger on it. I think it is unreasonable to assume that only the > mental state of the being who commits the action has a bearing on kamma > and > that the degree of harm caused by the action on others has no bearing on > > kamma. The only thing that comes to my mind is the interconnection of > everything in samsara but at this stage I really don’t know how to > elaborate > this further. .... Did you work out what was nagging you? It occurred to me when I read your post that we need to differentiate between mental states and kamma of the perpetrator and the results of kamma (vipaka) of those experiencing harm. As we know there are many factors involved in receiving results and the primary one is our own kamma performed. Other factors such as the impact from the falling log or bomb are decisive supports only. We had a long discussion on this topic before. If this touches on the nagging issue, I’ll give some links;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 27762 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Links to questions about nibbana Hi Herman & All, --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > I recall that recently while skimming through a number of posts, I > saw something there from you re questions in the Vis along the lines > of what I had been asking. ..... I don't have any links, but I'm happy to type it out in sections - a few a day as I'm finding it difficult to select some and leave out others. There are 11 Questions and Answers and they all seem relevant to discussions on nibbana here. I think you'll enjoy them. First ones: ***** VismXV1,67f DISCUSSION ON NIBBANA >[Question 1] Is nibbana non-existent because it is unapprehendable, like the hare's horn? [Answer] that is not so, because it is apprehendable by the [right] means. For it is apprehendable [by some, namely, the noble ones] by the [right] means, in other words, by the way that is appropriate to it, [the way of virtue, concentration, and understanding]; it is like the supramundane consciousness of others, [which is apprehendable only by certain of the noble ones] by means of knowledge of penetration of others' minds. Therefore it should not be said that it is non-existent because unapprehendable; for it should not be said that what the foolish ordinary man does not apprehend is unapprehendable. Again it should not be said that nibbana does not exist. Why not? Because it then follows that the way would be futile. For if nibbana were non-existent, then it would follow that the right way, which includes the three aggregates beginning with virtue and is headed by right understanding, would be futile. And it is not futile because it does reach nibbana. [Q.2] But futility of the way does not follow because what is reached is absence, [that is, absence of the five aggregates consequent upon the cutting off of the defilements]. [A] That is not so. Because, though there is absence of past and future [aggregates], there is nevertheless no reaching of nibbana [simply because of that]. [Q.3] Then is the absence of present [aggregates] as well nibbana? [A] That is not so. Because their absence is an impossibility, since if they are absent their non-presence follows. [Besides, if nibbana were absence of present aggregates too,] that would entail the fault of excluding the arising of the nibbana element with result of past clinging left, at the path moment, which has present aggregates as its support. [Qu.4] then will there be no fault if it is non-presence of defilements [that is nibbana]? [A] That is not so. Because it would then follow that the noble path was meaningless. For if it were so, then, since defilements [can be] non-existent also before the moment of the noble path, it follows that the noble path would be meaningless. Consequently that is no reason; [it is unreasonable to say that nibbana is unapprehendable, that it is non-existence, and so on].< ***** To be contd. I liked this reminder for us foolish, ordinary folks;-): "for it should not be said that what the foolish ordinary man does not apprehend is unapprehendable." Any comments welcome. Metta, Sarah ======== 27763 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Hi Christine, I’ve enjoyed reading all your posts and hope you’ve had a good weekend. As Nina has been saying to Howard, better to bring out our difficulties and objections into the open . I hope the others will add more here. --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > I know I am misunderstanding something - and I can't see what it is. > When thinking about what yoniso manisikara is, and whether it can be > cultivated - the dhammas that are present are variations > of 'frustration' 'wanting to progress' 'wanting to be certain of the > right path' and, yes, I know, the same old craving ... 'wanting a > method'. .... Exactly so and I think it’s a sign of progress when there is some recognition at any level of the present dhammas. Just as you say, mostly ‘wanting’ and more ‘wanting’ in between other equally useless states of frustration and sheer not knowing;-) This state of attending with some awareness to dhammas as they are (rather than how we ‘want’ them to be) is in itself the beginning of the cultivation of wise attention and basic understanding. No one would ‘choose’ the frustration and difficulty. It’s just the way it’s conditioned and in between there are so many sense door processes through the eyes, ears and so on, but when we’re obsessed with the ‘wanting’ there’s no awareness of these other realities at all. .... > I know 'no control' has been discussed many times. I intellectually > understand there is no self, no 'one' who can make things happen, > just nama and rupa, rising and falling away immediately. ..... So we can see that intellectual understanding is a foundation but it’s not enough and there are bound to be plenty of doubts and confusion still. I’m out of time. Hope others respond too. I greatly appreciate your open posts and sharing, Chris. Metta, Sarah p.s hope your mother, brother and youngsters are doing well. We’d love to hear any of Sarah F’s reflections if she can be prompted. Pls ask her to call me when she visits H.K. too. ===== 27764 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard I said I would get back separately on some of the interesting points raised in your post. Thanks for your earlier clarification. <> I'm not with you here. What do you see as being the particular significance/relevance of a rupa being unobserved/unexperienced, in relation to the question of its place of arising? <<(BTW, what *is* an unobserved sight? What does it mean for a sight not to be seen? The very language contradicts itself!)>> As you say, the language implies contradiction, but I think the problem lies in your particular choice of expression 'unobserved sight' here, rather than 'non-experienced visible-object'; and perhaps especially the expression 'a sight' for the Pali 'ruparammana' (visible-object). Consider for a moment audible-object. We may think of the audible-object being experienced through the ears right now as 'different sounds' but that is already *thinking about* the audible-object rather than its direct experience (in terms of Herman's sutta quote, that is an example of the nimitta and anubyanjana). Audible-object is simply the audible data that can be experienced through the ear-door, before there is any recognition of the nature or source of the sound. Likewise, visible-object is that which is experienced through the eye-door, rather than the 'different objects' that are seen (sights). It is the visible data that can be experienced when the eyes are open and that is absent when the eyes are closed. Now I don’t think anyone has any difficulty with the idea of audible-object/sound arising regardless of whether it is the object of our (or someone's) hearing consciousness. The conditions for the arising of sound in this world are unrelated to a being's hearing consciousness -- more to do with the contact of 2 sets of hardness. When those conditions occur, sound arises that is *capable of being* the object of hearing consciousness of a being. Of course, whether or not that sound actually becomes the object of any being's hearing consciousness depends on yet another set of conditions; but only sound that has arisen in the first place can be experienced. Does this sound improbable to you? Likewise with visible-object, its arising in this plane of existence where it is *capable of being experienced* by seeing consciousness does not depend on it actually being the object of a being's experience. The fact that this is more difficult to conceptualise in the case of visible-object than in the case of audible-object perhaps indicates the strong clinging or wrong view that there is to the experience through the eye-door, for all of us. << You seem to be saying that unobserved rupas occur in "Rupaville"! ;-) I say that if, as common sense asserts, there is an external material world of objects such as trees, rocks, air, grass, animal bodies, human bodies, planes, trains, and automobiles, then that is Rupaville!>> Sorry, but I am very much puzzled by this! First, I don’t see why the 'unobserved' rupas are such a problem conceptually while the 'observed' ones apparently are not. Secondly, I don’t see how you get from the 'group of 8 inseparable rupas' of the Abhidhamma to 'objects such as trees [etc]'. Would you say that in asserting the group of 8 inseparable rupas, or the arising of rupas independently of being experienced, the Abhidhamma itself postulates the idea of an 'external material world of objects such as trees [etc]'? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - Jon, to me hardness or an odor or a sight are contents of certain experiences (their objective aspects). As I see it, a hardness or an odor or a sight, if it is something other than that, must occur "somewhere," especially when it arises allegedly unobserved. (BTW, what *is* an unobserved sight? What does it mean for a sight not to be seen? The very language contradicts itself!) You seem to be saying that unobserved rupas occur in "Rupaville"! ;-) I say that if, as common sense asserts, there is an external material world of objects such as trees, rocks, air, grass, animal bodies, human bodies, planes, trains, and automobiles, then that is Rupaville! (This easily accounts for rupas occurring in groups.) But if not, I see there being proposed some unseen and unspecified "rupa realm," an amazing abstraction. If rupas are not features and functions of external physical "things," and they also are not the objective aspects of certain acts of consciousness, then they are disembodied ghosts hanging out in some ghost realm waiting to be somehow contacted by mind. Now, I can see so-called unexperienced rupas as potentials consisting of many, but not yet all, of the conditions needed for the arising in consciousness of a rupa, so that, for example, the occurrence of the sequence of phenomena we call "touching the back of our skull" results in the arising of a hardness, but prior to the occurrence of that sequence of phenomena occurring, that hardness is only a potential. (Some conditions have been met, but not enough.) This would be *one* way of explaining the matter. An objective external world of physical objects would be another. There may well yet be others that are far better than either of these. I have my preference, but I don't insist on it. What I do think is reasonable to insist on, however, is that a claim be backed up by a plausible and verifiable explanation. It seems to me that Abhidhamma and Abhidhammikas are extraordinarily detailed on many points, but at certain critical junctures, get very lax, showing a willingness to say "somehow", or to say "The Abhidhamma says it, so it must be so. Just wait until you have the ability to see it - many millenia from now". With metta, Howard 27765 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Nina I agree with you about Larry's questions, and may I also say the same about your dialogue with him (and with Howard). Most stimulating and very helpful. Jon --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon and Larry, > I appreciate both Larry's question and your answer. I like the > reminder: We > need to be true to ourselves in terms of the extent to which sati > and panna have been developed to date ... > Excellent. > Nina. 27766 From: Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 11:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Nina Hi again, Christine - In a message dated 12/7/03 12:53:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > It > happens that I eat no meat and no foul for exactly this reason. > ======================= My spelling must have been Freudian! ;-)) 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) 27767 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 5:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] The arising of rupas Howard Thanks for this lengthy explanation in reply to my question. <> (In other words, a rupa has no existence outside a moment of consciousness.) There are many references in the suttas to rupa-khandha. I think that in the context of the upadana-khandhas (khandhas of clinging), it is reasonable to regard rupas as those that are being, or have been or are to be, experienced. However, I don’t rupa as rupa-khandha as having a direct bearing on the question of whether rupas can arise without being experienced. I am not aware of anything in the suttas that points directly one way or the other on this, are you? << ... The business about touching the back of one's head or of being struck by lightning are stories, as I see it, but not groundless ones - they are stories which we associate with patterns of actual experiences in various mindstreams.