36800 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:48am Subject: Re: CSC 4-[Sarah: "citta is..."] Dear Sarah, Thank-you for the well-considered comments and post. I have a number of questions still [and I'm also working on the kamma-vipaka issue at the same time]. My question is: Is not the idea of "conceptual right view" a trap, much like the notion of "conventional right effort"? This question arises because I see you and Jon and Rob K and Mike and me and others being very careful to consider the "samma" in "right effort" and make a strong case for "conventional right effort" as really a form of wrong effort -- not just a lesser degree of Right Effort, but qualitatively distinct and quite different from Right Effort. My guess is that "conceptual right view" (e.g., BB in his introduction to Samma Ditthi sutta http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/r_view/r_view00.htm) is akin to "conventional right effort" in that it is not simply a lesser degree of Right View but is distinctly different from Right View in essential quality with very little truly in common. They may *sound* like they are the same thing when people talk about them, but with Right View the talk is a description of the piercing, direct view of reality that is Right View; whereas with "conceptual right view", the talk is a piecing together of a theory by logic and rationation. > .... > S: I'm sure it can be in just the way you describe, but there are degrees > of right understanding (of any kind) and it would be for the person using > this phrase to clarify further for you;-). I was merely correcting what I > saw as an error in what you wrote which suggested that the only panna was > mundane and supramundane panna of the eightfold path. There are certainly different kinds and degrees of pañña, including a conceptual understanding of Dhamma doctrines. But can conceptualizations -- *any* conceptualizations -- really be called "right view"? My working hypothesis is that conceptualizations are simply ditthi, which is to be distinguished from Samma Ditthi, not only in degree but also in kind. > S: Now I don't think I've used `conceptual right view' as a phrase, I don't know that you have either. I was just rudely bringing the discussion back to MY question! > like with many other phrases, eg `seeing sees visible object', we need to > talk more to the user to find out the implied meaning rather than getting > too hung up on the words. We can also use exact the right phraseology but > with wrong view....so it just depends on the meanings intended, I think. > ***** You bet. But doesn't "conceptual right view" really sound like an oxymoron? Isn't Sammaditthi really about clear viewing of reality rather than "correct" conceptualization of reality? > You mentioned (36512) that you find it hard to take that the pain from the > falling tree on your leg is a result of bad kamma. > > Sometimes there is very strong bodily unpleasant feeling, at other times > not. We hear about people falling through windows and so on and not > experience painful feelings whilst at other times, they are very strong > when we'd expect otherwise. Also, quite unpredictable and different for > various people. If a tree falls on both our legs at the same time, the > vipaka will not be the same at all. So, it depends on the vipaka as to > whether any rupas and what rupas are experienced through the body sense at > any instant. There's no time for thinking or adverting to pain, the > unpleasant (or painful) bodily feeling just accompanies the body > consciousness which experience the rupas. However, I agree with RobM that > the kamma couldn't have its effect without natural decisive support > condition too. Hence, kamma and NDSC are very important conditions as he > says and of course, without the rupas arising to be experienced through > the body sense or the body sense rupas themselves, no opportunity for > vipaka cittas either as everyone agrees, I think. More on this topic later.... > p.s Where did you get your U Kyaw Khine transl of Dhs from and how is it? A few years ago, there was a kindly gentleman on the list who was a psychologist and ran a little Buddhist bookstore. He had spent some time in Burma and acquired some interesting books, including this translation of Dhs by a Burmese monk and published by the "Department for the Promotion and Propagation of the Sasana". There are 2000 copies in print. I don't recall the name of the man who sent me the book, but Rob K has one as well, so maybe he can help. Dhs seems like it would not be super difficult to translate, but C Rhy Davids sure made a mess of it! Compared to that, the Khine is wonderful. An added benefit is that the chapter and section headings match the CSCD so it is easy to do cross-referencing to the Pali. Metta, Dan 36801 From: robmoult Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > I thought you had accidentally given the impression of a mind that > existed outside the present, momentary, nama and rupa. Now I am > wondering if that was entirely accidental.(!) Why, for example, > have you told Herman that, in the first three moments of a sense- > door process, "the mind is experiencing a bhavanga citta?" > > Surely, at those times, the mind IS a bhavanga-citta. There is no > external mind into which, and out of which, cittas come and go. ===== You are absolutely correct. Thank you for making this correction. I will be on the lookout for similar mistakes in the future. ===== > > While I am at it, I might point out some other parts of your answer > I found disconcerting: > > ----------------- > RM: > There are many laws of nature in this universe but the Buddha > only focused on those relevant to the goal of His teachings. For > example, the Buddha never talked about gravity. Why did the Buddha > choose not to talk about the nature of gravity? Because > understanding the nature of gravity does not lead to the holy life > or to Nibbana > > ----------------- > > That gives the impression that gravity is a part of absolute > reality. But isn't gravity only a concept? ===== There are many laws of nature. One of these laws of nature is the law of kamma. The law of kamma is "only a concept" but the Buddha talked about it because it was within the scope of His teachings. Another law of nature is the law of gravity. It is also "only a concept" and the Buddha did not talk about it because it was not within the scope of His teachings. ===== > > ----------------- > RM: > The tactile object rupa arises because of temperature and > it is governed by natural laws which are outside the scope of the > Buddha's teaching. > > ----------------- > > Is that correct? Has the Buddha only partly explained the conditions > governing rupa? ===== The Abhidhammattha Sangaha lists the 24 condtions described in the Patthana according to the following six groupings: - Mind as a condition for mind - Mind as a condition for mind-and-matter - Mind as a condition for matter - Matter as a condition for mind - Concepts and mind-and-matter as a condition for mind - Mind-and-matter as a condition for mind-and-matter You will note that there is no discussion of matter as a condition for matter. ===== > > ------------------ > RM: > This question is formulated as an ontological, > phenomenological question. The Buddha's focus was not on defining > realities but rather on the mind (mind is what creates conditions > conducive to the holy life and what brings us closer to Nibbana); > ----------------------- > > I think you need to accept that the Buddha did define realities: > otherwise, you will continue to confuse them with concepts. :-) I am preparing a relatively lengthy post on this (sorry, I don't think that you are going to like it). You could save me a lot of effort if you could find a Sutta where the Buddha talked about "existence / non-existence" or "reality / non-reality". I sincerely hope that you can find such a Sutta. Metta, Rob M :-) 36802 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Larry, While you are waiting for Rob's answer, I am just butting in. I am thinking of your remark about concept and reality you still find murky (I don't blame you, it is difficult!) and then I read Azita's remark about this matter I found very helpful. op 22-09-2004 07:39 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...:> L: Also there is a vast unresolved murkiness concerning concept and reality. N: I am sorry about that. There were many posts and I wonder what is still unresolved? Perhaps we should mind what Azita says: < Azita: , I think we often try to fit into our 'rational' minds these concepts [and they are only concepts until truly known by panna].> So, many things are bound to be murky so long as insight has not been developed. But we can begin! And there is the level of intellectual understanding. I am wondering whether there is anything I can do, because it may be an annoying question for you when you are studying. Since I am at your post I try to say something about your other questions. > L: I doubt if there is a canonical or commentarial answer to most of > these questions. My own speculative answer is that everything is kamma > result N: Do you remember Sivaka sutta? S.N. XXXVI, 21, I translated the Co. and subco. Not everything is result of kamma. I can post some of it. <"Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans."> I can post more, no trouble, you are welcome. L: but because some dhammas perform functions beyond a passive > resultant function they are designated differently. I can see root > consciousnesses as being both results of kamma and creators of kamma. N: I would rather say: hetus can be associated with kusala citta or akusala citta, and also with vipaakacitta, namely sahetuka kusala vipaaka or mahaavipaaka. Also with inoperative citta, kiriyacitta. When we say root consciousness it may cause confusion. L: I think contact has to be kamma result, so anything that is contacted is > kamma result. N: See cetasika study corner. Phassa is a universal arising with each citta, thus, it can be of all four jaatis. It also arises with kusala citta and akusala citta. L: However, functional consciousness doesn't seem to fit into > this scheme. It is my understanding that "functional" by definition is > outside the whole kamma process. N: Indeed, it is neither cause nor result. Nina. 36803 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg]suttas. Dear Friend James, I was hoping you still would follow posts! Thanks for your nice letter. op 22-09-2004 20:05 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: >> Hi Phil: >> K I: (I, 7, §2, The Devas, no 7, Over under Suttas, The heart > (mind, citta): >> Nor what is that whereby the world is led? ... I have been spending most of my > spare time these days reading past articles from the "The Wheel" > from BPS (and meditating, of course). Some of them have been quite > enlightening to me and my individual practice. N: Perhaps you can share some of it? J: Also, I am not sure > what you mean by my "taking up again the Kindred Sayings thread"…but > it sure sounds impressive!! Hehehe… Are you sure I participated in > anything as lofty as that!!?? ;-)) N: :-)) You used to have a sutta thread together with Christine and Victor (where is he?). You started with Kindred Sayings and you were posting translations of B.B. which I liked. It gives me pleasure to quote, for example this sutta: End quote. See, friend James, how involved you were? And I kept your note. I used to take the sutta along to my morning coffee and look at the Commentary I have in Thai. Those were good times!!! And as I am quoting this sutta, I find it a wonderful reminder. J: Anyway, let me know what you > would like me to do when you get the chance. I have thought of you > and hope that everything is going well with you (I feel I have > reasons to smile.). Take care. N: Now, it depends on your time and inclination. I know it is a lot of work because the B.B. transl are not on line. The above was just a hint :-)) Take care, Nina. 36804 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:17am Subject: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 06 ) by Htoo Dear Rob M and all, Rob M ebook is clearly written and easy to understand for everage people. Here I give some reputation on his pages. Page 22. 1.Registration The topic Mind-Door Process has 4 bullets in above ebook 'Theory Behind The Buddha's Smile'. In the 2nd last or 3rd bullet Rob writes as Two Registration Mental States. I think, we have discussed this before. I prefer 'Retention Mental State'. There is an object. It was passed by the past bhavanga mental state because it initially is not strong to serve as an object for mental state. After that there is vibrating bhavanga mental state. There has not arisen vithi citta because bhavanga cittas are ongoing but they vibrate. After that as there is a reminder that an object arises, bhavanga cittas are arrested. After that adverting co0nsciousness advert the attention to the object. Next citta receives that and next citta investigate the object. After that is determining consciousness. This is followed by 7 successive javana cittas. After that there only left 2 cittakkhana lifespan for the object. In this the arising cittas do not register any thing. These 2 cittas are one of 8 mahavipaka cittas or one of 3 santirana cittas. All are vipaka cittas and they arise just as a continutions. They just retain the object that was taken by javana cittas. So they should be retention consciousness rather than registration consciousness. I think Nina uses retention for this tadarammana citta. The Pali word is Tadaarammana. This means 'the''then' 'after' 'following' etc etc. So this means post javana or following javana or they just retain. Tadaarmmana does not means 'registration'. But anyway the book is readable and understandable. 2. Clear and obscure This a good translation. Bhtu means big, huge, large, great. Vi means distinctive or particular or especial. So vibhuuta sounds like clear while avibhuta means negative unclear or obscure. This is good point. 3. Javana and kamma-creating I agree. But not all javana are kamma-creating. There are 26 javana cittas that do not give rise to kamma. They are smiling citta of The Buddha, 8 mahakiriya cittas, 5 rupakiriya cittas, 4 arupa kiriya cittas, 8 lokuttara cittas. 12 akusala javana give akusala kamma, 8 mahakusala javana give kamavacara kusala kamma, 5 rupakusala give rupa kusala kamma, 4 arupakusala give arupa kusala kamma. So javana should not be kamma-creating even though it is right for non-arahats. Page 23. 4. Good point. Other may may not agree. But I like your writing here. 'A conformationational process that effectively '' copies the rupa into a mental object''. This is right. The arisen object is a rupa and it has passed away when the first bhavanga citta after tadarammana citta arises. Even though it does not exist any more, it is copied or printed to the mind at the mnind door process. 5. You describe that there are different processes and you depict them with lines and links. After the sense door process there always follow mind door process that take the object but working through for the chracterisation of that object, attha pannatta of the object that is the intrinsic name of that object. Intrinsic name here means 'attha pannatta' that is its true name. Example is 'water'. As soon as you hear water, you know. Those Pali speakers who hear 'udaka' know that it is water. Those Japanese who hear 'mistu' know that it is water. Those Hindis who hear 'Paani' know it is water. Those Chinese who hear 'suei' know it is water. Those Myanmar who hear 'yay' know it is water. This means that there is an intrinsic name for water rather than the voice itself. After that mind door process, mental states are for attending the voiced name or sadda pannatta. Here individual will think of their own language while the former process took for intrinsic name. After this there follow numerous characterisation for that rupa. That is why The Buddha preached that there are a million of millions cittas happen in a blink. Page 24 is perfect. Page 25. 5. Here Rob, you just put many religions together centering on a specific part of brain. This brain is also just construction and it is pannatta. But scientifically manifested brain waves may differ from one mental state to another. Even though there are calmness, this is not the same if cittas are not the same. For example those with ditthi or wrong view and those with right view differ. Only The Buddha will know any citta that arise. Thanks Rob M for sending me your ebook. I can open it and read it. Thank you very much. May these criticisms be beneficial. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36805 From: dighanakha Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:42am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello Sarah, S> Bemusement was the right word. IÕm not over-fond of your S> Ôdsg hardcoreÕ label either a some of our most active and S> long-term members to date like Howard, for a good example, S> are very much at the heart of DSG and would not like to be S> lumped together with me on this thread as youÕve seen from S> the very varied responses. No problem. Do you have any suggestion for how one might distinguish you, Jon, Robert K, Nina, etc. from dsg's more independently-minded contributors? Kh Sujin's disciples? Sujinians? Sugeniuses? ASS's (i.e. Acharn Sujin's students)? dig>> "One who affirms a religious textual authority as holistic dig>> and absolute, admitting of neither criticism nor reduction, dig>> and to be interpreted only literally." S> Sorry, but no, the hat doesnÕt fit ;-) Usually those of us S> who read abhidhamma everywhere are being asked to read the S> suttas *more* literally, not less, for a start. Even for the S> Jataka under discussion, I think I tend to look at the S> deeper and less literal meaning and to reflect on the latent S> tendencies which have been accumulated, ready to pounce..... Point taken. Let me qualify it: "One who affirms a religious textual authority as holistic and absolute, admitting of neither criticism nor reduction, and to be interpreted only literally, except where a literal interpretation would conflict with the commitment to holism etc. or would lead to a demonstrably absurd or monstrous conclusion." In general, a person with great trust in Buddhaghosa will incline to literalism, since B'ghosa himself is a literalist to a fairly extreme degree. But it is the previous points (the commitment to holism etc.) that I perceive as being more prominent among the Sugeniuses. dig> FOR WOMEN dig> Drop dead! (nassatha) dig> Go to hell! (vinassatha) S> Well, again my interpetation above might not be so literal.....;-) Quite so. This is an example of literalism being abandoned because the consequence would otherwise be monstrous. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36806 From: dighanakha Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:44am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello Sarah. S> You're obviously extremely well-read in the texts and I'm S> intrigued by the opening colouful messages from many new S> members here;-). Thank you for the welcome message. S> Can I persuade you to also share a little more about S> yourself or background, such as where you live? I live outside Anabhinandana. S> p.s If the name sticks, can we be given a short nickname to S> address you by? Thx;-) In fact Dighanakha Nutcracker *is* the short version. The long version goes on for four lines. Still, if it needs to be truncated further, I suppose you could take off the nakha leaving "Digger", or take off the Digha leaving "Knacker". Or take off the cracker leaving "Nut", or take off the Nut leaving "Cracker". Or chop off both ends leaving "Ghana", the Pali for nose. Or just shorten it to "D". Take your pick. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ The view of those ascetics and brahmins who are of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me' is close to non-attachment, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-cleaving, close to non-grasping. (Dighanakha Sutta) 36807 From: dighanakha Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:46am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello Sarah, S> Like Matt stressed so well, S> Matt: Whether women corrupted the sasana or not does not S> change what reality is arising and inpinging on the sense S> door right now. Whether the Buddha held those views or not, S> whether the Jataka Tales are true or fiction, whether the S> Teaching will last 500 or 5,000 years does not change what S> reality is arising and impinging on the sense door right S> now. S> In the citta moment that arises right now there is no Jataka S> Tales, no women, nomen, no Bhikhunis, no sexist views and no S> self; male or female. Though Matt's comment has met with the list's general approval, I am not myself satisfied with it. The Jataka stories' judgments on women are grossly in error and this casts a shadow of doubt on the good judgment of the commentators. To try and lift this shadow by appealing to some other doctrine from these same commentators would be a case of "Ask my fellow if I be a thief!" And it is only from the commentators that we get the idea that the Buddha's Dhamma has to do with paramattha dhammas and citta-khanas. These terms are not found in the Tipitaka -- not even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The shadow of doubt cast by the commentators' judgments on women should reasonably be taken to cover what they say about other things. Why trust what a man has to say about micro-scale momentary mental events, if he can't even get it right about the observable behaviour of one half of the human race? Furthermore, it is not as if this is an isolated instance. There are many other subjects on which the commentators' views can be shown mistaken by simple observation -- in some cases by observations that the commentators could easily have made for themselves. For example, taking a less emotive subject than women, here are some of Buddhaghosa's thoughts on language (nirutti), from the chapter on the four discriminations in the Sammohavinodani: "A mother is a Tamil, a father is an Andhakan. If a child born to them hears the mother's voice first, he will speak Tamil; if he hears the father's voice first, he will speak Andhakan. If he hears the voice of neither of them, he will speak the dialect of Magadha (i.e. Pali). "One who is born in a great forest where there is no habitation and no other person to speak to: the power of speech will arise naturally in him and he will speak the dialect of Magadha. "The dialect of Magadha predominates throughout the hell realms, among animals, hungry ghosts, and in the worlds of humans and devas. "The remaining 18 languages other than the dialect of Magadha, such as the languages of savages, Andhakans, Bactrians, Tamils etc., are all subject to change. The dialect of Magadha -- the speech of Brahmas, the Ariyan speech -- is the only language not subject to change." Apart from what is said about the language of hungry ghosts etc. (which is unverifiable) everything above is wrong. Language acquisition in children is the result of ongoing interactive communication. It has nothing to do with which parent speaks to the child first. The children of deaf and dumb parents do not grow up speaking Pali. Nor do those children who have spent years incarcerated in cellars by mentally disturbed parents, who have fed them but never spoken to them. There are well-documented cases of this: if the children are rescued they do not speak any language at all; if the incarceration has lasted from birth to puberty then the very faculty of language acquisition is normally destroyed. The claims that Buddhaghosa is making for the Pali language are exactly the same as those made for Sanskrit by the brahmins, for Ardhamagadhi by the Jains, for Latin or Hebrew by medieval Schoolmen etc. etc. I don't doubt that other parallels would be found in any culture that has not yet evolved a scientific approach to linguistics. It seems to me that a passage like this shows clearly the extent to which Buddhaghosa (or the writer he was translating) was limited by the science of his day. If he can be so wildly wrong in his linguistics (or sexology, physiology, anatomy, Buddhist history, geography...etc.), why trust him on psychology? dig> On the other hand, if we are going to base our reasoning on dig> the dsg fundamentalist assumption that the Kunala Jataka WAS dig> spoken by the Buddha (because its Mahavihara translator said dig> so), then we shall have to conclude either that the Buddha dig> did not always speak the truth, or that he did not have even dig> the most rudimentary everyday understanding of women, let dig> alone special insight into them. S> Or that our own insight is too limited to comprehend and S> therefore we may need to leave it aside for the time being. Our insight in the sense of insight into the three characteristics may be limited, but there are whole fields of knowledge where we know better than Buddhaghosa simply because empirical scientific knowledge is cummulative and we were born later than him. I am pasting a link here to Richard Dawkins' Dimbleby Lecture, "Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder". His remarks on Aristotle, it seems to me, would apply with full force to the Mahavihara commentators: http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/ Articles/1996-11-12dimbleby.shtml "You could give Aristotle a tutorial. And you could thrill him to the core of his being. Aristotle was an encyclopedic polymath, an all time intellect. Yet not only can you know more than him about the world. You also can have a deeper understanding of how everything works. Such is the privilege of living after Newton, Darwin, Einstein, Planck, Watson, Crick and their colleagues." S> Something which is very puzzling to me, however, is the S> following: dig> Something else I would draw your attention to (though it is dig> less probative than the above) is that the Kunala depicts dig> the Bodhisatta as lying. He lies three times when he is dig> seducing the white-robed nun Saccatapavi. But in other dig> commentaries (I think in the Buddhavamsa or the Cariyapitaka dig> Comm) it is stated that a Bodhisatta never violates the dig> fourth precept. He might break the others, but never the dig> fourth. S> Yes. I read the text for this and also had a quick look S> at the Pali for the relevant lines and you seem to be S> right. IÕve also read/heard the same as you about the S> *third* precept as the exception and I have no explanation S> here(!!). It isn't the third precept. In fact there are many Jatakas where the Bodhisatta is a philanderer who goes around seducing other men's wives. It's definitely the fourth precept the commentators say he can't break. But I gave a wrong source. It's not the Cariyapitaka but the Jatakanidana, in the scene where Dipankara Buddha is teaching sacca-parami to the brahmin Sumedha. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ The view of those ascetics and brahmins who are of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me' is close to non-attachment, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-cleaving, close to non-grasping. (Dighanakha Sutta) 36808 From: dighanakha Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:48am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello Sarah (and Jon), S> So are all women (and men) capable of such despicable S> motives or acts as accused of in the Jataka tale or S> elsewhere or do the examples just pertain to the S> exceptionally bad lot? Again, I would suspend judgment, but S> have always found the following tale from Qus of King S> Milinda very interesting indeed: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe35/sbe3515.htm S> Please read the rest at the link and let me know what you S> think! Sorry to disappoint, but I think Nagasena's argument is flawed. To notice the flaw one needs to see the verses in their original contexts. King Milinda quotes the following verse: "Should they get opportunity or secrecy Or get a suitable wooer All women would do evil; Failing another, then even with a cripple." (Kunala Jataka) Note the phrase "All women". This is a universal proposition and only one exception is needed to falsify it. Milinda believes he has found an exception. He quotes another verse: "The woman called Amara, who was the wife of Mahosadha, stayed in the village while her husband was away on a journey. Remaining in private and alone and making her husband like unto a king, she committed no evil though she was offered a thousand (kahapanas)." (Maha-ummagga Jataka) Ah! So there's at least *one* faithful wife in the universe. Milinda then challenges Nagasena to show that the two quotes are not contradictory. Nagasena responds by arguing that there is no contradiction because Amara did NOT get "opportunity, secrecy or a suitable wooer" as specified in the first verse. But it is only by sleight of hand that he can defend this view. He equivocates by using the terms "opportunity", "secrecy" and "suitable wooer" in an entirely different sense to that which they have in the verse from the Kunala Jataka, when it is read in context. If the words are taken in their Kunala Jataka sense, it is clear that Amara DID obtain opportunity, privacy and a suitable wooer. In the Kunala verse 'opportunity' merely means that the woman finds a space big enough to contain herself and her lover. 'Privacy' means that the place is sufficiently roofed and walled to conceal herself and her lover. "Suitable wooer" means any man who wants to have sex with her. But Nagasena allows these terms to cover just about anything. Take 'secrecy' for example: "And, further, she refused to do wrong because, on consideration, she was not sure of keeping the thing secret from the world. For even could she have kept it secret from men, yet she could not have concealed it from spiritsÊ-- even could she have kept it secret from spirits, yet she could not have concealed it from those recluses who have the power of knowing the thoughts of others -- even could she have kept it secret from them, yet she could not have concealed it from those of the gods who can read the hearts of men -- even could she have kept it secret from the gods, yet she could not have escaped, herself, from the knowledge of her sin -- even could she have remained ignorant of it herself, yet she could not have kept it secret from (the law of the result which follows on) unrighteousness. Such were the various reasons which led her to abstain from doing wrong because she could not be sure of secrecy." So Amara was faithful because she was a woman of good character, and Nagasena stetches the meaning of "opportunity and privacy" to encompass good character, even though the terms mean nothing of the kind in the Kunala. Now that's called cheating! S> I hope this partly answerÕs DighanakhaÕs qu in his post to S> Christine about how some Ôhardcore dsg members deal with S> this problemÕ. In short, speaking only for myself, I just S> leave aside parts of the texts I have difficulty with, S> knowing how very little wisdom has been accumulated to S> date....just enough to have confidence that itÕs likely to S> be this ignorance rather than the texts themselves that S> blinds my vision. How far are you prepared to take this policy? For example, when you read this, from Buddhaghosa's Sammohavinodani: "A mother is a Tamil, a father is an Andhakan. If a child born to them hears the mother's voice first, he will speak Tamil; if he hears the father's voice first, he will speak Andhakan. If he hears the voice of neither of them, he will speak the dialect of Magadha (i.e. Pali). "A child who is born in a great jungle where there is no human habitation and no other person to speak to: the power of speech will arise naturally in him and he will speak the dialect of Magadha." I would guess, Sarah, that with your background in psychology, you might well have some difficulty believing these statements to be an accurate account of language acquisition in children. Would you say that it's likely to be your "ignorance that is blinding your vision", or would you say that Buddhaghosa was simply mistaken here? S> As Jon also wrote before to Howard: J> Actually, there are a number of aspects to the teachings J> that run counter to either our taught values or innately J> held beliefs, but many of these things we have now come to J> recognise as having merit or as more than likely being in J> accordance with the way things are.Ó Jon, do you think that the above statement about wolf-children growing up speaking Pali is likely to be in accordance with the way things are? S> p.s Btw, Dighanakha, I thought your parody on the S> Ôconsistent approach to the textsÕ starting with ÒIn the S> Kunala Jataka we learn that all women are actually different S> from how they conventionally appear to beÓ, was rather witty S> and clever, not that I wish to encourage you;-). Okay, I promise not to repeat the performance terribly often. But if the moderators will permit me one more .... guess who this is: "You seem to overlook the fact that Buddhaghosa was only addressing the case of a child born to an *Andhakan* father and a *Tamil* mother. He does not suggest that the same would be true of a child born to a French father and an American mother, nor any of the other mixed marriage offspring tested by modern linguistic researchers. Since there are no Andhakans nowadays this is a teaching that is not relevant to our everyday lives in the kind of world in which we now live. The causes and conditions that would lead to an encounter with an Andhakan are just not present. That does not of course mean that I would wish to reject or exclude this aspect of commentarial insight. In fact I see no reason to doubt that if there WERE an Andhakan man, and if he DID marry a Tamil, and if they DID beget a child we would find the outcome to be exactly as specified in the Sammohavinodani. "As for the child who grows up without hearing human speech, I agree that *to you and me* it may seem difficult to believe that he is making anything more than incoherent grunts and yelps. But who are we to judge that those grunts and yelps are not the dialect of Magadha? Since the Sammohavinodani DOES contain an authoritative statement saying that the the dialect of Magadha is the language that the child would be speaking, what else could those grunts and yelps possibly be?" ;-) Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ The view of those ascetics and brahmins who are of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me' is close to non-attachment, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-cleaving, close to non-grasping. (Dighanakha Sutta) 36809 From: dighanakha Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:51am Subject: Re: 1 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Hello Robert. R> I'll try to write a few posts on this. First I begin with the R> Kesaputta sutta (incorrectly called the Kalama sutta by modern R> Buddhists) Oh my, them wicked modern Buddhists! In fact I doubt that "Kalama Sutta" originates with modern Buddhists, unless by 'modern' you mean from the 10th century onwards. You will find the sutta called by this name in the Abhinava Tika, in its section on the Brahmajala Sutta. It is common for a sutta to be known by three or four different names in the Commentaries. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36810 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 0:03pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 069 ) About Rupa --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: Dear Htoo Htoo: Rupa is also needed to be understood. I did not leave its importance. Some people readily see rupa rather than namma. For those sorts of people Ayatanas are taught where 10 ayatanas are all rupa. To understand Ayatana rupas have to be explained. Joop: I don't know what kind of people I am, I prefer to start with the four essentials in the analytical knowledge of body and mind (nama-rupa-pariccheda-nana) before I try to understand the derived material phenomena. Htoo:Nothing is higher. What did you mean by 'mind is higher than matter'? Joop: You are not in western philosophy but I thin Idialism as teached by Plato. And I think of a not-Theravada branch of Buddhism: yogacara, called "mind only". And in fact the first verse of the Dhamapada states that mind governs matter. Htoo: Rupas are rupas and they are real existence. They are not to be confined to anthropocentric. Joop: Then we have a real big philosophical problem in our discussion; I think we cannot know what is the nature of matter as such, all we can know about matter is what we experience (in our senses and mind-door) If you state rupa=matter than I had to say modern physics (in fact: mathematical physics) has a better theory of the nature of matter. But the Buddha was so wise not to cling to the pre-scientific theory of his time. On my question: Do you think it is fundamentally possible to modernize the list of rupa, still using them as paramatthas? Htoo: Rupas are to be experienced and to be known not just to be listed. Joop: Are you serious? The whole Tipitaka, and especially the Abhidhamma, are full of lists: hunderds of them. And I experience modernized rupa (in meditation), not the classical. Htoo: If experienced, marks on them that is tilakkhana of anicca, dukkha, and anatta will be cognised and finally liberated. Without rupa support, there is no way to be liberated. Rupa is also important. Joop: Of course that's the most important, thanks for reminding me to that With metta Joop 36811 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Fare the well, friend Herman ( was Re: [dsg] "... as parasites a tree." ???) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: Dear Phil I know about the decline of Buddhism that is inevitable but think that's good trying to postpone it for a century or so. Our situation is different: you in a country were buddhism is decreasing (or decreased) And I in the Netherland were it is (slowly, with low numers) increasing. In fact three quarter of "buddhist practices" here is meditation (vipassana=mindfulness), hardly rituals (no problem) and hardly dhamma-teachings (in my view a problem). But I have seen many times that somebody starts with meditation and after some years got interested in the Dhmaa-principles behind it. I think that Japanese like most people interested in their own (mental) health and pratice meditation for that reason? Phil: That's why I was interested in your comment about "modern metaphors" that you made some weeks ago Joop: I don't have many examples; for example I like the books of Stephen Batchelor. A little bit in the direction is: "The message in the teachings of kamma; rebirth; samsara" by Ashin Ottama: A contemporary look at three important themes in the doctrine of the Buddha in: www.buddha.cz/bodhipala/downtex_soubory/KRS-EN.rtf With metta Joop 36812 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 2:54pm Subject: Re: 1 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dighanakha" wrote: > > In fact I doubt that "Kalama Sutta" originates with modern > Buddhists, unless by 'modern' you mean from the 10th century > onwards. You will find the sutta called by this name in the > Abhinava Tika, in its section on the Brahmajala Sutta. > > It is common for a sutta to be known by three or four different > names in the Commentaries. > > +++++++++= Dear Dighanakha, Thanks, appreciaet this. RobertK 36813 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg]2 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Dear Herman, Staying with the kalama/kesaputta sutta: In this section the Buddha said "When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" -- then you should enter & remain in them.' Thus was it said"" endquote. Now in regard to the belief in kamma and rebirth I think we can be sure that "it is praised by the wise". This is because in so many suttas the Buddha [ a wise being indeed]spoke about rebirth and kamma and also spoke about teh dangers of holding the view that there was no rebirth: http://www.abhidhamma.org/majjhima%2060.htm ""Householders, those recluses and brahmins who have this view and declare there are no results for gifts, offerings, or sacrifices. There are no results for good and bad actions, there is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father. There are no spontaneously arisen beings recluses and brahmins in this world, who come to the right path, have realized this world and the other world and declare it[see note below]. We could expect this, they would abstain from these three things of merit such as good conduct by body, speech and mind, would observe these three things of demerit such as misconduct by body, speech and mind. What is the reason? These good recluses and brahmins do not see the dangers of demerit, the vile nature of defilements, the purity and the results of merit in giving up. There's another world So their view there is no other world, becomes wrong view. Words that say, there is no other world, becomes wrong speech. The view, there is no other world, is completely opposite to what the noble ones say. The noble ones talk of another world. Their instructions, there is no other world, becomes wrong instructions, and the wrong teaching. Giving the wrong instructions, they praise themselves and disparage others. .By that they decrease in their virtues andaccumulate various things of demerit, on account of wrong view. Such as wrong thoughts, wrong speech, giving instructions in the wrong teaching quite opposite to the noble one's teaching, and praising themselves and disparaging others. A wise man reflects, if there is no other world, these good persons will be well and good after death. If there is another world, after death they would go to decrease, to hell. Let us say there is no, other world, and the words of these good recluses and brahmins are true. Yet they are blamed by the wise, here and now, as un -virtuous ones bearing wrong view, and negative ideas. If there is the other world, these good persons will have unlucky throws on both sides. The wise will blame them here and now, they will decrease in virtues and birth in hell after death. Thus if this pervading teaching is observed, it pervades both sides and neglects the side of demerit."" Notes.1. The inquiring Teaching.'apa.n.naka' This means to reflect the matter thoroughly and to choose the correct course of actions. 2. There are no spontaneously arisen beings, recluses and brahmins.' Natthi sattaa opapaatikaa natthi loke samanabrahmanaa sammaggataa sammaapa.tipannaa ye imanca loka.m para.mca loka.m saya.m abhi~n~naa sajjhikatvaa pavedenti ` These are the beings who have realised the Teaching spontaneously. That is the four paths and four fruits. `maggaphala' They are the eight Great Beings. 3. There is another world.'loka' Another world is the next birth.A world is a being who experiences the world through his six spheres of mental contact. So another world is another birth.4. All born are led to maturity and are born in the higher six and experiences pleasantness and unpleasantness.'sabbe bhuutaa sabbe jiivaa avasaa abalaa aviriyaa niiyaati sanghatibhava pari~n~nataa chassevaabhijaatiisu sukhadukkha.m pa.tisanvedenti` This means that the one born matures later and experiencing contacts through six doors of mental contact, feel pluasant and unpleasant feelings.5. My birth among material gods of mental nature could not be shown.'natthi sabbaso aaruppaati sace tesa.m bhavata.m samana.brahmanaana.m sacca.m vacana.m .thaanametam vijjati ye te devaa ruupino manomayaa apa.n.nakamme tatruppatti bhavissati `These are the mental beings that enjoy the five strands of sensual pleasures. The heaven of the thirtythree gods is one of them. 6.Birth smong the immaterial perceptive gods could not be shown. These gods do not enjoy the five strands of sensual pleasures. They are perceptive gods, like those who have developed the four divine abidings.7. There is a possibility that I should cease to be here and now'.thaanameta.m vijjati ya.m di.t.thevadhamme parinibbaayissaami` To be is to be wishing, imagining,and thinking of sensualthings, of material things and immaterial things..When this stops it is called cessation and extinction."" RobertK 36814 From: Herman Hofman Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:18pm Subject: RE: [dsg]1 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Hi RobK, Thanks for your post. I have read and considered it, but I have no further comment. I am happy to keep reading anything else you may have on the topic. Kind Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" < > > Dear Herman, > If you like I could try to help with this. If I understand you > rightly you believe that death is the final end for each of us, > there is no rebirth? > ==== > Yes, you have understood me well. I will gladly take up your offer of > assistance, not because I want to believe there is rebirth, out of any > number of beliefs that exist about what happens to people after they > die, but because I want to see things as they are. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++= Dear Herman, I'll try to write a few posts on this. First I begin with the Kesaputta sutta (incorrectly called the Kalama sutta by modern Buddhists) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-065.html In this sutta the Buddha meets a group of people who wonder about what is true. Some teachers claim that there is a future life and rebirth, while others rubbish the idea. They ask the Buddha who is right. The Buddha replies that for one who has purified the mind: "'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires. "'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease -- free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires. "" For these people who were filled with doubts about the future and past this helped to alay them. They could see that at the very least developing a purified mind gave them advantages in this life. And if there was a fuure life then they would win double (now and in the future) . And so they were able to let go of their doubts and take refuge in the Buddha. The sutta ends: "Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One -- through many lines of reasoning -- made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life." RobertK 36815 From: Herman Hofman Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:27pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Kamma Hi Azita and RobM and everyone, Thank you all for the ongoing discussions and feedback. It is priceless to be given all this material for ongoing consideration. I have no further points to make so I'll just snip the rest. Kind Regards Herman 36816 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 3:41pm Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dighanakha" wrote: > The Jataka stories' judgments on > women are grossly in error and this casts a shadow of doubt on > the good judgment of the commentators. To try and lift this > shadow by appealing to some other doctrine from these same > commentators would be a case of "Ask my fellow if I be a thief!" > And it is only from the commentators that we get the idea that > the Buddha's Dhamma has to do with paramattha dhammas and > citta-khanas. These terms are not found in the Tipitaka -- not > even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The shadow of doubt cast by the > commentators' judgments on women should reasonably be taken to > cover what they say about other things. Why trust what a man has > to say about micro-scale momentary mental events, if he can't > even get it right about the observable behaviour of one half of > the human race? +++ From earlier post: then come the verses > informing us that we should expect this behaviour from ALL women, > along with recommendations that ALL women should be despised, > avoided, distrusted, and disbelieved. > So the point of my question above is that this material, though > supposedly approved by the ancient arahant theras and the Great > Commentator Buddhaghosa, is seriously at odds with what is taught > about women in the other Nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka, and > seriously disconfirmed by reality (it only takes one exception to > falsify a universal proposition, e.g. one woman who occasionally > speaks the truth). +++ Dear DighaNakha, I understand that you wish to prove that the commentaries composed by Buddhaghosa and also the earlier texts such as Milindapanha are not to be trusted (I think you doubt even suttanta such as Jataka?). But you do seem to trust the Nikayas. Christine recently posted some sutta extracts from the Anguttara Nikaya: And again, he spoke of Migasala who had enquired of Ananda about Kamma as: "Just a foolish, witless female woman, with just a woman's wit" (Anguttara Nikaya Chapter VIII PTS) 'And what, Master Gotama, is a woman's aim?" "A man, O brahmin, is a woman's aim, her quest is for adornments, her mainstay is sons, her desire is to be without a co-wife and her ideal is domination." ( Anguttara Nikaya VI.52) "Monks, there are these five disadvatages in a black snake. What five? It is unclean, evil-smelling, timid, fearful and betrays friends. Even so, monks, there are these five disadvantages in a woman. What five? She is unclean, evil-smelling, timid, fearful and betrays friends. These are the five. (Anguttara Nikaya III) What is your opinion of these quotes? Even in the DighaNikaya there are some suttas that us moderns may not easily understand. take the Aganna sutta: """ Now at that time, all had become one world of water, dark, and of darkness that maketh blind. No moon nor sun appeared, no stars were seen, nor constellations, neither was night manifest nor day, neither months nor halfmonths, neither years nor seasons, neither female nor male. Beings were reckoned just as beings only. And to those beings, Vâseþþha, sooner or later after a long time, earth with its savour was spread out in the waters, Even as a scum forma on the surface of boiled milky rice that is cooling, so did the earth appear. It became endowed with colour, with odour, and was its taste. Even as well- made ghee or pure butter, so was its colour; even as the flawless honey of the bee, so sweet was it. 12. Then, Vâseþþha, some being of greedy disposition, 5 said: Lo now! What will this be? And tasted the savoury earth with his finger. He thus, tasting, became suffused with the savour, and craving entered into him. And other beings, following his example, tasted the savoury earth with their finger. They thus, tasting became suffused with the savour, and craving entered into them. Then those beings began to feast on the savoury earth, breaking off lumps of it with their hands. And from [86] the doing thereof the self-luminance of those beings faded away. As their self-luminance faded away, the moon and sun became manifest. Thereupon star-shapes and constellations became manifest. Thereupon night and day became manifest, months too and half-months, the seasons and the years. Thus far then, Vâseþþha, did the world evolve again."""""enquote Then too in the DighaNikaya sutta (forget which one) about the 32 marks of the Buddha, some of them seem unusual. I think his height is much taller than we might expect (maybe someone can remember what it is). One I have problems with is somewhere where either the Buddha or a commentary talked about Rahu and the moon eating the sun or something during an eclipse. If we do have doubts about some sections of the Tipitaka is the best path to try to look for any passages that help to further increase doubt, or could we simply put aside what we don't understand. RobertK . 36817 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 4:07pm Subject: mind like flash of lightning Hello all A summary I found online of AN III 25. I assume the summary is accurate: These three types of persons are found in the world: One with a mind like an open sore; one with a mind like a flash of lightning; one with a mind like a diamond. One who is irascible and very irritable, displaying anger, hatred and sulkiness; such a one is said to be a person with a mind like an open sore. One who understands the Four Noble Truths correctly is said to have a mind like a flash of lightning. One who has destroyed the mind-intoxicating defilements and realized the liberation of' mind and the liberation by knowledge is said to have a mind like a diamond. Ph: A few comments. I found the image of "mind like a flash of lightning" very helpful for understanding that right understanding is not-self. There is no control over the arising of right understanding, and it rises and falls away in a flash. I've seen a similar image before, from a commentary, in a post by Nina. It takes ages for a diamond to form. I think these two images encourage us to be patient in our expectations about how long it will take until defilements are eradicated. On the other hand, as with many sutta, a beginner like myself could misunderstand "three types of persons" as pointing at some kind of stable character or individuality. I'm sure many beginners are misled, at least temporarily, when they approach the Suttanta Pitaka (usually through access to insight) without guidance from a teacher or commentary. And again it makes me grateful that I came across Abhidhamma - even a basic beginner's grasp of Abhidhamma helps one to understand suttas better. Metta, Phil 36818 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 4:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fellowship Hi Rob Forgot to mention yesterday that I felt mudita when reading about your Dhamma gathering. As you say, we feel "charged" after a "live" dhamma talk. I've only had that experience once, with Robert K. Hopefully I'll be meeting you in October, if our busy schedules work out. Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 6:44 AM Subject: [dsg] Fellowship > Hi All, > > About a year ago, my wife commented to a monk that Christians did a > much better job of promoting fellowship than Buddhists. My wife > noted that it was not uncommon for Christians to organize fellowship > meetings at people's houses (this in not uncommon in Malaysia, I > believe that it is less common among Christians in Western > countries). The monk suggested that we follow the Christians' > example and organize a fellowship meeting in our own home. The monk > even suggested a few names of lay Dhamma speakers. 36819 From: Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 5:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Nina, My main question about concept and realty is that kamma seems to be more realistic when it is discussed conventionally. Take beauty for example. As kamma result it can be either kusala or akusala, either a matter of wholesomeness or attachment. But beauty isn't just one flash of color. It is a complex formation. Strictly speaking any complex formation is a concept and a concept isn't a kamma result and concepts don't age or become disfigured. Additionally, beauty comes packaged in desirability. It seems to me this means beauty is "with roots" and the roots can be either kusala or akusala, inciting virtue or lust. Additionally, I think in some sense "kamma" = "sankhara". This whole round of existence is caused by desire, so that makes it all kamma result, even the desire. Even functional cittas, including an arahant's javana cittas. Btw, it is interesting that an arahant's javana cittas and an ordinary person's adverting consciousness have something in common. They are both functional. I wonder if adverting consciousness is what some people refer to in meditation as the "witness". Larry 36820 From: Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/23/04 8:12:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Btw, it is interesting that an arahant's javana cittas and an ordinary > person's adverting consciousness have something in common. They are both > functional. I wonder if adverting consciousness is what some people > refer to in meditation as the "witness". > ==================== I've always been unimpressed by that "witness" talk. I suspect that the so called witness is nothing other than our "old friend" Sense-of-Self disguised as something special when one thinks one is being "very spiritual" by meditating!! ;-)) 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) 36821 From: connieparker Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:01pm Subject: Re: the age of wisdom > Dear Connie & Nina, > Thanks for posting this. Connie, enjoy the rest of your 'understanding > decade';-). Thank you, Sarah. Still time (however uncertain the length) for tons of 'patience, courage and good cheer' given the part that says: "Even in one naturally weak in understanding some understanding, it seems, arises at that time." Even if it's only the smallest, most beginning understanding, it's better than leaving empty-handed... as the hand-out the Tibetans gave us last night on "Death and the Way" says: > --- connieparker wrote: > >> In the discussion on 'the material septad', ch. XX, >> 50: 2.