>> I gave an example in conventional terms simply to make it easier to relate to. Let me put the question then in terms of fundamental phenomena. If rupas do not arise (unexperienced) in this world in the first place, then what are the conditions , what is the 'trigger', by which a rupa becomes the object of consciousness? In any event, you still haven't said why you see your preferred alternative scheme as a more likely, more plausible, explanation than the explanation that rupas arise in this world independently of being experienced (one of the easier to accept aspects of the Abhidhamma, I'd have thought!). It occurs to me that the problem may lie in the fact that this is something you regard as unverifiable, and that in such cases you are inclined to reject the possibility of the assertion being true. I believe this would be a grave mistake. Much of what the Buddha said, even in the suttas, is unverifiable for us at the present time or ever (i.e., is verifiable only by a Buddha or the great disciples). I think Nina gave the example of the law of kamma, and I'm wondering how you feel about that? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... I understand and sympathize with your question, but I think it presumes a world of external objects that are merely conceptual projections. All that I take for "real" (or, better, "actual") are experiential conditions in some mindstream or other. Prior conditions, provided certain ones of them (and enough of them) have occurred, constitute what we might call a potential rupa (or a potential for a rupa), but a rupa, itself, is the content of an experience occurring in some mindstream. The business about touching the back of one's head or of being struck by lightning are stories, as I see it, but not groundless ones - they are stories which we associate with patterns of actual experiences in various mindstreams. But, as I said, this phenomenalist position, though one which I accept, is not something I know to be true. There could be a hidden, unobservable something lurking behind experience - but it is neither known nor knowable. ... 27768 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 5:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Herman OK, enough discussion about conceptual frameworks. Too conceptual for me! I'll agree to play by your rules, i.e., no requests for explanation of terms or intended meaning. (Wait a minute. Isn't that also a conceptual framework?) Here's my attempt at an answer to your original question, which was: <> At a superficial level, I would answer 'yes', most of our experiences are without reference to or in terms of other things. At another level I would answer 'No", in that from time to time it is noticeable that there is comparing, evaluating and judging going on, and it seems that this is a continuous and pervasive aspect of our consciousness. At yet another level, I would answer 'Yes' because, as I understand the teachings, at a moment of sense-door experiencing there is no reference to other things -- that comes in the following mind-moments. And finally, a 'No' answer is possible, in the sense that all objects of experience are compared with previous objects experienced and this is how objects are identified and recognised. Oh, hang on, 'Yes' if it's panna that experiences the object and knows it truly as it is. As you can see, I've tried to give you a fair range of answers in the hope that 1 of them falls within the non-existent conceptual framework that was nowhere in your mind ;-)) Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, ... > I agree with what you are saying. A conceptual discussion requires > an agreed frame of reference. > > The difference in this case is that "what is experienced" does not > become clearer viewed through a conceptual framework, it becomes > unclearer. It becomes the conceptual framework, actually. So what > is > required is a negative framework, one that negates any hint of an > implicit reality of the selected relations that are made between > selected sensations. > > Such a framework will not allow for a discussion of "what is > experienced". Such a framework would lead to the unbinding of all > the constructs that allow a discussion to take place. > > There is an unbridgable gap between the idea of experiencing > things, and experiencing things. > > It doesn't really matter who'se idea of experiencing things we use, > as long as it is seen that the idea is not so, we can all be quiet > about it :-) > > > Peace > > > Herman 27769 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... As I understand what you have said here, there is no practice taught by the Buddha other than studying what he said, reflecting on it, and relating it to the present moment. Of course, and here I am following what your general approach seems to be, doing these three things either will happen or won't happen, but is not something that can be controlled. And, thus, to sum up: There is no practice. How am I doing? ;-) Jon: You're doing fine ;-)). But I would say you place a lot of significance on whether it can or cannot be said that there is a practice. I think that 'practice' is one of those words that has a multitude of possible meanings, and can easily be misunderstood. In my view it's more fruitful to look at/talk about exactly what the Buddha said to be the necessary conditions for the development of the path. I gave my understanding of these in the post to which you were replying. To summarise, I see them as being the following: - hearing the true dhamma - reflecting on what one has heard - relating what one has come to understand intellectually to the present moment, Furthermore, I understand the Buddha to be saying that each of these needs to occur repeatedly and often. I also see it as important to realise that: - these factors/conditions are capable of occurring at any time regardless of the nature of the current activity, - the fruit of that development, in the form of a level of awareness of a presently arising dhamma, may occur at any time, not necessarily related to any present conscious intention to apply/study/practice the teachings. In a subsequent post to Nina you gave some comments of your own on this subject: <> It would be helpful to have a specific reference. However, if I may speak in general terms too, there is usually more than 1 possible interpretation open on the plain meaning of the language of the suttas. For example, I presume you would agree that any exhortation in a sutta to 'train yourselves' must be read with the implicit assumption that what is being referred to are kusala mindstates. I have reservations about a reading of such references as meaning an exhortation to 'exercising volition' in doing certain acts. To give an example, if a person in whom neither mindfulness or other form of kusala is present decides/determines/resolves to 'exercise volition in [attaining] mindfulness', that is likely in my view to be akusala, for the reason so aptly put by Ken O in his post to Sarah, namely, that any purposefully done action is likely to rise in tandem with self. This as I see it is the crucial difference between mindfulness arising as the result of the kind of conditions I mention above and any deliberate attempt to have mindfulness. Again speaking generally, in reading the suttas, we need to recognise the special case of those monks in the Buddha's time or shortly after for whom sati and panna had already been developed to high levels such as the level of a faculty or a power. Such monks were persons who truly could 'set mindfulness to the fore', as we find mentioned in the Satipatthana Sutta. But for us there is no such possibility, I believe. The crux of the difference between us here is the conditions for the arising of kusala, particularly satipatthana/vipassana. To my understanding, the factors I have cited above are much more crucial to this aim than any decision to 'exercise volition' in doing anything. And personally I don’t see that it matters whether or not these fall within the usual meaning of 'a practice'. Jon 27770 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 0:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Howard Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/7/03 4:54:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Goodness, Howard! You're not still supposed to be up at that time - > I rely on you North Americans having a respectable bedtime, so I can > drop surprise posts on you while you're asleep and still have hours > to think of a riposte to your reply. :-) > -------------------------------------------- Howard: We were in the midst of what was, for Long Island, a bit of a blizzard, especially for so early in the winter season. (We have close to 2 feet of snow now, and it is first winding down to only snow showers.) My son's fiancee has been staying over since Friday evening (the snow began Friday afternoon), and so we were all up late. --------------------------------------------- In hindsight, what I should > > have done was visit my mother BEFORE I posted to you, not after. Two > hours in a very small car with a very large disgruntled dog gets > things into perspective very quickly. > > Looking over your original post, I see straight away what I was > reacting to - it was a post by someone about six to nine months ago > in which they mentioned (something like) Right Livelihood was a > single moment. They may or may not have mentioned or alluded to the > abattoir job, but my memory is that they may have, or at least I > thought about it at that time, or in response to their post. > Is this what the Buddha referred to as 'eel wriggling'? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I can understand your interpreting my post as you did. I recall the original posting, and I recall that I took exception to it as well. I think now that the post we recall had a germ of correctness to it, but was not formulated to properly bring that aspect out. ------------------------------------------------- > > Reading your post closely yet again (and I assure you I did read it > about five times previously) to see where I assumed a meaning you > didn't intend - I feel it was probably just the flow of the sentence > that allowed me to think you were maintaining that Right Livelihood > was a mind moment only, period. [For me, though probably not for > anyone else, the omission of the bracketed words "(or re-chooses)" > and the inclusion of the word 'ALSO' after each mention of Right > Livelihood in the quote below, would have dampened any proclivity to > jump to erroneous conclusions]. > ----------------------- > Howard: "At the moment (or at the moments) that one > chooses .. [(or re-chooses)] .. a livelihood, it is a moment of Right > Livelihood or > Wrong Livelihood. When one is working, at the moment one is inclined > to act > harmfully through one's work but resists that, that is a moment of > Right > Livelihood [ALSO]; > at the moment one is inclined to act harmfully through one's work and > does > not resist that, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood; at the moment > one is > inclined to act beneficially through one's work and does so, that is > a moment of > Right Livelihood [ALSO]; and at the moment one is inclined to act > beneficially through > one's work but does not, that is a moment of Wrong Livelihood." > --------------------- > I think that we are in agreement on this issue. :-) Thank you for > your restrained and courteous reply. Palms together and deep bow to > you Howard. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you for so carefully rereading my post in the light of my further explanation. If I may, I'd like to add a further word or two: Livelihood/occupation, the same as almost everything we usually talk about, is a conventional object. Literally, livelihood is nothing that can be touched, seen, tasted, etc, but there is a host of interrelated phenomena, specifically human actions, that are covered by the idea. The conventional speech of the Buddha's describing right and wrong occupations is *true* speech. We use true, but "non-ultimate" language all the time. When, for example, I say there is about two feet of snow on the ground right now where I am, this statement is packed with conventional notions, but it is completely true. What makes it conventional, and not ultimate, speech is that it is a complex, layered structure of ramified abbreviations and linguistic shortcuts that expresses a network of interrelated "ultimate" facts in a manner suitable for practical communication. I find it is often important to do a bit of "unpacking" of such language to reveal aspects of the reality being conveyed that may be somewhat covered up by the linguistic form. In the case of Right Livelihood, Right Speech, and Right Action - the "Right" terminology really comes down to meaning "moral", and morality is a matter of volition. It enters in exactly when decisions are made, and that, as you have gone to the effort to see, much appreciated by me, is the point I was after and some details of which I was trying to lay bare. ----------------------------------------------- > > metta and peace, > Christine ======================= 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) 27771 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/7/03 6:57:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > I said I would get back separately on some of the interesting points > raised in your post. Thanks for your earlier clarification. > > < other than that, must occur "somewhere," ... > > Yes, I understand the Abhidhamma to hold that rupas, both experienced > and non-experienced, do arise in this world. I'm not sure what it > says about their exact place of arising, but I would assume that the > place of arising of all rupas in a group of 8 is the same (regardless > of whether 1 of them is an experienced rupa). Is there a problem > with such a scenario, in your view? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have a problem with viewing hardness as neither content of consciousness (the phenomenalist take) nor property of a physical object (the materialist/objectivist take). I don't know what such a "thing" is supposed to be. A kind of ghost hanging out in a rupa realm, I suppose. ----------------------------------------------------- > > <<... especially when it arises allegedly unobserved.>> > > I'm not with you here. What do you see as being the particular > significance/relevance of a rupa being unobserved/unexperienced, in > relation to the question of its place of arising? > > <<(BTW, what *is* an unobserved sight? What does it mean for a sight > not to be seen? The very language contradicts itself!)>> > > As you say, the language implies contradiction, but I think the > problem lies in your particular choice of expression 'unobserved > sight' here, rather than 'non-experienced visible-object'; and > perhaps especially the expression 'a sight' for the Pali > 'ruparammana' (visible-object). --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that the use of the language "visible-object" as a solution is a pseudo-solution! I see it as a substantialist approach, presuming the existence, somewhere, of some "thing" called a "visible object" that exists "out there" in some realm of "visible objects", and with which "consciousness," existing in its own realm, somehow comes into contact, analogous to the old billiard-ball model of interactions among separate physical things that Newtonian physics provided for in its view of the "material world." I, quite frankly, think that the terminology of a "sight" is far better than that of "visible object," far less prone to a substantialist reading. As far as I'm concerned, sights are nothing if not seen. Visual consciousnesses have no nature other than seeing, and sights have no nature other than being seen, and they are mutually dependent. ------------------------------------------------------ > > Consider for a moment audible-object. We may think of the > audible-object being experienced through the ears right now as > 'different sounds' but that is already *thinking about* the > audible-object rather than its direct experience (in terms of > Herman's sutta quote, that is an example of the nimitta and > anubyanjana). Audible-object is simply the audible data that can be > experienced through the ear-door, before there is any recognition of > the nature or source of the sound. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Unheard sound, except in physics theory (a conventional model) and commonsense (a conventional model), is unknown and unknowable, and is, to me, meaningless. If one talks about an external medium such as air or water vibrating, and about sound waves passing through that medium, a wave consisting of the medium alternatingly condensing and expanding, and then that wave making contact with an ear drum, and messages then being transferred by nerves to the brain, etc, etc, etc, then one is talking stories, stories drawn from the tales of physics and physiology. These are not groundless stories - they do correspond to phenomenal reality in some manner, because that have rather good predictive capacity. If you wish to invest reality in these materialist models, that's fine. I merely consider that they are useful predictive models, not unlike a mathematical equation being a useful predictive tool. ----------------------------------------------------- > > Likewise, visible-object is that which is experienced through the > eye-door, rather than the 'different objects' that are seen (sights). > It is the visible data that can be experienced when the eyes are > open and that is absent when the eyes are closed. > > Now I don’t think anyone has any difficulty with the idea of > audible-object/sound arising regardless of whether it is the object > of our (or someone's) hearing consciousness. The conditions for the > arising of sound in this world are unrelated to a being's hearing > consciousness -- more to do with the contact of 2 sets of hardness. > When those conditions occur, sound arises that is *capable of being* > the object of hearing consciousness of a being. Of course, whether > or not that sound actually becomes the object of any being's hearing > consciousness depends on yet another set of conditions; but only > sound that has arisen in the first place can be experienced. Does > this sound improbable to you? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I do not countenance the existence of sights, sounds, hardnesses, etc that occur except as objects of awareness in various mindstreams, because what is not experiential is exactly that - not experiential and in principle unknowable. So, the bottom line on this issue, Jon, is that we disagree on it. ------------------------------------------------- > > Likewise with visible-object, its arising in this plane of existence > where it is *capable of being experienced* by seeing consciousness > does not depend on it actually being the object of a being's > experience. > > The fact that this is more difficult to conceptualise in the case of > visible-object than in the case of audible-object perhaps indicates > the strong clinging or wrong view that there is to the experience > through the eye-door, for all of us. > > < ;-) I say that if, as common sense asserts, there is an external > material world of objects such as trees, rocks, air, grass, animal > bodies, human bodies, planes, trains, and automobiles, then that is > Rupaville!>> > Sorry, but I am very much puzzled by this! First, I don’t see why > the 'unobserved' rupas are such a problem conceptually while the > 'observed' ones apparently are not. Secondly, I don’t see how you > get from the 'group of 8 inseparable rupas' of the Abhidhamma to > 'objects such as trees [etc]'. Would you say that in asserting the > group of 8 inseparable rupas, or the arising of rupas independently > of being experienced, the Abhidhamma itself postulates the idea of an > 'external material world of objects such as trees [etc]'? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: No. -------------------------------------------------- > > Jon ============================ With metta, Howard > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Jon - > Jon, to me hardness or an odor or a sight are contents of > certain experiences (their objective aspects). As I see it, a > hardness or an odor or a sight, if it is something other than that, > must occur "somewhere," especially when it arises allegedly > unobserved. (BTW, what *is* an unobserved sight? What does it mean > for a sight not to be seen? The very language contradicts itself!) > You seem to be saying that unobserved rupas occur in "Rupaville"! ;-) > I say that if, as common sense asserts, there is an external material > world of objects such as trees, rocks, air, grass, animal bodies, > human bodies, planes, trains, and automobiles, then that is > Rupaville! (This easily accounts for rupas occurring in groups.) But > if not, I see there being proposed some unseen and unspecified "rupa > realm," an amazing abstraction. If rupas are not features and > functions of external physical "things," and they also are not the > objective aspects of certain acts of consciousness, then they are > disembodied ghosts hanging out in some ghost realm waiting to be > somehow contacted by mind. Now, I can see so-called unexperienced > rupas as potentials consisting of many, but not yet all, of the > conditions needed for the arising in consciousness of a rupa, so > that, for example, the occurrence of the sequence of phenomena we > call "touching the back of our skull" results in the arising of a > hardness, but prior to the occurrence of that sequence of phenomena > occurring, that hardness is only a potential. (Some conditions have > been met, but not enough.) This would be *one* way of explaining the > matter. An objective external world of physical objects would be > another. There may well yet be others that are far better than either > of these. I have my preference, but I don't insist on it. What I do > think is reasonable to insist on, however, is that a claim be backed > up by a plausible and verifiable explanation. It seems to me that > Abhidhamma and Abhidhammikas are extraordinarily detailed on many > points, but at certain critical junctures, get very lax, showing a > willingness to say "somehow", or to say "The Abhidhamma says it, so > it must be so. Just wait until you have the ability to see it - many > millenia from now". > > 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) 27772 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 6:47am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Doomed March Fly Hello Sarah, Sarah: Did you work out what was nagging you? It occurred to me when I read your post that we need to differentiate between mental states and kamma of the perpetrator and the results of kamma (vipaka) of those experiencing harm. As we know there are many factors involved in receiving results and the primary one is our own kamma performed. Other factors such as the impact from the falling log or bomb are decisive supports only. Michael: Lets assume that two individuals are going to perform the exact same task, dropping a bomb, and both at the moment of performing the task have exactly the same consciousness and mental factors present, and they are aware of the possible consequences and have the intention to kill. In the first case no one is hurt because the bomb misses the target, in the second countless people die. In both cases they are unaware of the consequences of their action. In accordance to what has been discussed in the list, the kamma created by both would be exactly the same because it only depends on their mind states. Well this is what is nagging me. I think this is not correct. I don’t know exactly why, but my suspicion is because it views each individual as separate and isolated and only matters what happens within each consciousness stream, it ignores the interconnection with all other beings/phenomena, etc. If there are any related past messages I would appreciate if you could point me to them. Metta Michael 27773 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 7:14am Subject: Re: Question on ego and self .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > Thanks for your comments. Hi Sarah, It is okay if you question the conclusions of these studies. I just consider them an interesting bit of information and then go on with my life. The area of brain research is so new and contains so much guesswork that nothing is conclusive. I do not believe that anyone should begin a meditation practice or continue a meditation practice because of one of these articles. That would definitely be counterproductive. I believe that the best motivation is when a person has hit rock bottom. By that I mean they realize that nothing in life is satisfying, even reading about the dhamma, and there is nothing else left to do but sit and get to the root of the problem. You obviously haven't hit rock bottom yet; reading and studying the dhamma is personally satisfying to you and enough. It isn't enough to me, but it does help to keep me on the right track (most of the time ;-). Over the years I have started and stopped my meditation practice and what always pulled me away was the false belief that life held some satisfaction for me, and the thing that always brought me back was when I realized that that was a false hope. Meditation has transformed my life and the person that I am, and I know that no scientific studies are going to be able to prove that. You just have to do it…when there is nothing else left to do. Metta, James Ps. I will get to the Star Kids letters as I have time and feel inspired. They have written quite a few lately! ;-) (Philip's questions about monks learning Kung Fu on hilltops is really priceless! ;-)) I have learned to take down the numbers so that they don't get buried and lost ;-). 