(b) Having attributed the three characteristics according to >> 'disappearance of what grows old in each stage' thus by means of the >> first >> stage, etc., he again attributes the three characteristics according to >> 'disappearance of what grows old in each stage' by means of the >> following >> ten decades: the tender decade, the sport decade, the beauty decade, the >> strength decade, the understanding decade, the decline decade, the >> stooping decade, the bent decade, the dotage decade and the prone >> decade. > > ... Another one from the handout: > S: I'm glad that Nina encouraged us to read it not too literally, seeing > as I'm in decline and Jon's close to stooping;-) 'Never too late to > develop understanding' and what an inspiration she, K.Sujin and other > friends in later decades are. Nina, I laughed about your father at over > 100 and still not reclining. Good for him. For my mother's birthday, I > offered her a shawl of various colours and she said 'definitely not > black, > that's for old ladies'. She declined a bed jacket or shawl for the same > reason. LOL! What did she finally accept? My 'poor old mother' is in the middle of her stoop-age... guess that's why she ordered herself patio furniture for her recent birthday. Another friend said something to the effect that it's also "Never too early or too often for sati". A final couple of quotes from the Tibetans reinforcing that idea: and: Not to say I agree with what that 'practice' is supposed to be, but I'm still biting my tongue and looking for that slippery common ground rather than arguing, Nina! Actually, I just went back to one of our meetings last night after staying away for the last few weeks because of my foul attitude and lack of good-will. wishing everyone favorable exchange rates, connie 36822 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > AL: I am going to concede this point, it does not seem reasonable that > > practitioners will have *no* craving just by seeing the impermanence > > and selflessness of things, perhaps it means something different? > N: First wrong view has to go. Even when seeing it as anatta, there is still > craving arising. It is so deeply accumulated. Yes then which wrong view? When the Buddha said, "not depending on wrong views he dwells" what did he mean? To me it seems appropriate that he meant seeing impermanence, and this has been one of the immediate results of my practise. This could still work with your statement that craving has to be rooted out through further practises, however it seems you're still referring to another type of wrong view, I'm not sure which (couldn't be wrong view of self since that isnt eliminated until sotapanna state of mind). > AL: But this leaves me in a tizzy here because I've read in MN 130, Divine > > Messengers, that good people in this world, when warned by Divine > > Messengers, do not dwell in negligence, but practise well the noble > > dharma, and 'clinging they look upon with fear, for it produces birth > > and death.' Doesn't this suggest that clinging (and under it, > > craving) is dealt with at an earlier level, even before attainments, > > or could the passage just be taken literally that they look upon > > clinging with fear, until it is all eradicated? > N: They see the danger of craving, since it keeps us in the cycle. Yes, even > before any attainment. There are many levels of seeing the danger, also the > intellectual level. But it can condition a sense of urgency not to be > negligent. I like this sutta very much. > A:... I am still dwelling in negligence, and > > not one of those who practises well the noble dharma. .. Just a matter of when > I can > > establish myself in some stable meditation for appropriate > > reflection(s) and practise. > N: It helps to realize one's negligence as a conditioned dhamma. This is > better than thinking: when *shall* I... Can I quote some of it here? Something like, "but full many are the negligent, and people may sorrow long indeed once gone down to the lower world, but when in this world good people are warned by divine messengers, they do not dwell in negligence, but practise well the noble dharma." Well, I've seen the first divine messenger and I'm still in negligence. It doesn't have to stay like this though. I can still do good. >> He has right view, undistorted vision, thus: 'There is what is given > > and what is offered and what is sacrificed, and there is fruit and > > ripening of good and bad kammas, and there is this world and the other > > world and mother and father and spontaneously (born) beings, and good > > and virtuous monks and brahmans that have themselves realized by > > direct knowledge and declared this world and the other world.'< > > > > I don't think that any of the vipassana nanas are necessary to have > > this view, it was to householders after all. Do you propose that we > > can only come to this view, or at least a partial semblence of it, > > through the practise of dharma and gaining insight-knowledges? > N: Yes. And also householders can develop insight. Only when seeing dhamma > as dhamma one can grasp what kamma and vipaaka are, and have right view > about them as not self, not belonging to self. The Buddha spoke here in > conventional language about kamma and vipaaka and right view about them. > Take seeing now, that is vipaaka, but without the development of insight we > do not have right understanding of it as a conditioned nama. What do we know > about seeing without being aware of it right now? I will give you some ground on this because I've read in the Vyaggapajja Sutta, from a booklet I have entitled 'Buddhist Rules for the Laity,' the Buddha describes four principles to establish onesself in to come to success in the world beyond, and one of them, prudence, includes eliminating ignorance, attaining enlightenment, pondering over the skandhas, and viewing the world of formations as impermanent. (So it follows that he could prescribe the vipassana nanas for laity too). The question is, then, just how much of this right view is composed of insight-knowledges, and how much can be acquired through other means. You can't say the knowledge that there is what is given and what is offered or sacrificed comes about through the insight-knowledges, can you? So there has to be another way to acquire this right view. I won't say I know how to do it, but the same goes for view of mother and father, possibly that of there being this world and the next world. It seems there should be some kind of direct understanding or vision of things as they are. Possibly through dana we can get to our views and they would be more malleable, I don't really know. I just don't think it can all come about through the insight knowledges, and I don't want wrong view. Interestingly, in the Agganna Sutta, there is slightly different terminology used than we are used to, such as `Likewise, a Khattiya who has led a good life in body, speech, and thought, and who has right view will, in consequence of such right view and deeds, at the breaking up of the body after death, be reborn in a good destiny, in a heaven-state. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa or a Sudda. Just slightly different terminology than the Buddha usually uses. I'm not sure why, but I like these two passages as well: >`And a Khattiya who has performed deeds of both kinds in body, speech >and thought, and whose view is mixed will, in consequence of such >mixed views and deeds, at the breaking-up of the body after death, >experience both pleasure and pain. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa, or >a Sudda. I would say I have some kind of a mixed view right now. Knowledge of there being this world and the next, being sufficient to motivate me to do some acts of good. >`And a Khattiya who is restrained in Body, speech and thougth, and >who has developed the seven requisites of enlightenment, will attain >to parinirvana in this very life. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa, or >a Sudda. We all would do well to take this one as example of what to try to do. Boy, seven factors of enlightenment, ten perfections, four foundations of mindfulness, I'm not sure exactly what it will take to reach enlightenment. I'll take some solace in the fact that I've had a near-brush with the noble truths on one occasion and am still young yet with much more opportunity to practise. :) > A: And I do think that the Buddha made it very clear when he said "right > > view, undistorted vision," that it is plainly seeing reality, not > > intellectual knowledge. > N: Completely right. > AL: I would assert > > that some aspects of right view can be taken up just by staying > > present and trying to acquire vision of what really is,... (snipped) > ... So this right view is important, it's what motivates us > > to do actions > N: Correct. In the Vis study we saw examples how wrong view that there is no > result of bad actions motivates a lot of akusala kamma. > N: This includes the belief that after death there will not be rebirth. > Tiika: > .... Having rejected another world, he indulges with perverted mind in sense > pleasures since he thinks that there is no danger in them. > > N: The Tiika then explains the words of the Vis.: beginning with... and > gives examples of wrong conduct of someone who takes this for the way to > heaven and salvation. It speaks about the different kinds of akusala kamma > that someone may commit with wrong view.> My god... Soo.. how exactly is it expected that one comes to the view that there is the next world. Well, maybe the experience I had that brought me to believe in the next world isn't so unusual after all. > > AL: I don't know how knowledge or vision of > > spontaneously reappearing beings can come about. > N: These are results of kusala kamma in the form of birth as a deva. Also > rebirth in Hell is spontaneous. But the point is to consider this present > moment, the only way to have right view. Then we can read the suttas with > more understanding. The sutta you quoted above points to: right > understanding of kamma and vipaka. We should not be confused as to details > about father and mother, this is a way of explaining the truth of kamma and > vipaka by way of conventional language. Ahh but how do we come to the view that there is mother and father? Bare attention to the present moment? (I'm not discarding this possibility) And are you suggesting that insight into kamma and vipaka gives us knowledge and vision of spontaneously reborn beings? Because if not we still have an open question of how to resolve this basic wrong view. > N: My remark pertains to purification that can come about through rites and > rituals.. If this is present the other wrong views will not be eradicated, > no hope. We do not have to try to know all kinds of wrong view. Nina Ive got to disagree here, what youre saying implies that a great majority of the followers of the Buddha who were given directions on how to reach a heavenly rebirth had to be stream-enterers to acheive it. It can't be like that. There *were* some people the Buddha instructed to acheive a heavenly rebirth without making attainments on the path. He called it a 'heavenly abode'. And I even know, I have not eradicated wrong view of purification of rites and rituals, yet I know (through my own vision) there is the next world. > > A: I do need to > > recognize wrong views as they are present in my mind, don't I? ...Why else > did you list them in your book Abhidharma in Daily life if not so we can > recognize them? > N: It is good to know that there are many kinds of wrong views and that the > belief in self conditions them. But we cannot recognize each one of them, > because pañña should be very keen. Stages of insight again! My view, coming into this, was that knowledge of Abhidharma constitutes the third foundation of mindfulness, mindfulness of mind, that is, knowledge of the different types of consciousness that can arise and their concomittants. That is, all 89 of them. And recognizing wrong view when present. You are now saying that some degree of panna is necessary to see wrong views. This is fine, because I have seen at least one wrong view. But other than that I am not seeing what direction Abhidharma goes in if not to fit as the third foundation of mindfulness. Maybe you could give me an idea? > AL: I've > > been reading from a commentary to the Maha-Satipatthana sutta, I accept that > sati can come and go when conditions > > are right, but I think, for instance, that I can be intend to be more > > mindful of the posture of my body and its smaller movements and > > positionings, or I can meditate in a fashion where I can be heedful of > > the qualities of my mind. Please let me know what you guys view on > > this is so we can get some reconciliation going. > > Well then , What are the conditions . Can we cultivate them? > N: Study of the Dhamma so that we have at least intellectual correct > understanding, and also all kinds of kusala, so that we think less of self. > If you intend to meditate you could ask yourself: is there clinging to > result? So if I have this straight kusala conditions the arising of such beneficial qualities as sati, correct? > AL: >> When you speak words of appreciation to your parents with kusala > > citta, it > >> is a form of dana. At that moment the citta knows the benefit of kusala. > >> That is a level of straightening one's views. > > > AL: I will give you this. I was kind to my parents earlier today and I > > think it gave me the benefit of seeing my views that are in there, > > right, wrong, or whatever they are! Generosity indeed. Perhaps we > > can talk about that in another thread. > N: I appreciate this and I am really glad. Generosity, very important to > talk about this. > See what Phil wrote: > we don't see the value of dana and sila." (from "phrases" available > at http://www.zolag.co.uk/ . Nice material for reflection.) > It reminded me that with all my attachment to the idea of developing panna, > I don't yet understand the value of dana. .. At this point, I am quite > tied up in knots about seeing selfish motives behind much to do with > dana. > > Now you have more understanding than before of the citta, that it is citta > that is kind. This is the way to learn that there is no owner of kusala, > that it depends on the citta that arises because of conditions. Citta is a > dhamma. Evenso in the case of the brahmavihaaras, we can understand *our > own* (not really ours) citta, not someone else's citta. > A: But didn't you say in ADL that when we know the underlying tendencies > > of dosa or lobha when we get engaged in frivolous talk we can lessen > > them? Or something to that effect? Are you getting this? Why do I > > feel like I'm talking to a machine? > N: It is more like this: we know that akusala like frivolous talk is > conditioned by past accumulations, by the latent tendencies that are > accumulated. But sure, they can be weakened by the development of right > understanding together with all kinds of kusala. If they are not weakened, > how could lokuttara pannñaa eradicate them completely. It is a process going > on for countless aeons. As Azita says: patience, courage and good cheer, > Nina. I'm of the view that we can abstain outright from it, which the Buddha said is in itself wholesome. In the sutta on effacement, The Buddha said 'one given to idle chatter has abstention from idle chatter by which to avoid it' But that's just me. Peace, AL 36823 From: Antony Woods Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:28pm Subject: Anicca=inconstant rather than impermanent Dear Sarah and DSG, I found this quote helpful in understanding why anicca implies dukkha and anatta: metta / Antony. Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: "Anicca, the first of the three, is pivotal. Anicca applies to everything that changes. Often translated as "impermanent," it's actually the negative of nicca, which means constant or dependable. Everything that changes is inconstant. Now, the difference between "impermanent" and "inconstant" may seem semantic, but it's crucial to the way anicca functions in the Buddha's teachings. As the early texts state repeatedly, if something is anicca then the other two characteristics automatically follow: it's dukkha (stressful) and anatta (not-self), i.e., not worthy to be claimed as me or mine. If we translate anicca as impermanent, the connection among these Three Characteristics might seem debatable. But if we translate it as inconstant, and consider the Three Characteristics in light of the Buddha's original question, the connection is clear. If you're seeking a dependable basis for long-term happiness and ease, anything inconstant is obviously a stressful place to pin your hopes -- like trying to relax in an unstable chair whose legs are liable to break at any time. If you understand that your sense of self is something willed and fabricated -- that you choose to create it -- there's no compelling reason to keep creating a "me" or "mine" around any experience that's inconstant and stressful. You want something better. You don't want to make that experience the goal of your practice. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/change.html 36824 From: antony272b2 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] most moving Buddha quote Dear Sarah, Context of this message attached. Here a definition of the word martyr a friend sent me: 2 : a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle Doesn't this monk sacrifice what for him are incredibly attractive sense-pleasures and surrender his life to the Buddha? I'll address your other points on dana and Anuradha sutta in another post. Thankyou for helping me with my Dhamma studies! metta / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Antony & Phil, > > Antony's post with the helpful quote is very timely as it neatly > addresses some comments I was planning to make in reply to a great post of > Phil's (on the topic of eradicating defilements #36465). > > --- Antony Woods wrote: > <...> > >Even though touched with pain & grief, > > weeping with tearful face, he lives the holy life that is > > utterly perfect, surpassingly pure. With the break-up of the body, after > death, he reappears in the good bourn, the heavenly world. > > This is called the taking on of a practice that is painful in the > > present but yields happiness in the future. > > > > Translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu adapted by Antony Woods > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn045.html > > > A: > Comment: I find this one of the most moving paragraphs in the Pali > Canon. > .... > S: This is followed by the example of the one who doesn't have strong > lust etc. > > I think the point is that what is of most importance is the living of the > `holy life', in other words, the development of wisdom which understands > dhammas as they are at this very moment -- conditioned, unalterable, > impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self. .... > A: > Maybe I identify with this monk as a martyr who is missing out on > having > > a good time and grieving in such a way that is healthy and beneficial. > > Normally people are supposed to be ashamed of their suffering. > ... > S: I don't think any `grieving' is ever `healthy and beneficial' as it's > always rooted in dosa (aversion) and follows as a result of the passion, > aversion and delusion. But as you suggest, being `ashamed' as we usually > use this word is useless as it just adds more aversion as Phil pointed > out before. When there is understanding, there is acceptance and > detachment and no idea of these being `my' states. If we have an idea of > any kind of martyrdom or torment as being noble in any way, I think we're > in danger of slipping into the second group who practice `torment' and > ascetic practices whicharen't healthy in any way. 36825 From: antony272b2 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:05pm Subject: Tathagata elsewhere than 5 aggregates? "No, lord"? Dear Sarah and DSG, Context below. I apologise for suggesting replacing "Tathagata" with "Antony" as the logic remains the same. On other lists I actually altered the sacred scriptures to support my analogy and I will exercise restraint in the future and put my argument into my own words. My point was that the logic that the Tathagata cannot be described as existing or not-existing after death can also be applied to ordinary worldlings because "we" cannot be found either in the five aggregates or outside of the five aggregates so cannot be "pinned down" even in this life, let alone after death, and the teaching of the Tathagata is just about dukkha and its cessation and not about the "self". However I do have saddha that rebirth is a reality, it's just that I found this sutta profound in that it is not a self that is reborn. Today I'm thinking that the logic is not as simple as I thought. The Buddha asks and I quote: "Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?" "No, lord." ------ I notice a tendency in myself to believe that there is a soul or a true self that is outside of the five aggregates. Obviously I haven't understood the all-encompassing comprehensive coverage of the five aggregates. I realise that this is a heretical view (I remember I quoted Ajahn Sumedho once and a friend didn't like the phrase "But that's not what Buddha meant" after the phrase "If you get a hard core Theravadin monk talking they make (Nibbana) sound like annihilation - no self, no soul, no God - a dreary kind of atheism". I ask your forgiveness for airing this lack of understanding. Maybe I fantasise about the Buddha being a whole that is more than the sum of its parts i.e. by dissecting him into five aggregates you lose the profound meaning of his presence. Thanks for taking the time to read and reply to my messages with their delusions and incorrectness. with metta / Antony. Sarah wrote: > So let me sign off with part of another wonderful sutta Antony quoted > which reminds us that even the Tathagata is a concept. > > Metta, > > Sarah > > Antony:<....