27774 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 7:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Yoniso-manasikaara (wise attention) Hi Christine I was hoping Sarah will respond more bc she and RobK always got very good materials on the back of their sleeves. The word oftenly used by Buddha "Monks this is how you should train yourself" always imply a meaning of a purposedly intended volition. However since Buddha always stress about anatta, then is he contradicting himself. To me, there is no contradiction. When Buddha exhort us to train in this way, to me, IMO, he does not say we must purposedly train in this way. His view should be seen as when one meet this circumstances, one can practise this way, this process of thought, this method of discernment. He does not say go and purposedly meet this circumstance in order to practise this method. Anyway there is no need to purposedly meet a circumstance bc circumstance always come to us, one good example is that our senses are always bombarded by different objects, they are the conditions for our condition to train ourselves. There is no need to go and do something as it is around us every minute of our waking moments. When we think we need to do something is just bc we are not mindful of the moment, this should a state that our mind is full of mental restlessness which is more of moha rather than panna. kind regards Ken O 27775 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 8:06am Subject: RE: [dsg] Buddhist Dear Star Kid Janice, My trip to Thailand was very nice. I got to spend a lot of time with my family, which is always a plus ;-). I enjoyed it very much. Thanks for asking! Kamma is giving results constantly in one's life. To be born a human is the result of a good kamma. Have you noticed that for most animals in the world, their living conditions are not as good as yours? There are a few exceptions (I know dogs who live like kings!), but animals have very harsh lives. Our experiences through the 5 senses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body) are results of kamma. When you see something pleasant and good (like good TV show), that is a result of a good kamma. When you hear something pleasant and good (like music you like), that is a result of a good kamma. This is the same for the other 3 senses. Would you rather experience something pleasant or unpleasant? Good kamma helps you to experience pleasant things. In the Buddha's time, people become a monk in many different ways. Nowadays, in Thailand, one becomes a monk by requesting to a group of monks in Pali, in a ceremony that turns a normal person into a monk. Monks have very strict rules of conducts, so that they can better their mind, and so that other people would have faith in them. They wear the robe (clothing) that is the symbol of those people who have purified their minds and no longer have any greed, anger, or delusion. I don't think having a statute of the Buddha is a requirement for a Buddhist. On the other hand, some people have the images of the Buddha to remind themselves of the purity the compassion, and the wisdom of the Buddha. How's your school work nowadays? More interesting than last year? kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:31 AM > To: dsg > Subject: [dsg] Buddhist > > > > Dear Kom, > Thank you for the letter you sent me! How was > your trip to Thailand? Did you enjoy yourself? Well I > have some new questions for you: > 1: When does the Kamma help you? > 2:How do normal people become monks? > 3:Does every Buddhist have a Buddha statue at > home? > Metta, > Janice 27776 From: Alan Bell Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 8:34am Subject: Desire and the path to truth .... and Alan's intro ... >Hi Alan, > >Welcome to DSG. Thanks for the good qus. Keep them up! I’m glad to see you >got many welcomes and replies to your first post;-) Do you live in >England? (I ask because I saw a uk in your first address and I’m from >England myself.) Actually we have another lurking friend from England who >is also Alan (W) and runs this website where most Nina’s books can be >found: Hi Sarah and all, Yes - I am from England. Liverpool in fact. >p.s If you’d care to share anything more about your interest in the >Buddha’s Teachings and how you found your way here, we’d be glad to hear. I came to be a student and practitioner of the dharma about two years ago. I was a stressed out IT manager, who through conditioning was focussed more on money, the big house, nice car etc etc (still had loving relationships though :-)) but just wasn't satisfied with the material life, that so commonly has no meaning, thus leading me to a spiritual path ... I started to practise Yoga and was amazed at the personal transformation. I then ventured to the Manchester Buddhist Centre, and attended a couple of courses on meditation. However, I then stopped attending the centre and since then had focussed more on my Yoga practice (with meditation) for the last 12 months. The main reason for stopping my attendance was that I was not interested in the ritual and devotional teachings that where practised at the centre. My main interest is in the practical element of meditation and dharma practise, and less on the 'religious' element of buddhism. Again, more recently I have re-kindled my interest in the dharma and zen to complement my yoga practice. I must admit I do miss talking to like minded people (of a spiritual nature) as I am so often surrounded by people with closed hearts (poor souls) which does indeed make ones' practise more difficult some times, as I do like to share experiences along the way. I must admit my heart is sometimestorn though between the desire of concentrating more fully on a zen buddhist path or deeper yogic path, as I think it is difficult (as one gets more advanced) to expend energy on both - I would be interested to know what people thought of this statement ?!! For instance, decisions need to be made on the type of retreats to attend :-) yoga or zen ? Anyway, that's my little intro ... in light, Alan 27777 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 8:47am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 07 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, As he has decided, the Dhamma practitioner is going to sit in meditation. He has just finished his early morning routine of toileting, washing, brushing, bathing, dressing, paying homage to triplegem. Now he sits in cross-legged and he puts his palms on his feet and now he is in lotus position. His eyes are closed. He starts to breathe in. He breathes in and then he breathes out. He is focusing on his breath. He knows he is breathing. If his breath becomes long he knows it as long and if short, he knows it as short. If there is a pause, he knows the pause. He knows the whole breath and he is concentrating on his breath. He is not wandering around on sensual thinkings. He is not on thinking of hatred. He is well concious to his breath and well focused. He is well alert and very light and ready to respond to the subtlest thing. He is well confident in the practice. He is breathing in and breathing out. He is well calm and tranquilized. He sits still for a long time. All his mind arising at each moment are on his breath and the whole breath. As soon as a mind finishes to know the breath of incoming, next mind takes the breath again. There is no drop out between arising of each mind which are put on the breath. He knows the whole breath. He is well calm and tranquilized and he feels joyful and rapture takes him and he is well in the breath meditation. He even did not recognize how long has lapsed as a time measure. But as an initial practice he times his meditation with an alarm clock for an hour section. When the alarm sounds, he knows the alarm and he starts to focus on his mind moving around the changes in his position. He is intending to stand up. He knows that and he stands. He knows his legs stretch and he knows he arises and he is standing but his eyes are still closing. He knows he wants to open his eyes and then opens and knows that he sees things nearby. In the next hour he will be doing walking meditation. May you all practise Mahasatipatthana as a tool to get through the Samsara With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27778 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 11:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Path & Fruit Hi Howard, Michael and all, good point, Howard. Original issue: 1. the four pairs: does it refer to enlightened ones? Yes, this is stock, and I looked at Masefiled co trans. They are all of them enlightened. Follewed by more issues: 2. why four pairs of men, and is this the same as the eight lokuttara cittas as taught in the Abhidhamma. 3. Is the transition of path-consciousness to fruition-consciousness a development and in what sense? op 05-12-2003 16:33 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> as I wrote to Michael, in the suttas we find : four pairs of men. In the >> abh: the lokuttara cittas are enumerated as eight four maggacittas and four >> phalacittas. The meaning is the same. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The meaning may well be the same, or perhaps not. In the suttas it > seems that each pair consists of one training for a stage of enlightenment > (e.g. > path in preparation for once returner), and the fruit of that training (the > stage of once returner). In Abhidhamma, there are the notions, never clearly > spelled out, BTW, of path consciousness and fruition consciousness. N: The Co to the Dhammasangani, (T.O. Wijeratne), Ch I, p. 43: Then the same is said of the other stages of enlightenment. It is said that this can be explained by thousand methods, taking into account jhanafactors, right efforts, etc. p. 148: it is explained that the phalacitta follows immediately. My remarks: it is , akalika, no pause in between. I see many times in this co that it is said: the citta or the citta of that person. If we see that person as momentary we do not fall over it. Let us think of the Vis. quote: < life, pleasure, pain, all in one moment that flicks by. > Dying-consciousness falls away and is immediately followed by rebirth-consciousness, and then there is a different person, though conditioned by preceding lives. This will help us to understand the Abhidhamma. Howard, I know you appreciate the momentary aspect, and this will also be helpful concerning this issue. There is no conflict here. The person who attains enlightenment of the first stage is born anew, the ariyan birth. He is a different person, some of the latent tendencies are eradicated. It is a momentary birth. The lokuttara magga-citta. Some time ago we discussed M II, no 56, Upalisutta: he listened to the Buddha, and attained enlightenment, of the stage of the sotapanna: he had I remarked before that this is daily life: lokuttara citta arises just in a moment and falls away. Upali knows that he must go on developing understanding, and, in his daily life. He was not clinging to lokuttara citta. He had unshakable confidence in the Dhamma, no more doubt. And: without another's help! We have to develop understanding ourselves. Good friends help much but we should not cling to them. Finally we are on our own. This text impresses me very much. He became another person, but just one moment. One of the stock phrases is also: he had the dustless eye of dhamma. This can pertain to the first three stages, as I read in the Co. See also Human Types of the Abhidhamma: Ch VIII p. 103: What are the four persons identifiable with the path and who are the four identifiable with the frtuits? The stream-attainer and one who proceeds to realise the fruition stage...