> > "How do you construe this, Anuradha: Do you regard the Tathagata as being > in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than > feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In > fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?... > Elsewhere than consciousness?" > > "No, lord." > > "How do you construe this: Do you regard the Tathagata as > form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?" > > "No, lord." > > "Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without > feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?" > > "No, lord." > > "And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or > reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare, > 'Friends, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer > of the superlative attainment -- being described, is described otherwise > than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not > exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists > nor does not exist after death'?" > > "No, lord." > > "Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only stress > that I describe, and the cessation of stress." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-086.html > ========================== 36826 From: robmoult Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:26pm Subject: Kalaka Sutta (AN IV.24) Hi Howard and All, Howard, I seem to have the idea that you recently gave a talk on the Kalaka Sutta at your local Buddhist group: The Blessed One said: "Monks, whatever in the cosmos -- with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & priests royalty & common people -- is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. Whatever in the cosmos -- with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & priests, their royalty & common people -- is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That has been realized by the Tathagata, but in the Tathagata it has not been established. Does the commentary interpret this as meaning that the Buddha was claiming omniscence or rather is the Buddha claiming that he knows the nature of "whatever in the cosmos..."? Metta, Rob M :-) 36827 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma Hi Herman, thanks for your interest. I type it out. op 23-09-2004 00:03 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofman@t...: > Would somebody be kind enough to post me a link to A ii 245? Grad. s. Book of the Fours,Ch 25, § 6 Growth in Wisdom Rob K, Mike and I translated this sutta from Pali with Jim. Mike had the best one. Nina. 36828 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Paying respect. Hello Phil, op 23-09-2004 13:39 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: It is the Dhamma that counts, not the > persons >> by means of whom you come into contact with the Dhamma. > > Ph: I think so too. Thus I am sometimes uncomfortable with the way dana is > practiced > towards clergy in Asia. There is a sense that they are more worth of Dana by > the virtue > of their status - there are those teachings about the value of dana > depending on the value of > the person who receives it. N: It is more complex. The monks are dependent on laypeople as regards the requisites. Moreover, the status of monk is higher than the status of laypeople. They have to observe many rules. The giver: he should not cling to an idea of gaining more merit for himself when he gives to a more worthy person. The Buddha explained that the kusala kamma is greater, but we should not cling and give whenever there is an opportunity and when it is fitting. > PH: : But if a lot of people learn from you, doesn't that make you a teacher? N: Kh Sujin said: I am your good friend in Dhamma. But since people in Thailand insist calling her achaan, teacher, she does not object. It is so much in the tradition. Dhamma friend is better than teacher. > p.s thanks also for all feedback in other threads that i haven't responded > too. N: You are welcome, but no need to answer. I just try to add something here and there since cetasikas is a study corner. Sarah posts sections and people may need additional explanations. Nina. 36829 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 069 ) & Explanation Dear Htoo, thank you, useful Pali explanations. I jotted them down, I will need them later on. Thank you also for the other threads. Nina. op 23-09-2004 14:32 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> It is said that 'itthamekuuna navuti pabhedam pana maanasam. > Ekaviisa satamvaatha, vibhajanti vicakkhanaa'. Those who are wise > also critically count cittas as 121 cittas ( eka visa satam_1, 20, > 100 = 121 cittas in total ). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 36830 From: Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 9:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Howard, H: "I've always been unimpressed by that "witness" talk. I suspect that the so called witness is nothing other than our "old friend" Sense-of-Self disguised as something special when one thinks one is being "very spiritual" by meditating!! ;-))" L: I think the point is what the witness (and possibly adverting consciousness) is _not_. It is not a resultant consciousness of rupa and it is not a root consciousness. In that sense it could be considered to be pure awareness. Is that what you mean by "very spiritual"? I agree though that it can be an object of attachment, or at least the idea of it could be an object of attachment. Larry 36832 From: Antony Woods Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:06pm Subject: Dana: samsara is not "business as usual" Dear Sarah, Context of message attached below. I think there is some need for privacy and being discreet in performing dana with non-Buddhist parents who have little faith in the Dhamma. In the long run I have never regretted the dana that I have performed in the past, despite family opposition, it is just this time that I felt guilty though now I am looking forward to when the cheque clears. I am realising that life in samsara is never "business as usual" as one of life's imponderables that alone give life meaning is whether or how much to give as dana. It is not enough to not give dana and just bequest "dana" in one's will after death. The opportunities to give dana are impermanent - in one case the Buddhadhamma Foundation in Bangkok ceased publishing English books - and there are people who need money now whereas in five years time they may be prosperous and it is too late to be of help. I draw on the tradition in Australia of tithing 10% of my income to my religion. I am a disability pensioner so this is not that much although it sounds like a lot of money. I'm realising that monetary dana alone will not be sufficient to gain a heavenly rebirth with sotapanna teachers and an easy path to Nibbana. I need to rehabilitate myself so that I can take financial responsibility for myself, take risks and work in a beneficial profession at the same time. Thanks for taking the time to read my messages and for your support in my Dhamma practice. Metta, Antony ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: >I particularly appreciated your honesty in a message I read when you said, >‘I am deluded in thinking that the quality of making merit equates with ME >feeling good rather than focusing on the benefit of others’. As Phil has >commented before here, we cannot perform all the kind acts we’d like >because of financial constraints and because we have to consider family >views and concerns. I think this is the right attitude. If one’s deeds are >at the expense of family unhappiness or if they lead to secrecy or a lack >of respect for the different views of others, then we need to pause and >reflect, I think. > >We can find other ways to help or show kindness that are acceptable to >those around us and which don’t involve secrecy or possible dismay. They >don’t need to cost money and may just be the appreciation of others’ kind >deeds, for example. If we are performing good deeds in order to be a good >person, there is no development of understanding with detachment from the >presently arising states as you hinted at so well in your ME comment. > >Metta, > >Sarah >===== 36833 From: antony272b2 Date: Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg]2 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Dear Herman, Rob K and all, Excuse me for posting without reading the whole thread. To summarise, I would say as a Buddhist that there is evidence that the Buddha taught rebirth, and there is evidence that the Buddha was wise. Although as I commentate below the Tathagata is a concept which cannot be found within or elsewhere of the five aggregates. It seems absurd that Adolf Hitler passed away peacefully into nothingness. Just my two cents. Antony. PS Here is my commentary on the profound Anuradha Sutta on rebirth: > My point was that the logic that the Tathagata cannot be described as > existing or not-existing after death can also be applied to ordinary > worldlings because "we" cannot be found either in the five aggregates > or outside of the five aggregates so cannot be "pinned down" even in > this life, let alone after death, and the teaching of the Tathagata > is just about dukkha and its cessation and not about the "self". > However I do have saddha that rebirth is a reality, it's just that I > found this sutta profound in that it is not a self that is reborn. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/36825 36834 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dana: samsara is not "business as usual" Dear Antony & Phil, I’ve been considering this topic today as well so I’d like to add a couple more comments even though I wasn’t planning to post for a couple of days to attend to other neglected chores;-) --- Antony Woods wrote: > I think there is some need for privacy and being discreet in performing > dana > with > non-Buddhist parents who have little faith in the Dhamma. .... S: I agree with this. .... > In the long run I have never regretted the dana that I have performed in > the > past, > despite family opposition, it is just this time that I felt guilty > though now I am looking forward to when the cheque clears. .... S: I greatly appreciate your strong confidence in the value of dana and your example. For myself, I’ve often reflected on and been reminded by the passage Phil quoted from K.Sujin’ s book in message 36707 concerning whether there will be more kusala or akusala cittas as a result. In other words, generally speaking, if our kind deed is likely to lead to a lot of guilt and regret, we should consider other ways of assistance. A classic example for me, which I’m always reminded of by the watch in the example Phil quoted, is when I was living in a temple in Sri Lanka 30 years ago. I just had one very simple small bag of all my worldly possessions at this time. The temple had a clock stolen and there was a lot of unhappiness about it amongst the female temple assistants. I still had a rather precious watch I’d been given the year before by my ‘godfather’ as a 21st present (remember the days when a watch was a ‘for life’ gift?). I promptly donated my watch to the temple to bring a little joy for those who were distressed. Of course it was a rather special one by Sri Lankan standards and everyone was happy. When I eventually returned to England, no one minded that everything else had been given away, but the donation of the watch caused a lot of misery to my family who couldn’t understand it at all. They were really worried about my godfather finding out and so on as he inevitably did when he visited me. As a consequence, I had a lot of regret (and still some which is why it still comes to mind!!). It was a good lesson for me on what K.Sujin was referring to. I'm not so far along the path in this regard at all, but better to know, I think;-). My accumulations are therefore not yours or Phil’s and I prefer to find ways of showing kindness or dana that won’t condition dismay for those I’m living with, especially if I’m under their care. This is because I know that for me, this will lead to regret or remorse on my part. Phil mentioned before that he had thought of making a particular donation, but he knew his wife wouldn’t be happy and so he makes his wonderful ‘donations’ and gives his assistance on list instead. Even with time for dhamma activities, I like to consider Jonothan’s interests or if my mother is with me, consider her interests for example and not over-stretch others’ patience so that I can ‘perform dana’. Antony, your kind deed was done and I’m very happy that you now feel joy in it after a few pangs of concern. Anumodana. I believe there’s also a difference between discretion as you mention and secrecy. Our lives should be like ‘open books’ , but this doesn’t mean we flaunt kind acts that others won’t rejoice in. i’m sure your kindnesses will bring much joy to those who benefit. ..... > I am realising that life in samsara is never "business as usual" as one > of > life's > imponderables that alone give life meaning is whether or how much to > give as > dana. > It is not enough to not give dana and just bequest "dana" in one's will > after death. ... S: I agree. This is not really dana. ... > The opportunities to give dana are impermanent ... S: Yes, excellent. You’re very unusual in your strong confidence and appreciation of the value. .... >I'm realising that monetary dana alone will not be > sufficient > to gain a heavenly rebirth with sotapanna teachers and an easy path to > Nibbana. ... S: Ah, I don’t think this should be the concern. If our motive for giving is tied up for a wish for ‘a heavenly rebirth with sotapanna teachers....’ in anyway, it definitely will detract from the value of the dana. I remember even after I returned from the Sri Lankan temple and started earning a modest salary, that I still had a bit of the idea that I should give away any possessions and so on. There’s a fine line between giving naturally because one appreciates the opportunity and value in it and thinking of oneself, of one’s rebirth or wishing to be the one without possessions for any reason. For example, we may think we have less attachment if we have no money or possessions, but of course this is quite wrong. Attachment can never be measured by the outer appearances like this. So Phil, knowing whether there is more kusala or akusala involved can be taken simply reflecting on whether it’s wise to give at that time or deeply, understanding more about present cittas that arise. In any case, any dana depends on conditions, no self again. Once more, understanding is the key so that it’s not clung to or taken as self who gives in anyway. .... > I need to rehabilitate myself so that I can take financial > responsibility > for > myself, take risks and work in a beneficial profession at the same time. .... Antony, best wishes for this. Your accumulations for generosity give you a very good incentive for doing this. I wish you well with this. However life works out for us, however, there will always be opportunities for one kind of dana or other and of course for more understanding and other wholesome qualities like metta too. Perhaps when we next visit Sydney we’ll have a chance to meet you. ... > Thanks for taking the time to read my messages and for your support in > my > Dhamma > practice. ... S: Likewise. Thank you for your encouragement for dana also. Please kindly share your further comments on what I've written here. I think it's a good topic to discuss further and one that hasn't been discussed enough on DSG. Metta, Sarah p.s I haven’t read your other posts carefully yet. Pls know that I’m usually anything from a few days to a few weeks behind with replies but I always appreciate your contributions. Briefly though, I quite understood your use of your name to replace ‘Tathagata’ and the logic worked very well for me. They were good points and nothing to apologise for. I liked your post a lot which is why I requoted part of the sutta. ================================ 36835 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:43am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner19-Contact /Phassa(e) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.1, Contact (Phassa)contd] ***** In the planes of existence where there are nama and rupa, cittas have a physical base or place of origin, the vatthu (1). The vatthu is rupa. In the case of the 'panca-vinnanas' (seeing, hearing, etc.) the vatthus are the 'pasada-rupas' (the rupas which are capable of receiving visible object, sound, etc.). ln the case of the panca-vinnanas the pasada-rupa functions as both vatthu and doorway, 'dvara'. For example, the rupa which is eye-sense (cakkhuppasada-rupa) is both doorway and vatthu for seeing-consciousness. Although it is one and the same rupa, the function of dvara and vatthu are different. The dvara is the means through which citta experiences an object, and the vatthu is the physical base for the citta. Only for the panca-vinnanas are the dvara and the vatthu one and the same rupa. For the other cittas of the sense-door process the dvara and the vatthu are different rupas; they have as their vatthu another kind of rupa which is in the commentaries called the 'heart-base' (hadaya-vatthu) (2). The cittas which arise in the mind-door process also have as their vatthu the 'heart-base'. The vatthu is the physical base not only of citta, but also of the cetasikas which accompany the citta. When seeing-consciousness arises at the eye-base (cakkhu-vatthu), phassa and the other cetasikas which accompany seeing-consciousness arise also at the eye-base. Thus, citta and the accompanying cetasikas arise together at the same vatthu; they share the same object and they fall away together. ..... (1) Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 17. (2) Ibidem. it is the material support for all cittas other than the panca-vinnanas.There is no need to specify its exact location. ***** [Contact (Phassa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 36836 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner18-Contact /Phassa(d) Dear Htoo & All, Thx for your encouragement and for kindly including me in your other posts. I hope to give more feedback and discuss further soon - probably Monday unless other posts jump the queue;-) --- htootintnaing wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > It is good to go slow. I would write in small paragraphs rather than > long and confusing, idea-losing paragraphs. ... S: Yes, it was a little experimental at first. I decided it would work better to do a little every day than a big slab every few days for this. It has meant that (with Nina's permission) I've had to break up some paragraphs for easier reading on line. I'm also trying to pick up typos and re-arrange footnotes as I go, but there may still be errors as I'm doing it quickly. If I'm too busy, like last weekend, I just leave it. it's not as if the list is starved for abhidhamma these days, thx to you, RobM and many others;-). .... > You will see when I write > I just use 4 or 5 sentences for a paragraph. I like the style now