> and so on for the other stages. Now we come to the third issue: and this concerns the way the text is translated. Michael is my fellow student on the Pali list and let us look at the Pali: I quoted Masefield: < the one practising (pa.tipajjamaano) with the aim of setting before him at first hand the sotaapatti-fruit> Now pa.tipajjati is: entering upon a path, walking along it. Human Types transl has: he proceeds to realize. That is all. Another word, pa.tipatti is often translated by practice. This is a different word. This is what Jon just pointed out: We have to think of moments again. It is very clear to me, but some translations are confusing. It shows that Pali is indispensable if we want to go into the deep meaning of the texts. Nina. 27779 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 11:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Livelihood and Abhidhamma/Nina Hi Howard, Tthank you for your thoughtful post. op 06-12-2003 16:02 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > I've been thinking over a bit about the Abhidhammic "take" on various > matters. I mentioned to you that I *do* study it a bit. Actually, I mull over > aspects of it more than I study it, per se. N: That is the right attitude. H: Often this results in my finding > elements of it that I think are either superfluous to the Dhamma, or contrary > to it,...One thing that I have come to find quite valuable is its at-the-moment perspective > on all matters, and, specifically, on the factors of the eightfold path. N: Here you come to the essence, the momentary aspect. So, as Sarah said, your points (pet peeves if you like) are useful for all of us. Do continue, there are not many who come with concrete points when they find the abh controversial. Anyway, it is a long term study, how can we take in all at once, I can't. When I write to you I also think of others. It is normal that people react differently, different accumulations. When reading, pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling arises due to the object experienced. This is the natural course in the cycle of birth and death (nyama). Do feel free to react or not to react, it is all right. I like to compare texts anyway, it is useful also for myself. And again: good for me to think of this: is there another way of presenting the Dhamma? As Sariputta did in the sutta on Right Understanding: is there another way of explaining, yes, there is another way of explaining. So many methods adapted to the different listeners. We have now a lot of threads hanging around. A main difficulty for you: you think it is merely a conventional term, whereas I think that it represents what is real. As Sarah said: a shorthand for reality. Difficulties about rupas, rupas which are realities even though you cannot experience them, maybe your background of phenomenology? I like to go deeper into the sutta on Right understanding later on. I just read what Ken H wrote very clearly about knowing the present moment, also one of your points: I like your long standing dialogue with Jon, and it does not matter that there are long pauses in between. It is always good to take up old threads. With appreciation, Nina. P.S. Right Livelihood is for another time. I liked this one with the stress on momentary reality and also your post on latent tendencies, showing that nothing is static. 27780 From: Jeffrey S. Brooks Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 1:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New member, Jeff Brooks Hello Sarah, and thank-you for your interest. Many apologies for taking so long to get back with you. I have been busy responding to over a hundred and 50 emails a day since I posted the original message that you have so kindly responded to. Fortunately that flow of email has slowed down enough for me to get back on line to check on the responses to my post. Since you mentioned that my bio is about the past, and you inquired into my present, then I can say that in my present I am more happy and fulfilled than I can ever recall being, but since I practice moment-to-moment mindfulness, then I am aware that most of my days and night I feel more happy and content than I can ever recall being. I am also aware that many of the experiences that I mentioned in the post that responded to are also part of my present as well as my moment-to-moment experience for a number of years, such as awareness of an aura and the upper 4 chakras. And, during this morning's meditation I had pleasant arisings to the 4th jhana, which is typical for me, as well as the rising of "energy." As for the "I" when I refer to myself, this is a language that is based on self references I use it in much the same way you use the term. I speak of this one, who is typing this message to you, that one who will be reading it. But, I know that this is not me, I am not this, and this is not mine. How about you? Best regards Jeff Brooks Ecstatic Buddhism A newsletter for ecstatic Buddhists website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ecstatic_Buddhism/ Subscribe: Ecstatic_Buddhism-subscribe@yahoogroups.com --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Jeff, > ... > Whilst I think that it's always interesting to read and hear about > people's past experiences -- and there's no doubt that yours are > particularly colourful -- the past has gone completely. I think we all > tend to cling to past special experiences and sometimes try to fit the > texts to match any unusual phenomena, but surely this is just indicative > of the clinging at this moment and lack of any understanding of what is > presently arising? > ... 27781 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 2:53pm Subject: Re: Justice and Fairness Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > I like this post - can you tell me where the reference to akusala > kamma patha comes from? ===== The Expositor (Atthasalini), Book I, Part III, Chapter V - Discourse on Courses of Immoral Actions, p126-136 in the PTS version. This section also talks about slight misdeeds (killing small animals) vs. greater misdeeds (killing larger animals). ===== > When people talk about Kamma and how it makes sense - it is true, it > does on paper, and with the simple examples given, and when it is > not 'me'. When you compare it to gravity, it seems straight forward - > The result of breaking the laws of gravity, in this world, is > immediate, predictible, consistent and the result is able to be > precisely replicated. However, the law of kamma, on the contrary, > isn't immediate, predictable, consistent and the result is not able > to be precisely replicated. I can see the type of kamma that gets > results right now - shout an obscenity at a tired policeman and > predictable things will happen. But we have no proof that bad things > happening to good people who happened to be in the wrong place at the > wrong time are vipaka. To state they are could be just 'tidying up > the story'. I think a lot about this because it hits me in the face > everyday. I'm not sure whether you read this post of mine recently - > rather than repeat parts of it again, I'll give the link: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24985 > > Anyway, it's something I have to deal with, and the 'adze handle' of > not understanding kamma may wear through one day ... ===== Good post (I had not read it previously). I see theism as pure blind faith, whereas I see kamma as an extension of what we experience every day. As you mentioned, if you swear at a cop, you can see the reaction. In other words, cause and effect is obvious in everyday life in the very short term. In the mid-term, the law of cause and effect is obvious to somebody who thinks about it a bit. I can trace the main decisions in my life that generally led to me sitting here typing this message and some of those decisions are far back in time (i.e. joining DSG was an important decision). However, if you want to extend back into the long term (why some people are born rich, etc.), you have to introduce an element of faith; not blind faith, but faith that the same principles that we see working on the short term and can understand intellectually on the mid-term also operate in the long-term. Metta, Rob M :-) 27782 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:06pm Subject: Re: Grasping at mind states Take 2 Hi Jon, Perhaps a more obvious means of not clinging to anything seen is to close one's eyes. Peace Herman > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Herman > > > > Now here's a question for you. Given the speed with which clinging > > arises when sense-door objects are experienced, what is your > > understanding of the means by which it would be possible for a > person > > to 'not grasp at any theme or details by which -- if he were to > dwell > > without restraint over the faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful > > qualities such as greed or distress might assail him'? > > > > Jon 27783 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 4:37pm Subject: Vism.XIV 47, 48 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 47. 1. There is what is called 'the eye' in the world. That looks like a blue lotus petal and is surrounded by black eyelashes and varied with dark and light circles. The "eye" [sensitivity as meant] here is to be found in the place in the middle of the black circle surrounded by the white circle in that [feature of the] eye with its accessories where there appears the image of the bodies of those who stand in front of it. It pervades the eye's seven layers like oil sprinkled on seven layers of cotton. It is assisted by the four primary elements whose [respective] functions are upholding, cohering, maturing, and moving, as a warrior prince is by the four nurses whose functions are holding, bathing, dressing, and fanning. It is consolidatd by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; it is furnished with colour, odour, flavour, etc. (see Ch. XVIII, par. 5); it is the size of a mere louse's head; and it duly serves both as physical basis and as door for eye-consciousness, and the rest [of the consciousness of the cognitive series]. [446] 48. And this is said by the Geneal of the Dhamma: 'The sensitivity with which he sees a visible object is small and it is subtle too, no bigger than a louse's head' (?). -------------------- 27784 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 4:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 47, 48 "It pervades the eye's seven layers like oil sprinkled on seven layers of cotton." Hi Nina, What's this all about? I assume "it" refers to eye sensitivity. Larry 27785 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 8:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on ego and self .. Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > --- robmoult wrote: > > Here is an extract from "Why God Won't Go Away" (p7) which supports > > your view: > > Robert was one of eight Tibetan meditators who participated in our > > imaging study. Each was subjected to the same routine, and in > > virtually every case, the SPECT scans showed a similar slowing of > > activity in the orientation area, occuring during the peak moments > > of meditation. > > Later, we broadened the experiment and used the same techniques to > > study several Franciscan nuns at prayer. Again, the SPECT scans > > revealed similar changes that occured during the sisters' most > > intensely religious moments. > <...> > > > > My opinion is that the scientists were observing something and then > > trying to fit their observations into their religious beliefs. I > > looked at the same observations and used it to support the validity > > of anatta, though this interpretation is not even hinted at in the > > book. > ..... > So you are correlating a decreased activity in part of the brain as shown > on a SPECT scan (I keep thinking of SPECTRE in a James Bond film;- )) with > either a) an understanding of anatta as I think was suggested before or b) > the truth of anatta, regardless of any understanding or in spite of a > wrong understanding by the participants. > > If similar decreased activity were to show up after say, a swimming or > hiking marathon or yogic meditation, would this lead you to draw the same > conclusions? What about reduced heart activity as shown on an ECG? > > As I say, I have no problem following the studies (how scientific is > another qu), but I do have trouble following the conclusions - yours and > others I've read following other similar research. I'll be glad for any > further clarification. The area of the brain in question (Orientation Association Area) has the role of collecting sensory data and organizing it around a "self". A significantly decreased blood flow to that specific portion of the brain would correspond to a decreased sense of "self" as something separate from the surroundings. Depending on one's religious inclinations, one could describe this sensation as: - Being at one with the universe - Talking to God - Perceiving anatta To me, the fact that these scientists have designated an area that creates a sense of self that overlays the sensory input is significant - this aligns well with the Buddhist view that "self" is only a concept. I would suggest that any activity that causes a decreased blood flow to this portion of the brain would help one to perceive "anatta". I am not surprised that deep meditation can be a condition for this arising. I suspect that, depending on the individual, other conditions could also lead to a similar result. Metta, Rob M :-) 27786 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 2:14pm Subject: Jhana is ecstasy I have found the Pali term 'jhana' is too often regarded as a dirty word in many Buddhist circles. I find that remarkable since the Buddha mentions it in almost every sutta, and in the Digha Nikaya alone it has 19 references in the glossary. And, even when jhana is acknowledged then its definition as ecstasy is too often denied. The term 'ecstasy' has been used as a word to describe the experience of enlightenment by English speaking contemplatives for quite some time. Also, please take note that Theresa of Avila and John of the Cross used Spanish terms that have been translated into the English as 'ecstasy' to describe the experiences in their contemplative practice. And, they described 7 absorption states. Therefore I believe it is reasonable to assume that the term 'ecstasy' is a valid translation of the Pali term jhana. From the Digha Nikaya Glossary jhanas - Absorptions, DN 42, 1.3.21f., n.79, n.50, n.57, n.76f., 2.75ff., 4.33, n.168, 9.10ff., 16.6.8f., 17.2.3, n.583, n.611, 26.28, 29.24, 33.3.3(6), n.1118, n.1127, n.1143 Majjhima Nikaya 59 Bahuvedaniya Sutta a translation from the Pali by Bhikkhus Nanamoli and Bodhi, Wisdom Publications, Boston 1995 "The pleasure and joy that arise dependent on the five sense cords (senses)... are called sense pleasure....There is another kind of pleasure here, Ananda, (when one is) secluded from the sense pleasure, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the first jhana, which is accompanied by applied and sustained (concentration) with joy and pleasure born of seclusion. This kind of pleasure (bliss) is Pasadika Sutta DN 29 The Delightful Discourse a translation from the Pali by Maurice Walshe, Wisdom Publications, Boston 1987, 1995 24.2 There are, Cunda, these four kinds of life devoted to pleasure which are conducive to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to tranquillity, to realization, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. What are they? First a monk detached from sense-desires, detached from unwholesome mental states, enters and remains in the first jhana... Anapanasati Sutta, MN 118 Awareness of In-&-Out Breathing [6] "One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to joy, and to breathe out sensitive to pleasure." The Language of Ecstasy in Englsih Absorb tr.v. 1. To take (something) in through or as through pores or interstices. 2. To occupy the full attention, interest, or time of; engross. See Synonyms at monopolize. 3. Physics. To retain (radiation or sound, for example) wholly, without reflection or transmission. 4. To take in; assimilate: immigrants who were absorbed into the social mainstream. 5. To receive (an impulse) without echo or recoil: a fabric that absorbs sound; a bumper that absorbs impact. 6. To take over (a cost or costs). 7. To endure; accommodate: couldn't absorb the additional hardships. [Middle English, to swallow up, from Old French absorber, from Latin absorbre Absorption n. 1. The act or process of absorbing or the condition of being absorbed. 2. A state of mental concentration. Bliss n. 1. Extreme happiness; ecstasy. 2. The ecstasy of salvation; spiritual joy. Ecstasy n., pl. ecstasies. 1. Intense joy or delight. 2. A state of emotion so intense that one is carried beyond rational thought and self-control. 3. The trance, frenzy, or rapture associated with mystic or prophetic exaltation. [Middle English extasie, from Old French, from Late Latin extasis effusive adj. 1. Unrestrained or excessive in emotional expression; gushy: an effusive manner. 2. Profuse; overflowing: effusive praise. euphoria n. A feeling of great happiness or well-being. [New Latin, from Greek, from euphoros, healthy : eu-, eu- + pherein, to bear; see bher-1 below.] exhilaration n. 1. The act of exalting or the condition of being exalted. 2. A state or feeling of intense, often excessive exhilaration or well-being. See Synonyms at ecstasy. 3. A flight of larks. See Synonyms at flock1. exuberant adj. 1. Full of unrestrained enthusiasm or joy. 2. Lavish; extravagant. 3. Extreme in degree, size, or extent. 4. Growing, producing, or produced abundantly; plentiful: Note: because exhilaration exuberant have the quality of effusiveness, then I relegate them to the first jhana, which seems to be typified by a youthful and gushy kind of joy. Rapture n. 1. The state of being transported by a lofty emotion; ecstasy. 2. Often raptures. An expression of ecstatic feeling. See Synonyms at ecstasy. 3. The transporting of a person from one place to another, especially to heaven. Note: Because 'rapture' has the quality of being transported then I take this to the Contemplative Christian term for an out-of-body experience. And, since the out-of-body experience typically leaves the subject in a cataleptic trance, then I am going to associate it with the supramundane absorption states trance (trans) n. 1. A hypnotic, cataleptic, or ecstatic state. 2. Detachment from one's physical surroundings, as in contemplation or daydreaming. 3. A semiconscious state, as between sleeping and waking; a daze. Note: because the word 'trance' has the quality of "Detachment from one's physical surroundings in a cataleptic-like state then I believe we should use this term for the Supramundane absorption states. Blessings to you, Jeff Brooks Ecstatic Buddhism A newsletter for ecstatic Buddhists website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ecstatic_Buddhism/ Subscribe: Ecstatic_Buddhism-subscribe@yahoogroups.com 27787 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 9:25pm Subject: Re: Justice and Fairness Hello RobM, and All, I understand from what I have heard elsewhere, that there are said to be bad consequences for anyone not having confidence in the full orthodox version of kamma. This is scary and doesn't create belief or understanding, it just makes people fearful and unwilling to publicly question. Doubt goes underground, and doesn't get cleared up. Conditionality, I agree with - it is undeniable - I can see and intellectually map out many of the innumerable causes for one experience. But I had not thought that kamma and conditionality were totally the same. Conditionality makes sense, it is plain to see. But kamma when it isn't a direct, immediate result, isn't plain to see. Belief in kamma can't always be described as "This much I see and have proven, so this little extra step I can accept because of what I have proven in the past." As far as I can tell, it's often not a little step, it's a huge leap - and, it seems to need strong faith. Say the continuum presently and conventionally known as Rob Moult holds up a bank, steals a great deal of money, kills a teller, and gets completely away with it in 2003. No-one ever finds out that Rob Moult is the robber and murderer, Rob Moult dies at a great age, respected, rich, and surrounded by loving family. What happens next? We are told - the continuum allegedly goes through further re- becomings and somewhere, somehow, somewhen an awful thing happens to it - and that is the 'just and fair' result of kamma committed years- to-aeons in the past by a previous version of the continuum (Rob Moult).....so the faithful believe ... Nice and tidy, explains all the awkward questions about fairness and justice. But where is the connection? Is there a store of vipaka? No memory exists, no lesson is learned, no way to verify the truth of the belief... Who/what keeps the records? And there is no discernible thread connecting the two happenings. People at both ends - firstly where the murder and robbery were committed, and secondly where the unnamed severe result occurs - see no result and no cause. Hard to see there really IS any connection. Kamma is such an important part of Buddhism, I'd really like to feel settled about it, but don't see how to bring this about. I guess one just has to live "as if" it is true. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > I like this post - can you tell me where the reference to akusala > > kamma patha comes from? > > ===== > > The Expositor (Atthasalini), Book I, Part III, Chapter V - Discourse > on Courses of Immoral Actions, p126-136 in the PTS version. This > section also talks about slight misdeeds (killing small animals) vs. > greater misdeeds (killing larger animals). > > ===== > > > When people talk about Kamma and how it makes sense - it is true, > it > > does on paper, and with the simple examples given, and when it is > > not 'me'. When you compare it to gravity, it seems straight > forward - > > The result of breaking the laws of gravity, in this world, is > > immediate, predictible, consistent and the result is able to be > > precisely replicated. However, the law of kamma, on the contrary, > > isn't immediate, predictable, consistent and the result is not > able > > to be precisely replicated. I can see the type of kamma that gets > > results right now - shout an obscenity at a tired policeman and > > predictable things will happen. But we have no proof that bad > things > > happening to good people who happened to be in the wrong place at > the > > wrong time are vipaka. To state they are could be just 'tidying > up > > the story'. I think a lot about this because it hits me in the > face > > everyday. I'm not sure whether you read this post of mine > recently - > > rather than repeat parts of it again, I'll give the link: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24985 > > > > Anyway, it's something I have to deal with, and the 'adze handle' > of > > not understanding kamma may wear through one day ... > > ===== > > Good post (I had not read it previously). I see theism as pure blind > faith, whereas I see kamma as an extension of what we experience > every day. As you mentioned, if you swear at a cop, you can see the > reaction. In other words, cause and effect is obvious in everyday > life in the very short term. In the mid-term, the law of cause and > effect is obvious to somebody who thinks about it a bit. I can trace > the main decisions in my life that generally led to me sitting here > typing this message and some of those decisions are far back in time > (i.e. joining DSG was an important decision). However, if you want > to extend back into the long term (why some people are born rich, > etc.), you have to introduce an element of faith; not blind faith, > but faith that the same principles that we see working on the short > term and can understand intellectually on the mid-term also operate > in the long-term. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 27788 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 9:48pm Subject: Mahacattarika was: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs Hi Sarah, (and Steve and all), Getting back to the Mahacattarika Sutta: When you are reading that sutta, do you get the impression that the words, "the realisation that wrong understanding is wrong understanding," are being used to describe all mundane right understanding? And do you get the impression that "the realisation that right understanding is right understanding," [in this instance], describes only 'supramundane right understanding?' In other words, I think 'wrong view' is being used metaphorically for everything that is not Nibbana and the Path. And 'right view,' for everything that is. At Cooran, Steve and I were talking about the second noble truth. We were wondering why 'clinging' (lobha) is given as the cause of dukkha. I have slotted this into my theory: :-) In the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, the first noble truth is illustrated as 'birth, decay, death, grief, lamentation' and so on. But we know that 'joy, celebration, mundane success,' are also dukkha. It seems as if the pleasant/wholesome dukkhas are being left out for the purposes of metaphor. The metaphor highlights the difference between the dukkhas that are mundane (the five aggregates of clinging, the first noble truth) from the dukkhas that are supramundane (the five aggregates of path consciousness, the fourth noble truth). I speculate that, for similar reasons, lobha is given as the cause of dukkha -- even though all six mundane motivations are responsible. This completes a simplified, metaphorical picture painted by the profound, ultimately real, four noble truths: 1, unwholesome, conditioned reality is due to 2, unwholesomeness, whereas 3, wholesome unconditioned reality is attained by 4, wholesomeness. What do you think? (Be polite.) :-) Kind regards, Ken H 27789 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Christmas O, James ;-)) ;-)) I always read you letters to the starkids with great pleasure. You know with a sharp intuition what is driving them and speak the right words to help them, appreciating, Nina. op 06-12-2003 20:32 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Ps. You might want to ask Mrs. Abbott how she celebrates `Abhidhamma > Day' That is the day that celebrates the occasion when the Buddha is > said to have gone to the Tushita Heaven to teach his mother the > Abhidhamma. It occurs the first full moon day in October. Mrs. > Abbott loves the Abhidhamma! :-) 27790 From: Sarah Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 10:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Christmas Hi Nina & James, --- nina van gorkom wrote: > O, James ;-)) ;-)) buddhatrue@y...: > > > Ps. You might want to ask Mrs. Abbott how she celebrates `Abhidhamma > > Day' That is the day that celebrates the occasion when the Buddha is > > said to have gone to the Tushita Heaven to teach his mother the > > Abhidhamma. It occurs the first full moon day in October. Mrs. > > Abbott loves the Abhidhamma! :-) .... You’ve given me a great idea! Maybe we could all have an Abhidhamma party next year instead of a Halloween party. We could have various namas and rupas dangling from the ceiling ready to attack the kids as they arrive, with commentary and sub-commentary texts plastered over the walls and dropping out of my sleeves;-). Hopefully, James, you’ll come to meet the Starkids and help them find their way around the rupas (Rupaville;-)) and explain why understanding the commentaries to the Abhidhamma texts is essential for having fun at a party;-) They’d love it. I’ve learnt over the years that if you call anything a game or a party, the kids are soon on side. Nutritive essence? Maybe it’s not necessary for them to get distracted with mundane hang-ups and we’ve all had too many messy cakes over the years. We’ll just tell them there’s a controversy about whether nutritive essence exists or whether it’s merely a concept and conduct a scientific experiment to see whether deprivation leads to more understanding of anatta;-) Maybe a few Tusita cobwebs and fairies for atmosphere? Metta, Sarah p.s Just remembered - October full-moon, Nina and I will be in India at the very spot where the Buddha returned after teaching Abhidhamma to his mother in Tusita;-) You'll be on your own, James;-) =========================================================== 27791 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 11:41pm Subject: Re: Justice and Fairness Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > I understand from what I have heard elsewhere, that there are said to > be bad consequences for anyone not having confidence in the full > orthodox version of kamma. This is scary and doesn't create belief > or understanding, it just makes people fearful and unwilling to > publicly question. Doubt goes underground, and doesn't get cleared > up. ===== I don't see this as a "punishment for lack of faith", but rather a statement of a law of nature; actions done without an understanding of the law of kamma have more serious results than actions done with an understanding of kamma. This is because of the strength of the volition involved. One doesn't have to done a thesis on kamma to grasp the fundamental principle of "good -> good" & "bad -> bad" and that is all that is needed to lessen the strength of volition. ===== > > Conditionality, I agree with - it is undeniable - I can see and > intellectually map out many of the innumerable causes for one > experience. But I had not thought that kamma and conditionality > were totally the same. ===== Mathematically, I see it as: kamma = conditionality + ethics In other words, not only do things arise from conditions, but also "good -> good" & "bad -> bad". ===== > Conditionality makes sense, it is plain to see. But kamma when it > isn't a direct, immediate result, isn't plain to see. Belief in > kamma can't always be described as "This much I see and have proven, > so this little extra step I can accept because of what I have proven > in the past." As far as I can tell, it's often not a little step, > it's a huge leap - and, it seems to need strong faith. ===== We must see the workings of kamma in the short term; a smile passes along a pleasant feeling or "oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive". We can then verify that kamma is a reasonable explanation for the mid-term; a habit of generosity -> good reputation. Admitedly, extending this beyond lifetimes is an extrapolation, but it seems to me to be a rational conclusion. Why do some people have a fundamentally different character or different skill sets from other people; accumulations from past life seems to me to be a reasonable explanation. ===== > > Say the continuum presently and conventionally known as Rob Moult > holds up a bank, steals a great deal of money, kills a teller, and > gets completely away with it in 2003. No-one ever finds out that Rob > Moult is the robber and murderer, Rob Moult dies at a great age, > respected, rich, and surrounded by loving family. What happens > next? We are told - the continuum allegedly goes through further re- > becomings and somewhere, somehow, somewhen an awful thing happens to > it - and that is the 'just and fair' result of kamma committed years- > to-aeons in the past by a previous version of the continuum (Rob > Moult).....so the faithful believe ... Nice and tidy, explains all > the awkward questions about fairness and justice. > But where is the connection? Is there a store of vipaka? No memory > exists, no lesson is learned, no way to verify the truth of the > belief... Who/what keeps the records? And there is no discernible > thread connecting the two happenings. People at both ends - firstly > where the murder and robbery were committed, and secondly where the > unnamed severe result occurs - see no result and no cause. Hard to > see there really IS any connection. > Kamma is such an important part of Buddhism, I'd really like to feel > settled about it, but don't see how to bring this about. > I guess one just has to live "as if" it is true. ===== Here is the Acintita Sutta (AN IV.77): "There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four? 1. "The Buddha-range of the Buddhas [i.e., the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha] is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it. 2. "The jhana-range of a person in jhana [i.e., the range of powers that one may obtain while absorbed in jhana]... 3. "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma... 4. "Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it. "These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them." Christine, please take note of #3 :-) I wouldn't want to bring you madness & vexation by conjecturing about this. Christine, kamma is not completely verifiable (except by a Buddha) and requires a degree of faith. This is the faith that "good -> good" & "bad -> bad". I must admit to a very strong faith in this tenet; but it is not merely a blind faith, it is a reasoned faith grounded on experience and then extrapolated. One could argue that my extrapolation is ungrounded and to that person, I would ask, "give me a better model". Metta, Rob M :-) 27792 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anusaya Hi RobM & All, --- robmoult wrote: > In Nyanatiloka's Dictionary, under "anusaya", a reference is made to > Vis.M. XXII,60: "These things are called 'proclivities' since, in > consequence of their pertinacity, they ever and again tend to become > the conditions for the arising of ever new sensous greed, etc." > > In other words, "anusaya" refers to mental states that tend to be > somewhat self-sustaining. Now what is the underlying mechanism that > would allow a mental state to become somewhat self-sustaining? It is > pakatupanissaya. For example, the arising of sensous greed creates > a "strong past citta/cetasika" which becomes the conditioning state > for a new citta of sensous greed via pakatupanissaya. I see anusaya > as the manifestation (outcome) and I see pakatupanissaya as the > underlying mechanism supporting this outcome. > > Does this clarify or confuse? .... This clarifies;-) I would probably refer to the sensuous greed as the outcome of the accumulated anusaya, acting as decisive support condition, but I’m probably just quibbling;-). RobertK also quoted from the Vism on anusaya: >The Visuddhimagga (XXII, 60) ... For it is owing to their inveteracy that they are called inherent tendencies (anusaya) since they inhere (anusenti) as cause for the arising of greed for sense desires, etc., again and again." ***** RobM, I have a few gems for you, I hope;-) You started off by mentioning that the term ‘pakatupanissaya’ only occurs in the Patthana and you were looking for expressions of the inter-connectedness of pakatupanissaya and anusaya elsewhere. As I mentioned before, I think we read about this frequently in the suttas, albeit in other terms and albeit with an understanding of Abhidhamma necessary to appreciate the suttas in question. Ken O introduced one good example in a discussion thread on ‘practice’ and control/lack of control with Howard. He wrote: >Just the chinese sayings wu wei er wei (no action yet there is action) literal translation. I would to share this interesting sutta paragraph with you http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-038.html "But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress." ***** This is the third section, the end of the short sutta. I looked at B.Bodhi’s translation which starts off: “...Bhikkhus, what one intends, and what one plans, and whatever one has a tendency towards: this becomes a basis for the maintenance of consciousness.... Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering” BB adds extensive commentary notes (SN, p767f) which show the importance of appreciation of conditions and anusaya (latent tendencies). Howard & Christine may find this useful too: “Spk [comy]: Here, the phrase ‘one intends (ceteti)’ includes all wholesome and unwholesome volition of the three planes; ‘one plans (pakappeti)’, the mental fabrications of craving and views (ta.nhaadi.t.thikappaa) in the eight cittas accompanied by greed [Spk-p.t [sub-comy]: the fabrications of views occur only in the four cittas associated with views]; and ‘whatever one has a tendency towards (anuseti)’ ***implies the underlying tendencies(anusaya) under the headings of conascence and decisive support conditions for the twelve (unwholesome) volitions***.[see CMA 1:4-7] ‘This becomes a basis (aaramma.nam eta.m hoti)’: These various states such as volition become a condition (paccaya). ‘for the maintenance of consciousness (vi~n~naa.nassa .thitiyaa)’: for the purpose of maintaining the kammic consciousness........” BB adds that AN 1 223-24 ‘explains the process of renewed existence in similar terms’. He adds that ‘anuseti’ clearly refers to the anusaya or underlying tendencies, including the tendency to ignorance and craving. He also writes (and I’m abbreviating a lot here) that ‘in this sutta the terms ***aaramma.na and pati.t.thaa denote the decisive-support condition (upanissayapacccaya) for consciousness***, while in the two suttas in the Khandhasa.myutta they denote the conascence and support conditions (sahajaatapaccaya, nissayapaccaya). The sub-comy to the next section may be of interest to Ken H too. In the sutta we read: “If, bhikkhus, one does not intend, and one does not plan, but one still has a tendency towards something, this becomes a basis for the maintenance of consciousness........Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering.” “Spk: this refers to a moment when there is no occurrence of [wholesome and unwholesome] volition of the three planes, and no occurrence of the mental fabrications of craving and views. ‘but one still has a tendency’: by this the underlying tendencies are included because they have not been abandoned here in the resultants of the three planes........As long as the underlying tendencies exist, they become a condition for the kammic consciousness, for there is no way to prevent its arising.” “Spk-p.t: This second section is stated to show that wholesome and unwholesome kamma capable of producing rebirth is accumulated in the preliminary portion (of the path of practice), and that even without planning (through craving and views), the volitions of insight meditation in a meditator who has seen the dangers in existence are still conditioned by the underlying tendencies and are capable of generating rebirth. It is also stated to show that even when wholesome and unwholesome states are not occurring there is still an establishing of kammic consciousness with underlying defilements as condition; for so long as these have not been abandoned they lie latent in the existing resultants of the three planes, etc.” In the third section, quoted by Ken O at the start, ‘the function of the path of arahantship (arahattamaggassa kicca.m)’ is discussed whereby the anusayas have been eradicated. By path, clearly the magga citta is being referred to. “Spk-p.t: the nine supramundane states can be said because the underlying tendencies are extirpated by the series of paths, and the fruits follow immediately upon the paths, and Nibbana is the object of both.” There is a lot more that could be discussed here, but I’ll wait for any further comments. Many thanks to you all for prompting these quotes and further reflections. As RobertK’ wrote: >Accumulating is happening right now - the accumulating of understanding (or not) that can be a condition as upanissiya paccaya (support condition) or asevena paccya (repetition condition) for more understanding and so it keeps accumulating until there are enough conditions for insight to arise. Not by self or wanting or freewill but by the right conditions.< Metta, Sarah ====== 27793 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 0:39am Subject: [dsg] Re: Christmas Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Nina & James, You've given me a great idea! Maybe we could all have an Abhidhamma party > next year instead of a Halloween party. LOL! Hmmm…this sounds like a good idea. Who are you going to be dressed as? Buddhaghosa (Buddha-ghost-a ;-)? Hope you have fun in India. Get your shots and don't drink the water. Metta, James 27794 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 0:47am Subject: Re: Justice and Fairness Hi RobM, Thanks for your kind efforts - I really appreciate your patience. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" 27795 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 1:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi KenO (& James), Just checking my sleeve;-) --- ashkenn2k wrote: > Hi James > > You are right to insist that the mind is indeed pure and bright and I > am wrong about it. Here is another reference on luminous mind > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn140.html > "There remains only consciousness: pure & bright. What does one > cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One > cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' ...... I think we need to look at these luminous references carefully and in context. In this example, the terms ‘parisuddha’ and ‘pariyodata’ are used. They usually occur together and are translated as clean, clear, pure,bright etc. I believe they (nearly?) always refer to sobhana states such as wisdom, or the teachings as in purisuddha dhamma desana etc. In this sutta they are referring to consciousness with insight which understands and penetrates feelings and other realities. B.Bodhi gives this note from the commentary which also clearly explains the use of ‘remains’ in context: “MA: This is the sixth element, which “remains” in that it has yet to be expounded by the Buddha and penetrated by Pukkusaati. Here it is explained as the consciousness that accomplishes the work of insight contemplation on the elements. Under the heading of consciousness, the contemplation of feeling is also introduced.” The passage continues to show the conditioned nature of feelings and their impermanence. A little later in the sutta, we read: “Then there remains only equanimity, purified and bright, malleable, wieldy, and radiant. Suppose, bhikkhu, a skilled goldsmith......” Here we have another gem for Victor on attachment to jhana states: “MA identifies this as the equanimity of the fourth jhana. According to MA, Pukkusaati had already achieved the fourth jhana and had a strong attachment to it. The Buddha first praises this equanimity to inspire Pukkusaati’s confidence, then he gradually leads him to the immaterial jhanas and the attainment of the paths and fruits.” Later we read about the conditioned nature of the immaterial jhanas. “MA: this is said in order to show the danger in the immaterial jhanas. By the one phrase, ‘This would be conditioned,’ he shows: ‘Even though the lifespan there is 20,000 aeons, that is conditioned, fashioned, built up. It is thus impermanent, unstable, not lasting, transient. It is subject to perishing, breaking up, and dissolution; it is involved with birth, ageing, and death, grounded upon suffering. It is not a shelter, a place of safety, a refuge. Having passed away there as a worldling, one can still be reborn in the four states of deprivation.” Sobering reminders;-) A little later Pukkusaati becomes an anagami (non-returner) when he hears these further words: “Since he does not form any condition or generate any volition towards either being or non-being, he does not cling to anything in this world. when he does not cling, he is not agitated. when he is not agitated he personally attains Nibbana. He understands thus: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being.” “MA says at this point Pukkusaati penetrated three paths and fruits, becoming a non-returner. he realised that his teacher was the Buddha himself, but could not express his realisation since the Buddha still continued with his discourse.” Hope this helps. Comments welcome. Metta, Sarah ===== 27796 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 1:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kangaroos (was Re: October thoughts from Cooran) Hi Ken O (& Herman). --- ashkenn2k wrote: > k: You are right there is no need to know what is Nibbana bc > whatever we label it, there is a strong likelihood of being attached > to it. I think this sutta is a good reminder that even the path > leading to Nibbana also cannot be cling to. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn024.html > However, Buddha still have to describe though for worlding like me. > It is just there. .... I like this sutta a lot. It’s a reminder that even the great disciples had to hear each other express their understanding in order to know they were enlightened. With their great wisdom, they could appreciate it in the other. We also read in this sutta about the 7 visuddhi (stages of purification), which are discussed in such detail in the Visuddhimagga. We read about increased wisdom and purification until the final eradication of clinging to any phenomena (not particularly to the path as I read it, just like in the simile of the raft: BB adds: “MA explains that the first six stages are 'accompanied by clinging' in the sense both of being conditioned and of existing in one who still has grasping; the seventh stage, being supramundane, only in the sense of being conditioned.” Metta, Sarah p.s I liked your additional comments of the yoniso manasikara thread. I may come back to it eventually;-) ========================================== 27797 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken O, One more very quick one which is long overdue - apologies. I’ll look to see what’s up my big sleeve for Ken H tomorrow and give you a break;-) --- ashkenn2k wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Sometimes, it is difficult to juggle explaining in ways that is not > Abdhidhamma and sometimes it is a mixed up. ... Agreed. ..... >I know one day someone > will ask this question. You said that a lokuttara wisdom and the > arahant's wisdom is conditioned, anicca, dukkha and anatta. What are > these refering, they are referring to kammic effects. As long as > one is still in the condition world, the effects are there. .... You may be confusing the lokuttara magga cittas with wisdom at each stage of enlightenment which are not vipaka (kammic result), with the ‘kammic effects’ arsing during the arahant’s lifetime. (Of course, the lokuttara magga cittas immediately bring their results in the way of lokuttara phala cittas). .... >The world loku as you know is beyond the world or supramundane. When we > say it is beyond the world or supramundane, to me it is wisdom that > is not bound by *conditioned* world, however why it is still bound > by anicca, dukkha and anatta to me it is bc of kammic effects. .... See above. Still due to various conditions to arise and fall away. Many conditions involved such as path condition, object condition (nibbana in this case), succession etc etc. .... > Maybe > I should use the word "beyond the conditioned world consciouness" to > argue but this is too long to write, too cumbersome. I prefer the > word unconditioned wisdom to express lokiya citta to lokuttara > citta. .... Conditioned supramundane consciousness. .... >Ok maybe next time I used supramundane wisdom to avoid > confusion. Or maybe I should use this word unwordly widsom ;-). ... OK. .... >In > my stand, one needs to experience the unconditioned dhamma (Nibbana > as an object) in order to explain what is in the condition world. > (I think there is a sutta on this where Arahant is in Nibbana but > not total Nibbana until the conditioned life time is over due to > kamma) ..... I think you’re referring to these: 1.sa-upaadi sesa nibbana - nibbana with groups of existence remaining, i.e arahant 2.an-upaadi sesa nibbana - nibbana without the groups remaining i.e death of arahant. .... >Or not Buddha will have a hard time convincing pple that > there is a way to liberation (i.e. Nibbana). > > I always happy if you got more to discuss here bc I not particularly > into jhanas or supramundane consciouness bc now to me it is a state > too far away to study. .... Likewise. I always enjoy your good humour and confidence in the teachings, Ken O. Metta, Sarah ====== 27798 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 3:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Links to questions about nibbana Hi Sarah, I wasn't sure what to make of the quote "for it should not be said that what the foolish ordinary man does not apprehend is unapprehendable." Nobody in their right mind would call a blind person a fool for not being able to apprehend colour. Now I take heart from the unshakeable faith of certain of the noble ones that we are all possessed of the means to apprehend nibbana, but that foolishness prevents the use of those means. So be it then. The suggestion that nibbana must be so, because else the way would be futile, is the insanity of wishful thinking gone troppo. It reminded me of a song about 10-15 years ago by the Eurogliders: Oooooh! Ooh I want to find a better place Oooooh! Ooh I'm searching for a better place Oooooh! Ooh I'm tired of living in the sand Oooooh! Ooh I'm searching for a better land Heaven, must be there Well, it's just got to be there I've never - never seen Eden (My note - read Nibbana) I don't wanna live in this place Oooooh! Ooh I'm always trying to escape Oooooh! Ooh I never know which road to take etc etc etc I found the rest heavy going, but will persevere with it. No need to type a question and answer each day on my account, some of your effort would get more lost than it needs to. I could possibly digest one a week?!? Thanks all the same. Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Herman & All, > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > > I recall that recently while skimming through a number of posts, I > > saw something there from you re questions in the Vis along the lines > > of what I had been asking. > ..... > I don't have any links, but I'm happy to type it out in sections - a few a > day as I'm finding it difficult to select some and leave out others. There > are 11 Questions and Answers and they all seem relevant to discussions on > nibbana here. I think you'll enjoy them. First ones: > ***** > VismXV1,67f DISCUSSION ON NIBBANA 27799 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 3:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Links to questions about nibbana Hi Herman & All. VismXV1,67f DISCUSSION ON NIBBANA cont. [Qu.5] But is not nibbana destruction, because of the passage beginning ‘that, friend, which is the destruction of greed...[of hate....of delusion..is nibbana]’(S.iv,251)? [A] That is not so, because it would follow that Arahantship also was mere destruction. For that too is described in the [same] way beginning ‘That, friend, which is the destruction of greed...of hate...of delusion...is Arahantship’ (S.iv, 252). And what is more, the fallacy then follows that nibbana would be temporary, etc; for it it were so, it would follow that nibbana would be temporary, have the characteristic of being formed, and be obtainable regardless of right effort; and precisely because of its having formed characteristics it would be included in the formed, and it would be burning with the fires of greed, etc, and because of its burning it would follow that it was suffering. [Qu. 6] Is there no fallacy if nibbana is that kind of destruction subsequent to which there is no more occurrence? [A] That is not so. Because there is no such kind of destruction. And even if there were, the aforesaid fallacies would not be avoided. Also because it would follow that the noble path was nibbana. For the noble path causes the destruction of defects, and that is why it is called ‘destruction’; and subsequent to that there is no more occurrence of the defects. But it is because the kind of destruction called ‘cessation consisting in non-arising’, [that is, nibbana] serves figuratively speaking as decisive-support [for the path] that [nibbana] is called ‘destruction’ as a metaphor for it. [Qu.7] Why is it not stated in its own form? [A] Because of its extreme subtlety. And its extreme subtlety is established because it inclined the Blessed One to inaction, [that is, to not teaching the Dhamma (see M.i,186)] and because it has no first beginning. [Qu.8] Since it is, when the path is, then it is not uncreated. [A] that is not so, because it is not arousable by the path; it is only reachable, not arousable, by the path; that is why it is uncreated. It is because it is uncreated that it is free from ageing and death. It is because of the absence of its creation and of its ageing and death that it is permanent.” ****** How are we doing? Do these help to understand why there is only one unconditioned dhamma? Atoms in the next qus. Metta, Sarah ======