you > are presenting about Nina's Ceatsikas book. ... S: Thanks again. Sometimes the sections (like the one I just posted may still be a little too long or much to digest for one 'meal', but if I start a new 'meal' with 'vatthu', for example, it'll be even harder for some to digest, so i have to look ahead a little. Now, I admire all the work and time Larry has put into leading his various study corners so adeptly. As I say, I'm still learning. Metta, Sarah p.s. 16th October for two weeks, I won't be giving installments. Either everyone can enjoy a rest or anyone else is most welcome to give them, with no need to do it my way at all. In fact, if anyone would like to take over anytime, that's also fine, though I'm also happy to continue on return if not. =================== 36837 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:56am Subject: RE: [dsg]2 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Hi RobK, Thanks again. And if you feel inclined, please keep it coming :-) ============= R > Staying with the kalama/kesaputta sutta: In this section the Buddha said "When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" -- then you should enter & remain in them.' Thus was it said"" endquote. Now in regard to the belief in kamma and rebirth I think we can be sure that "it is praised by the wise". This is because in so many suttas the Buddha [ a wise being indeed]spoke about rebirth and kamma and also spoke about teh dangers of holding the view that there was no rebirth: ========= H > So far, no problem. ========= R > ""Householders, those recluses and brahmins who have this view and declare there are no results for gifts, offerings, or sacrifices. There are no results for good and bad actions, there is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father. ======== H > I wonder why all these are thrown together? What I specifically do not believe is that there is a causal nexus between the death of this, my body and the coming to be of another being in a next moment. That doesn't mean I don't believe there are no results for good and bad actions, because that is blatantly obvious. I also do have a mother, father, all in this world. But when this body dies, so does everything else that goes with it, including any consciousness. That's the end, finished, kaput!!! I see no need for an unobvious afterlife or other continuity after death to explain the obvious functionality, here and now, of sound moral behaviour. Kind Regards Herman 36838 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:17am Subject: RE: [dsg]2 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma Hi Antony, Thanks for coming in on this thread. I always appreciate your posts. ======== A > To summarise, I would say as a Buddhist that there is evidence that the Buddha taught rebirth, and there is evidence that the Buddha was wise. Although as I commentate below the Tathagata is a concept which cannot be found within or elsewhere of the five aggregates. ======== H > I agree with you wholeheartedly. From the canon, it is an inescapable conclusion that the Buddha taught rebirth. And wise he was, for sure. And there is no paramattha dhamma known as Tathagata. ======== A >It seems absurd that Adolf Hitler passed away peacefully into nothingness. ======== H > Even more absurd, to me, is that Adolf Hitler, or any other being, should arise, come into being, whatever. Hitler himself probably harmed few people directly. It is very scary, however, how the human pack-mentality can unfold. On the barking of a single command, the faithful go a-hunting. I see no principle of justice operating in the universe, just probabilistic conditionality/causation. There is no goal, other than the self-imposed ones. Palliative care is the best one can do. Kind Regards Herman 36839 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:32am Subject: RE: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma Hi Nina, === Hi Herman, thanks for your interest. I type it out. op 23-09-2004 00:03 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofman@t...: > Would somebody be kind enough to post me a link to A ii 245? Grad. s. Book of the Fours,Ch 25, § 6 Growth in Wisdom Rob K, Mike and I translated this sutta from Pali with Jim. Mike had the best one. ======= Thank you, van harte, Nina Kind Regards Herman 36840 From: robmoult Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 4:06am Subject: Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Ken H, A while back, I asked for references from the original Abhidhamma which talked about realities. I was pointed to the opening section of the Dhammasangani. Let us consider this text in more detail: Book I The Uprising of Thoughts (cittupppada-kandam) Part I Good States of Consciousness Chapter I The Eight Main Types of Thought relating to the Sensuous Universe (kamavacara-attha-mahacittani) Part I [1] Which are the states that are good? (katame dhamma kusala) When a good thought concerning the sensuous universe has arisen, which is accompanied by gladness and associated with knowledge and has as its object a sight, a sound, a taste, a touch, a mental state or what not, then there is: (i) contact (phasso) (ii) feeling (vedana) (iii) perception (sanna) (iv) volition (cetana) (v) thought (cittam) (vi) application (vitakko) (vii) sustained thinking (vicaro) (viii) zest (piti) (ix) ease (sukham) (x) self-collectedness (cittass'ekaggata) (xi) the faculty of faith (saddhindriyam) (xii) the faculty of energy (viriyindriyam) (xiii) the faculty of mindfulness (satindriyam) (xiv) the faculty of concentration (samadhindriyam) (xv) the faculty of insight (pannindriyam) (xvi) the faculty of ideation (manindriyam) (xvii) the faculty of gladness (somanassondriyam) (xviii) the faculty of life (jivitindriyam) (xix) right views (samma-ditthi) (xx) right intention (samma-sankappo) (xxi) right endeavour (samma-vayamo) (xxii) right mindfulness (sammasati) (xxiii) right concentration (sammasamadhi) (xxiv) the power of faith (saddhabalam) (xxv) the power of energy (viriyabalam) (xxvi) the power of mindfulness (satibalam) (xxvii) the power of concentration (samadhibalam) (xxviii) the power of insight (pannabalam) (xxix) the power of conscientiousness (hiribalam) (xxx) the power of the fear of blame (ottappabalam) (xxxi) absence of greed (alobho) (xxxii) absence of hate (adoso) (xxxiii) absence of dullness (amoho) (xxxiv) absence of covetousness (anabhijjha) (xxxv) absence of malice (avyapado) (xxxvi) right views (sammaditthi) (xxxvii) conscientiousness (hiri) (xxxviii) fear of blame (ottappam) (xxxix) serenity in mind (cittapassaddhi) (xl) serenity of mental factors (kayapassaddhi) (xli) lightness in mind (cittalahuta) (xlii) lightness in mental factors (kayalahuta) (xliii) plasticity in mind (cittamuduta) (xliv) plasticity in mental factors (kayamuduta) (xlv) facility in mind (cittakammannata) (xlvi) facility in mental factors (kayakammannata) (xlvii) fitness in mind (cittapugunnata) (xlviii) fitness in mental factors (kayapagunnata) (xlix) directness in mind (cittujjukata) (l) directness in mental factors (kayujjukata) (li) mindfulness (sati) (lii) intelligence (sampajannam) (liii) quiet (samatho) (liv) intuition (vipassana) (lv) grasp (paggaho) (lvi) balance (avikkhepo) Now these – or whatever other incorporeal, causally induced state there are on that occasion – these are the states that are good. Most people, when they say that they study the Abhidhamma mean that they study the Abhidhammatthasangaha. Let us compare this list from the original Abhidhamma with what was presented 1500 years later in the Abhidhammatthasangaha. The original Abhidhamma presents an open-ended list whereas the Abhidhammatthasangaha presents a fixed, closed list. Abhidhammatthasangaha includes the cetasikas of chanda, adhimokkha, manasikara, tatramajjhattata, karuna, mudita, abstinence of wrong speech, abstinence of wrong action, abstinence of wrong livelihood. These are not included in the original Abhidhamma. The list in the original Abhidhamma includes feeling (vedana) as well as ease (sukkham) and pleasure (somanassindriyam); the Abhidhammatthasangaha considers ease and pleasure as types of feeling, not distinct states. The list in the original Abhidhamma includes faculty of insight (xv - pannindriyam), right views (xix - samma-ditthi), power of insight (xxviii - pannabalam), absence of dullness (xxxiii - amoho), a second aspect of right views (xxxvi - samma-ditthi), intelligence (lii – sampajannam) and intuition (liv – vipassana) as seven distinct states, the Abhidhammatthasangaha groups them all as one state, panna. [the original Abhidhamma includes repetition of many other states as well]. The original Abhidhamma lists "states" (dhamma in Pali). The term "dhamma" is used to represent all sorts of things and some people have said that they understand in the context of the original Abhidhamma, "dhamma" means "realities". I certainly agree that the idea of realities is core to the Abhidhammatthasangaha, but I believe that this is a later, "added on" interpretation not intended in the original Abhidhamma. If the author of the original Abhidhamma meant "realities", why did He use such a generic term such as "dhamma" rather than a word that specifically mean realities or "things which exist"? If the author of the original Abhidhamma meant "realities", why did he leave the list open-ended? Why did He not include the other nine cetasikas which ended up in the Abhidhammatthasangaha? Why did He list ease and pleasure as ultimate realities when they are types of feeling? Why was He so repetitive (i.e. repeating different aspects of panna seven times in the original list)? I take the list of the original Abhidhamma at face value; presenting different aspects of a good state of mind. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one recognize a good state of mind when one arises. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one understand the nature and characteristics of good states of minds. In my opinion, taking the components listed as a list of "ultimate realities" is reading into the list something that the original author did not intend. I am hoping that somebody can present an alternate viewpoint that can help me to accept that, in the context of this list, interpreting "dhamma" as "ultimate reality" is a reasonable assumption. Metta, Rob M :-) 36841 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 4:52am Subject: RE: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Dear RobM and RobK and all, Warning!!! Controversial reply. Thank you both for being factual. As RobM's says, the Abhidhammatthasangaha is not just a compendium of Abhidhamma, it puts forward ideas markedly different from its alleged source. Hence, the student of the Abhidhammatthasangaha is only remotely a student of the Abhidhamma, which is only remotely connected to the words of the Buddha. In the case of RobK, he has recently quoted many texts which in a climate of gender equality are very controversial to say the least. My gratitude is because matters of textual integrity have been given air by insiders. I appreciate these posts from the inside, because I know that before one is free from the bondage of views, one needs to know the difference between belief, fact and reality. I stopped being a minister a long time ago, but here I am preaching, yet again :-) Sorry. Kind Regards Herman Hi Ken H, A while back, I asked for references from the original Abhidhamma which talked about realities. I was pointed to the opening section of the Dhammasangani. Let us consider this text in more detail: Book I The Uprising of Thoughts (cittupppada-kandam) Part I Good States of Consciousness Chapter I The Eight Main Types of Thought relating to the Sensuous Universe (kamavacara-attha-mahacittani) Part I [1] Which are the states that are good? (katame dhamma kusala) When a good thought concerning the sensuous universe has arisen, which is accompanied by gladness and associated with knowledge and has as its object a sight, a sound, a taste, a touch, a mental state or what not, then there is: (i) contact (phasso) (ii) feeling (vedana) (iii) perception (sanna) (iv) volition (cetana) (v) thought (cittam) (vi) application (vitakko) (vii) sustained thinking (vicaro) (viii) zest (piti) (ix) ease (sukham) (x) self-collectedness (cittass'ekaggata) (xi) the faculty of faith (saddhindriyam) (xii) the faculty of energy (viriyindriyam) (xiii) the faculty of mindfulness (satindriyam) (xiv) the faculty of concentration (samadhindriyam) (xv) the faculty of insight (pannindriyam) (xvi) the faculty of ideation (manindriyam) (xvii) the faculty of gladness (somanassondriyam) (xviii) the faculty of life (jivitindriyam) (xix) right views (samma-ditthi) (xx) right intention (samma-sankappo) (xxi) right endeavour (samma-vayamo) (xxii) right mindfulness (sammasati) (xxiii) right concentration (sammasamadhi) (xxiv) the power of faith (saddhabalam) (xxv) the power of energy (viriyabalam) (xxvi) the power of mindfulness (satibalam) (xxvii) the power of concentration (samadhibalam) (xxviii) the power of insight (pannabalam) (xxix) the power of conscientiousness (hiribalam) (xxx) the power of the fear of blame (ottappabalam) (xxxi) absence of greed (alobho) (xxxii) absence of hate (adoso) (xxxiii) absence of dullness (amoho) (xxxiv) absence of covetousness (anabhijjha) (xxxv) absence of malice (avyapado) (xxxvi) right views (sammaditthi) (xxxvii) conscientiousness (hiri) (xxxviii) fear of blame (ottappam) (xxxix) serenity in mind (cittapassaddhi) (xl) serenity of mental factors (kayapassaddhi) (xli) lightness in mind (cittalahuta) (xlii) lightness in mental factors (kayalahuta) (xliii) plasticity in mind (cittamuduta) (xliv) plasticity in mental factors (kayamuduta) (xlv) facility in mind (cittakammannata) (xlvi) facility in mental factors (kayakammannata) (xlvii) fitness in mind (cittapugunnata) (xlviii) fitness in mental factors (kayapagunnata) (xlix) directness in mind (cittujjukata) (l) directness in mental factors (kayujjukata) (li) mindfulness (sati) (lii) intelligence (sampajannam) (liii) quiet (samatho) (liv) intuition (vipassana) (lv) grasp (paggaho) (lvi) balance (avikkhepo) Now these - or whatever other incorporeal, causally induced state there are on that occasion - these are the states that are good. Most people, when they say that they study the Abhidhamma mean that they study the Abhidhammatthasangaha. Let us compare this list from the original Abhidhamma with what was presented 1500 years later in the Abhidhammatthasangaha. The original Abhidhamma presents an open-ended list whereas the Abhidhammatthasangaha presents a fixed, closed list. Abhidhammatthasangaha includes the cetasikas of chanda, adhimokkha, manasikara, tatramajjhattata, karuna, mudita, abstinence of wrong speech, abstinence of wrong action, abstinence of wrong livelihood. These are not included in the original Abhidhamma. The list in the original Abhidhamma includes feeling (vedana) as well as ease (sukkham) and pleasure (somanassindriyam); the Abhidhammatthasangaha considers ease and pleasure as types of feeling, not distinct states. The list in the original Abhidhamma includes faculty of insight (xv - pannindriyam), right views (xix - samma-ditthi), power of insight (xxviii - pannabalam), absence of dullness (xxxiii - amoho), a second aspect of right views (xxxvi - samma-ditthi), intelligence (lii - sampajannam) and intuition (liv - vipassana) as seven distinct states, the Abhidhammatthasangaha groups them all as one state, panna. [the original Abhidhamma includes repetition of many other states as well]. The original Abhidhamma lists "states" (dhamma in Pali). The term "dhamma" is used to represent all sorts of things and some people have said that they understand in the context of the original Abhidhamma, "dhamma" means "realities". I certainly agree that the idea of realities is core to the Abhidhammatthasangaha, but I believe that this is a later, "added on" interpretation not intended in the original Abhidhamma. If the author of the original Abhidhamma meant "realities", why did He use such a generic term such as "dhamma" rather than a word that specifically mean realities or "things which exist"? If the author of the original Abhidhamma meant "realities", why did he leave the list open-ended? Why did He not include the other nine cetasikas which ended up in the Abhidhammatthasangaha? Why did He list ease and pleasure as ultimate realities when they are types of feeling? Why was He so repetitive (i.e. repeating different aspects of panna seven times in the original list)? I take the list of the original Abhidhamma at face value; presenting different aspects of a good state of mind. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one recognize a good state of mind when one arises. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one understand the nature and characteristics of good states of minds. In my opinion, taking the components listed as a list of "ultimate realities" is reading into the list something that the original author did not intend. I am hoping that somebody can present an alternate viewpoint that can help me to accept that, in the context of this list, interpreting "dhamma" as "ultimate reality" is a reasonable assumption. Metta, Rob M :-) 36842 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:02am Subject: RE: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi all, I just realized I did RobK a gross injustice. I have no basis for implying that he is commenting on the structural integrity of the texts. Sorry. Herman Dear RobM and RobK and all, Warning!!! Controversial reply. Thank you both for being factual. As RobM's says, the Abhidhammatthasangaha is not just a compendium of Abhidhamma, it puts forward ideas markedly different from its alleged source. Hence, the student of the Abhidhammatthasangaha is only remotely a student of the Abhidhamma, which is only remotely connected to the words of the Buddha. In the case of RobK, he has recently quoted many texts which in a climate of gender equality are very controversial to say the least. My gratitude is because matters of textual integrity have been given air by insiders. I appreciate these posts from the inside, because I know that before one is free from the bondage of views, one needs to know the difference between belief, fact and reality. I stopped being a minister a long time ago, but here I am preaching, yet again :-) Sorry. Kind Regards Herman 36843 From: robmoult Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Dear RobM and RobK and all, > > Warning!!! Controversial reply. > > > Thank you both for being factual. > > As RobM's says, the Abhidhammatthasangaha is not just a compendium of > Abhidhamma, it puts forward ideas markedly different from its alleged > source. Hence, the student of the Abhidhammatthasangaha is only remotely > a student of the Abhidhamma, which is only remotely connected to the > words of the Buddha. > ===== Your qualifiers make me wince... "markedly different"... "alleged source"... "remotely a student of the Abhidhamma"... "remotely connected to the words of the Buddha"? You are certainly reading more into my message than I had intended. I feel that the Abhidhammatthasangaha has a different emphasis than the original, but this does not make it "markedly different". I feel that a student of the Abhidhamma should start with the Abhidhammatthasangaha (that is why it was written, as an introductory manual), but once a degree of familiarity is obtained, one should move on to the original texts. I feel that the Abhidhamma is a complementary way of presenting the words of the Buddha as found in the Suttas. Sorry, Herman, perhaps I am not as much a rebel as you first imagined! :-) :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 36844 From: agriosinski Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:53am Subject: Re: Warning - controversial post :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: [...] > > The original Abhidhamma lists "states" (dhamma in Pali). The > term "dhamma" is used to represent all sorts of things and some > people have said that they understand in the context of the original > Abhidhamma, "dhamma" means "realities". I certainly agree that the > idea of realities is core to the Abhidhammatthasangaha, but I > believe that this is a later, "added on" interpretation not intended > in the original Abhidhamma. If the author of the original Abhidhamma > meant "realities", why did He use such a generic term such > as "dhamma" rather than a word that specifically mean realities > or "things which exist"? If the author of the original Abhidhamma > meant "realities", why did he leave the list open-ended? Why did He > not include the other nine cetasikas which ended up in the > Abhidhammatthasangaha? Why did He list ease and pleasure as ultimate > realities when they are types of feeling? Why was He so repetitive > (i.e. repeating different aspects of panna seven times in the > original list)? Hi Rob, well, let stay controversial. It seems to me, that Abhidhamma (can't say which part more then other) introduced not the observer, but the idea of an observer to Dhamma. Once there is this dividing motion "this and that" - there is a world of reality and there is born from it world of pondering upon reality. Secondly, abhidhammic thinking introduced extensive objectifying of experience. But since there was already this idea of an observer, now the objects themselves started their little life as "this and that". And now is the time for "real theravada Buddhist who ..." to appear in the picture. There is already whole World of Abhidhamma to be part of it... or not to be part of it... or whatever. metta, Agrios 36845 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:51am Subject: basic citta processes 2 (was Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner19-Contact /Phassa(e)9 Hello all >Thus, citta and >the accompanying cetasikas arise together at the same vatthu; they share >the same object and they fall away together. Apologies if this is a kind of carry over for what I was asking in another thread (basis citta processes) but it's important that I keep asking until I start getting it. Let's say it's seeing. As we know, we have the illusion of constant seeing, but in fact there are countless number of these rising and falling citta processes occurring in rapid succession, right? "They share the same object and they fall away together" and then there are bhavanga cittas until the same visible object is adverted to again, and so on, and so on...? Until some other object takes the attention away? Or until the object loses the ability, if you will, to advert bhavangas? Or until the mind rushes off in proliferation based on the object? Thanks in advance Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 5:43 PM Subject: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner19-Contact /Phassa(e) > Dear Friends, > > Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. > > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) > ========================================== > [Ch.1, Contact (Phassa)contd] > ***** > In the planes of existence where there are nama and > rupa, cittas have a physical base or place of origin, the vatthu (1). The > vatthu is rupa. In the case of the 'panca-vinnanas' (seeing, hearing, > etc.) the vatthus are the 'pasada-rupas' (the rupas which are capable of > receiving visible object, sound, etc.). ln the case of the panca-vinnanas > the pasada-rupa functions as both vatthu and doorway, 'dvara'. > > For example, the rupa which is eye-sense (cakkhuppasada-rupa) is both > doorway and vatthu for seeing-consciousness. Although it is one and the > same rupa, the function of dvara and vatthu are different. The dvara is > the means through which citta experiences an object, and the vatthu is the > physical base for the citta. Only for the panca-vinnanas are the dvara and > the vatthu one and the same rupa. > > For the other cittas of the sense-door process the dvara and the vatthu > are different rupas; they have as their vatthu another kind of rupa which > is in the commentaries called the 'heart-base' (hadaya-vatthu) (2). The > cittas which arise in the mind-door process also have as their vatthu the > 'heart-base'. > > The vatthu is the physical base not only of citta, but also of the > cetasikas which accompany the citta. When seeing-consciousness arises at > the eye-base (cakkhu-vatthu), phassa and the other cetasikas which > accompany seeing-consciousness arise also at the eye-base. Thus, citta and > the accompanying cetasikas arise together at the same vatthu; they share > the same object and they fall away together. > ..... > (1) Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 17. > (2) Ibidem. it is the material support for all cittas other than the > panca-vinnanas.There is no need to specify its exact location. > ***** > [Contact (Phassa) to be contd] > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== > 36846 From: robmoult Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:03am Subject: Re: Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Agrios, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "agriosinski" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > It seems to me, that Abhidhamma (can't say which part more then other) > introduced not the observer, but the idea of an observer to Dhamma. > Once there is this dividing motion "this and that" - there is a world of reality and there is born from it world of pondering upon reality. > > Secondly, abhidhammic thinking introduced extensive objectifying of > experience. But since there was already this idea of an observer, now > the objects themselves started their little life as "this and that". > > And now is the time for "real theravada Buddhist who ..." to > appear in the picture. There is already whole World of Abhidhamma to > be part of it... or not to be part of it... or whatever. IMHO, the Suttas use conventional language and can easily be misinterpreted as supporting the concept of an observer (by those who do not understand). I see the style of the Abhidhamma as one step "purer"; less likely to support the idea of an observer by explaining nama as a natural process. Metta, Rob M :-) 36847 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:06am Subject: When panna sees the benefits of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala Hello all "When panna sees the benefits of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala it will condition the arising of kusala." I found this phrase when looking through a pocket notebook, jotted down in June. Don't know where it comes from - probably from one of Nina's books. It made my heart-base do a flip. Metta, Phil 36848 From: gautama_buddha2004 Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:29am Subject: Upacara samadhi Dear friends, I am new to this group. I want to ask those who have experienced upacara samadhi or if better jhana . Have you ever felt that during meditation , suddenly you don't see your body anymore but have subtle conciousness? For those who have, what do you do after that to shift to higher state? Thanks, Aries 36849 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anicca=inconstant rather than impermanent Hi, Antony (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/23/04 10:36:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, antony272b@h... writes: > Dear Sarah and DSG, > > I found this quote helpful in understanding why anicca implies dukkha and > anatta: > > metta / Antony. > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: > > "Anicca, the first of the three, is pivotal. Anicca applies to everything > that changes. Often translated as "impermanent," it's actually the negative > of nicca, which means constant or dependable. Everything that changes is > inconstant. Now, the difference between "impermanent" and "inconstant" may > seem semantic, but it's crucial to the way anicca functions in the Buddha's > teachings. As the early texts state repeatedly, if something is anicca then > the other two characteristics automatically follow: it's dukkha (stressful) > and anatta (not-self), i.e., not worthy to be claimed as me or mine. > > If we translate anicca as impermanent, the connection among these Three > Characteristics might seem debatable. But if we translate it as inconstant, > and consider the Three Characteristics in light of the Buddha's original > question, the connection is clear. If you're seeking a dependable basis for > long-term happiness and ease, anything inconstant is obviously a stressful > place to pin your hopes -- like trying to relax in an unstable chair whose > legs are liable to break at any time. If you understand that your sense of > self is something willed and fabricated -- that you choose to create it -- > there's no compelling reason to keep creating a "me" or "mine" around any > experience that's inconstant and stressful. You want something better. You > don't want to make that experience the goal of your practice. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/change.html > ================================ I'm not much in agreement with Ven T on this point. While I think that including "undependable" as part of the meaning of 'anicca' is good and useful, I'm not very keen on substituting "inconstant" for "impermanent". As I see it, 'impermanent' means "not lasting", in the sense of "being present at one time, and not being so at a later time". It is simple in meaning, neither implying sharp moments of cessation nor fuzzy intervals of cessation - being noncommital in that regard, and simply pointing to "now - yes, but later - no". The word inconstant, however, suggests to me "variation" or "change-while-existing". It suggests to me the commonsense view of an "entity with core or substance that continues while its superficial or adventitious characteristics/features come and go," so that there is "change while remaining". This, as I see it, is one of the wrong views. It is a form of A and not-A in the classical tetralemma. The reason that we gravitate to this view so easily, I believe, is that by means of our power of conceptualization, we group together related phenomena as unitary entities (like trees, and cars, and people), and these mind-constructed, imagined entities seem to *continue but change*. They seem to continue because we repeatedly superimpose the concept/idea on our experience, and they seem to change because the underlying experiential realities (dhammas) come and go. The word impermanence is, for me, a much better rendering of 'anicca' than is the word inconstant. 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) 36850 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kalaka Sutta (AN IV.24) Hi, Rob - In a message dated 9/23/04 11:28:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard and All, > > Howard, I seem to have the idea that you recently gave a talk on the > Kalaka Sutta at your local Buddhist group: > > The Blessed One said: "Monks, whatever in the cosmos -- with its > devas, Maras, &Brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & > priests royalty &common people -- is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, > attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. > Whatever in the cosmos -- with its devas, Maras, &Brahmas, its > generations with their contemplatives &priests, their royalty & > common people -- is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought > after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That has > been realized by the Tathagata, but in the Tathagata it has not been > established. > > > > Does the commentary interpret this as meaning that the Buddha was > claiming omniscence or rather is the Buddha claiming that he knows > the nature of "whatever in the cosmos..."? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ============================ I don't believe that I gave what would justifiably be called a "talk" on the sutta. At most a brief reading of it and statement of my understanding. As far as your question is concerned, I'm not not clear on what "commentary" you are referring to. If you mean what Bhikkhu ~Nanananda had to say, I don't recall his having addressed your question, which I understand to be the following: With regard to the statement "Whatever in the cosmos ... is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know," does this mean that the Buddha new all facts about all things, or does it mean that the Buddha directly knew the tilakkhana in all things. I suspect that it is the latter menaing that is intended, but I could, of course, be wrong in this. In any case, the commentary by Bhikkhu ~Nanananda in his book The Magic of the Mind doesn't address this matter as I recall. 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) 36851 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/24/04 12:33:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > H: "I've always been unimpressed by that "witness" talk. I suspect that > the so called witness is nothing other than our "old friend" > Sense-of-Self disguised as something special when one thinks one is > being "very spiritual" by meditating!! ;-))" > > L: I think the point is what the witness (and possibly adverting > consciousness) is _not_. It is not a resultant consciousness of rupa and > it is not a root consciousness. In that sense it could be considered to > be pure awareness. Is that what you mean by "very spiritual"? I agree > though that it can be an object of attachment, or at least the idea of > it could be an object of attachment. > > Larry > > ========================== I'm afraid I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I maintain that the so called witness is just plain illusion. Perhaps it is an awareness of just-passed awareness misidentified as a "watcher". In any case, I see it as a reification, an I-making, and an error. 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) 36852 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:56am Subject: Deeds of merit - non-material forms of dana? Hello all More from the discussion between Ms. Wandhana and K Sujin in "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/meri1.html W. : People who have day in day out barely enough for their own use will not be able to perform deeds of generosity. How can they develop kusala? S. : The word kusala refers to the nature of the citta which is good and beautiful, and such citta brings a pleasant result, thus, it causes us to receive what is pleasant. When someone's citta is wholesome there are no attachment, anger, ignorance or jealousy, no pride, conceit or other defilements arising at that moment. Even if someone has no things he can give away there can be kusala citta. There are many other kinds of kusala besides the giving away of things. W. : Thus, there can also be the development of kusala without necessarily giving things away. If that is true, so much the better. In my daily life I often hear people say that they can hardly obtain enough for their own living. In that case it is difficult to develop the way of kusala which is daana, generous giving; it seems that there is no way to do that. (end quote) Ph: Sarah and Antony are discussing dana in a very interesting way in another thread, so lots of talk about dana these days. "Kusala, baby!" as Austin Powers would say. Thich Nhat Hahn writes about non-material ways of giving dana, such things as presence. Being fully present when talking to someone as a kind of gift. It comes to mind sometimes when I'm teaching and the mind wanders. Others he mentions are stability, peace, space, freshness....but presence is the only one that seems to have stuck with me. Not a teaching of the Buddha, as far as I know but when mindfulness arises in a way that makes one fully present when talking to someone, or even e-mailing, it is kusala. But I wonder if it's really dana, a deed of merit. The above seems to be saying do not think of dana unless it is dana in a more traditional sense. Instead, develop other ways of kusala. Metta, Phil 36853 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:06am Subject: RE: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi RobM, What was your controversial post about then? Where does your feeling that a student of the Abhidhamma should start with the Abhidhammatthasangaha come through in your original post? You now qualify that it is OK for an introductory manual to diverge from the material it pretends to introduce. I realise that I'm sure I don't understand. No need to explain. I would hate to be a condition for future wincing. Kind Regards Herman ============ Your qualifiers make me wince... "markedly different"... "alleged source"... "remotely a student of the Abhidhamma"... "remotely connected to the words of the Buddha"? You are certainly reading more into my message than I had intended. I feel that the Abhidhammatthasangaha has a different emphasis than the original, but this does not make it "markedly different". I feel that a student of the Abhidhamma should start with the Abhidhammatthasangaha (that is why it was written, as an introductory manual), but once a degree of familiarity is obtained, one should move on to the original texts. I feel that the Abhidhamma is a complementary way of presenting the words of the Buddha as found in the Suttas. Sorry, Herman, perhaps I am not as much a rebel as you first imagined! :-) :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 36854 From: robmoult Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Herman, Many on DSG feel that "realities" are central to the Buddha's teachings. If we look at the description of DSG, it talks about "original record of the Buddha's word in the Theravada tradition" and "developing precise understanding of the realities of the present moment". The position that I am building up to is that the idea of "realities of the present moment" is not from the word of the Buddha (i.e. not in the Suttas, not in the original Abhidhamma) but a later addition. To me, this position stikes at the foundation of some people's understanding of the Buddha's teachings... this is what makes it controversial. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi RobM, > > What was your controversial post about then? Where does your feeling > that a student of the Abhidhamma should start with the > Abhidhammatthasangaha come through in your original post? You now > qualify that it is OK for an introductory manual to diverge from the > material it pretends to introduce. I realise that I'm sure I don't > understand. No need to explain. I would hate to be a condition for > future wincing. > > Kind Regards > > Herman > > ============ > > Your qualifiers make me wince... "markedly different"... "alleged > source"... "remotely a student of the Abhidhamma"... "remotely > connected to the words of the Buddha"? > > You are certainly reading more into my message than I had intended. > I feel that the Abhidhammatthasangaha has a different emphasis than > the original, but this does not make it "markedly different". > > I feel that a student of the Abhidhamma should start with the > Abhidhammatthasangaha (that is why it was written, as an > introductory manual), but once a degree of familiarity is obtained, > one should move on to the original texts. > > I feel that the Abhidhamma is a complementary way of presenting the > words of the Buddha as found in the Suttas. > > Sorry, Herman, perhaps I am not as much a rebel as you first > imagined! :-) :-) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 36855 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:28am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 069 ) About Rupa Joop: Dear Htoo >Htoo: Rupa is also needed to be understood. I did not leave its importance. Some people readily see rupa rather than namma. For those sorts of people Ayatanas are taught where 10 ayatanas are all rupa. To understand Ayatana rupas have to be explained. Joop: I don't know what kind of people I am, I prefer to start with the four essentials in the analytical knowledge of body and mind (nama-rupa-pariccheda-nana) before I try to understand the derived material phenomena. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I also don't know both you and myself. But your statement makes me think of 'you are good to see both nama and rupa'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo:Nothing is higher. What did you mean by 'mind is higher than matter'? Joop: You are not in western philosophy but I thin Idialism as teached by Plato. And I think of a not-Theravada branch of Buddhism: yogacara, called "mind only". And in fact the first verse of the Dhamapada states that mind governs matter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Philosophywise, I left them except abhidhamma. When I was young, I learnt different thinking of philosophers. But this stopped on the way. I do not want to be a logist or philosopher but I just want to walk on the Path. Dhammapada says in Dhamma setting. There are rupa inside and outside. Ijjhatta and bahiddha. There are lifeless rupas. These rupas are not governed by mind. But they are governed by utuja niyama or laws related to physical things. Does mind govern the sun to arise and to set? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Rupas are rupas and they are real existence. They are not to be confined to anthropocentric. Joop: Then we have a real big philosophical problem in our discussion; I think we cannot know what is the nature of matter as such, all we can know about matter is what we experience (in our senses and mind-door) If you state rupa=matter than I had to say modern physics (in fact: mathematical physics) has a better theory of the nature of matter. But the Buddha was so wise not to cling to the pre-scientific theory of his time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I understand. You are talking rupas that are in contact with only you. I agree. This is what it should be. This is the exit. If rupas outside are followed, then as you said science may explain more. But all these will be in the conceptual world. They will not be ultimate realities. When Bodhisatta was a blacksmith, he actually was the best scientist of his time. He managed to do everything requested regarding matters or materials. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > On my question: Do you think it is fundamentally possible to modernize the list of rupa, still using them as paramatthas? >Htoo: Rupas are to be experienced and to be known not just to be listed. Joop: Are you serious? The whole Tipitaka, and especially the Abhidhamma, are full of lists: hunderds of them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: 100s is not that much. Could youm please count them 100 by 100? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: And I experience modernized rupa (in meditation), not the classical. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Explain these please. 'modernized rupa' and 'classical rupa'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: If experienced, marks on them that is tilakkhana of anicca, dukkha, and anatta will be cognised and finally liberated. Without rupa support, there is no way to be liberated. Rupa is also important. Joop: Of course that's the most important, thanks for reminding me to that ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I think, after files on cetasikas, I have talked on rupas to some detail. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > With metta > Joop ---------------------------------------------------------------------- May you be free from suffering. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36856 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:01am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 071 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas. If lokuttara cittas are counted as 40, rather than 8, there will be 121 cittas. These are realities. They all are paramattha dhamma. They all are ultimate truths. They are ultimate realities. They are true at any given time. If these mind states are understood, study of dhamma will be much more effective than without understanding these mind states. They may be called 'states of mind' 'mind state' 'mental state' etc etc. But it is better to call them as cittas. Basing on these cittas, everything happening on this earth, in this world, beyond the world, beyond the earth can be understood. At any given time or at any moment, there is a citta at least in one's mind. This citta has to be one of these 121 cittas or 89 cittas. But these cittas never arise alone. There are many accompanying factors along with their arising. These factors are called mental factors or cetasika. Cetasika means 'of citta'. Ceto means 'mind' 'citta'. Cetasikas are possessions of the mind. They are properties of mind. It is these cetasikas or mental factors that give the names to the specific citta of each of these 121 cittas or 89 cittas. Citta and cetasikas can never be separated. But as cetasikas do have their own characteristics and their own functions, it is worthy to study all these cetasikas. Citta itself has the character 'that knows what has to be known' or 'this is aware of what is to be aware of'. Citta is to know. Nothing more than that. How pure it is! But there is no single citta that does not have any cetasika at all. Originally transparent clean water becomes coloured when different dyes are added to that water. We have discussed about cittas. We have discussed about water. Now we are moving to cetasikas. We are going to discuss the dyes. Classifications of different coloured water or the classifications of cittas in different ways have discussed in the earlier posts. But after finishing up discussions on cetasikas, they may appear again as these classifications are worthy to study. This post is opening message for coming posts on cetasikas which dye the pure, luminous mind, citta. When cetasikas are understood, some understanding on kusala, akusala dhamma is expected. Cetasikas are mental factors and they always arise with their accompanying cittas. They vanish when their citta, who is the king of mind disappears. These cetasikas take the same object when the co- arising citta takes an object. Cittas have to depend on vatthu or base which is rupa when they are in the realms where all five khandhas or aggregates are available ( pancavokara bhumis ). There are 52 cetasikas. But not all these 52 arise at the same time with any citta. Cetasikas arise when there are conditions for their arising. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS:Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. Remarks-: Once there was an interesting question on cetasikas. It was whether there is a store house of cetasikas. 36857 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultime realities and conventional realities, to Rob M. Hi Rob M, You give points worth considering. Just butting in. op 23-09-2004 17:32 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: to Ken H: > I am preparing a relatively lengthy post on this (sorry, I don't > think that you are going to like it). You could save me a lot of > effort if you could find a Sutta where the Buddha talked > about "existence / non-existence" or "reality / non-reality". I > sincerely hope that you can find such a Sutta. N: In the suttas the difference between conventional language and language spoken in the ultimate sense is dealt with. This touches on the point you raise above. This is a post by Sarah: <...these are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world, which the Tathagata uses without misapprehending them,’ (DN 9, Potthapada Sutta: States of consciousness, 53, Walshe trans.) The footnote (224) to M.Walshe’s translation adds: ...In MA (ad MN 5: Anagana Sutta). the following verse is quoted...: “Two truths the Buddha, best of all who speak, declared: Conventional and ultimate - no third can be. Terms agreed by usage of the world; Words of ultimate significance are true In terms of dhammas. Thus the Lord, a Teacher, he Who’s skilled in this world’s speech , can use it, and not lie.> Another sutta: K. I, The Deavas, Sword suttas, 1,3,§5, The Arahat: The Buddha speaks about the arahat who can use the word I and mine: Thus here we also see that there are two ways of speech. The Buddha used both ways, depending on people's understanding. He spoke about many kinds of dukkha, suffering we all can easily grasp. But then he said:< in short, the five khandhas of grasping are dukkha.> The khandhas are nama and rupa, these are impermanent and thus dukkha. The Buddha would gently lead people to the understanding of the noble Truth of dukkha. Another example: he would speak about the different parts of the body: hair of the head, etc. to help people to have less attachment. Then, these parts can be divided up into smaller and smaller parts, they are only rupas arising and falling away: the four great elements and derived elements. In this way he taught Rahula. When someone had lost a dear one he would not immediately say: that person does not exist. He would full of compassion lead people to understanding dhammas that are impermanent. Life, pleasure, pain, they exist in only one moment. How can we expect to last what arises and falls away immediately? You said: the law of kamma is a concept. The Buddha spoke in conventional terms about kamma and vipaka, and he would also refer to ultimate relaities. He said: (Quoted from B. Dict. the sutta: A.VI, 63 ). The law of kamma: kamma that conditions vipaaka. Is that a concept? It denotes a relation between realities. We can say: the words are concepts, naama-paññatti, which denote here dhammas, realities. The word paramattha dhamma we do not find in the suttas, but the notion of it is clearly expressed. When you read for example K IV, you find that the Buddha speaks all the time about the objects experienced by cittas through the six doors. About lobha, dosa and moha arising on account of the objects. I translated a Co from Pali about the subject: Co to M.N.5, No Blemishes, about paramatthadesana: There is a twofold teaching of the Buddha, the Blessed One: the teaching in the conventional way and the teaching by way of ultimate realities. (Buddhassa Bhagavato duvidhaa desanaa: sammuttidesanaa, paramatthadesanaa caa ti.) There is a human, a being, a woman, a man, a man of the warrior caste, a brahman, a god, and Mara. Such is the teaching in the conventional way (sammuttidesanaa). Impermanence, dukkha, anattaa, the aggregates, elements, sensefields, satipa.t.thaana. Such is the teaching by way of ultimate realities. Here the Blessed One taught to those in the conventional way who by means of it, after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction. But who by means of ultimate realities after having heard the teaching , penetrated the meaning and abandoned ignorance, and were skilled to attain distinction, to those he taught by way of ultimate realities. Nina. 36858 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:15am Subject: Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika. Text Vis 102: 102. Profitable resultant, though, has desirable or desirable-neutral objects only, while these have undesirable or undesirable-neutral objects only. The former are of three kinds, being classed according to equanimity, bodily pleasure, and mental joy, while these are of two kinds, being classed according to bodily pain and equanimity. For here it is only body-consciousness that is accompanied by bodily pain; the rest are accompanied by equanimity. And the equanimity in these is inferior, and not very sharp as the pain is; while in the former it is superior, and not very sharp as the pleasure is. So with these seven kinds of unprofitable resultant and the previous sixteen kinds of profitable resultant, sense-sphere resultant consciousness is of twenty-three kinds. Intro: In this section the Visuddhimagga deals with the feelings that accompany the akusala vipaakacittas, namely indifferent feeling and unpleasant bodily feeling. ================= Text Vis: Profitable resultant, though, has desirable or desirable-neutral objects only, while these have undesirable or undesirable-neutral objects only. ===================== N: The ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas experience a desirable or a moderately desirable object, whereas the akusala vipaakacittas experience an undesirable or a moderately undesirable object. The Tiika explains why there are two types of investigating-consciousness (mind-consciousness-element) which are kusala vipaaka: one type is accompanied by pleasant feeling, when the object is very pleasant and one type by indifferent feeling, when the object is moderately pleasant. There is only one type of investigating-consciousness that is akusala vipaaka, and this is accompanied by indifferent feeling, no matter whether the object is very unpleasant or moderately unpleasant. Therefore, the akusala vipaakacittas are classified as sevenfold, whereas ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas are classified as eightfold. The Tiika explains that there is no unpleasant feeling, domanassa, on account of a very unpleasant object since unpleasant feeling cannot arise without aversion (pa.tigha). N. As we have seen, the two akusala cittas rooted in aversion, dosa-muula-cittas, are the only two cittas that are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. Akusala vipaakacittas cannot be accompanied by unpleasant feeling, they are not akusala cittas but merely results. ====================== Text Vis.: The former are of three kinds, being classed according to equanimity, bodily pleasure, and mental joy, while these are of two kinds, being classed according to bodily pain and equanimity. For here it is only body-consciousness that is accompanied by bodily pain; the rest are accompanied by equanimity. ============ N: The ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas are classified by way of three feelings, as was explained above. The akusala vipaakacittas are classified by way of two feelings, bodily pain and indifferent feeling. The Tiika explains that the painful feeling accompanying body-consciousness that is akusala vipaakacitta should be understood in the way opposite to what has been said about pleasant bodily feeling that is kusala vipaaka. As we have seen in the Intro to Vis. 99: The Expositor (II, p. 349) explains that in the case of the eye-door, ear-door, nose-door and tongue-door, derived ruupa strikes on derived ruupa. The whole day we are touching things and there is impingement of tangible object on the bodysense which is all over the body. We may believe that the bodily feeling is indifferent, but this is not so. Bodily feeling is merely result and it is very ephemeral, only lasting for one moment. Moreover, bodily unpleasant feeling has nothing to do with unhappy feeling accompanying citta rooted in aversion which is akusala and arises because of different conditions. Unhappy feeling that is akusala may arise very shortly after the body-consciousness and then one may take unhappy feeling for bodily unpleasant feeling. ======================== Text Vis.: And the equanimity in these is inferior, and not very sharp as the pain is; while in the former it is superior, and not very sharp as the pleasure is. =========== N. Bodily pleasant feeling and painful feeling are keen, because the impact of tangible object on the bodysense is more violent than the impact of the other sense objects on the relevant sense-bases. The sense-cognitions other than body-consciousness, seeing, hearing, etc., are accompanied by indifferent feeling, upekkhaa. The indifferent feeling that is kusala vipaaka is superior, whereas the indifferent feeling that is akusala vipaaka is inferior. The Tiika explains that since akusala vipaaka is the result of what is surely inferior also indifferent feeling accompanying the akusala vipaakacitta is inferior because it is of a nature of affliction (dukkhasabhaavatta). It states: N: Upekkhaa that is akusala vipaaka is inferior, it should be seen as a kind of suffering or affliction, although it is not as acute as bodily pain. The Tiika states: N: This shows the passive nature of indifferent feeling that accompanies akusala vipaaka. It is a kind of affliction. It cannot be changed, because it has been conditioned by kamma already. Whatever arises is conditioned and we cannot be master of it. There are many moments of seeing and hearing, and these are accompanied by indifferent feeling. They are kusala vipaakacittas or akusala vipaakacittas accompanied by indifferent feeling which is also vipaaka. Indifferent feeling is superior when it accompanies kusala vipaakacitta and inferior when it accompanies akusala vipaakacitta. However, they are fleeting moments that fall away very quickly. It is difficult to realize that one short moment of akusala vipaakacitta is a kind of affliction or suffering. When we think of something unpleasant we saw or heard, we actually join many different moments together into a whole of impressions. We think with ignorance and aversion of situations and persons that caused us to experience unpleasant objects. We do not realize the difference between the moment of akusala citta that is accompanied by unhappy feeling and the moment of vipaakacitta. We tend to blame other people, but in fact, it is akusala kamma, not a person, that conditions unpleasant sense-cognitions. There can be detachment from the idea of self and person when we have more understanding of paramattha dhammas that appear one at a time through one of the six doors. We can learn the difference between vipaaka and thinking about it with akusala citta. Life is actually one fleeting moment of experiencing an object. We can begin to study the different dhammas as explained by the Visuddhimagga. This can give us a foundation of intellectual understanding of non-self, and this can be a condition for the arising of direct understanding of dhammas as they are. =========== Text Vis.: So with these seven kinds of unprofitable resultant and the previous sixteen kinds of profitable resultant, sense-sphere resultant consciousness is of twenty-three kinds. =============== N: There are altogether twentythree types of vipaakacittas of the sense-sphere (kaamaavacara), namely: eight types of kusala vipaakacittas with roots (sahetuka), eight types of kusala vipaakacittas without roots (ahetuka) and seven types of akusala vipaakacittas. ***** Nina. 36859 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Larry, op 24-09-2004 02:11 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > My main question about concept and realty is that kamma seems to be more > realistic when it is discussed conventionally. N: Right. You have good points worth considering. Partly I touched on these in my post to Rob M and also your remarks gave me ideas for my Intro! L:Take beauty for example. > As kamma result it can be either kusala or akusala, either a matter of > wholesomeness or attachment. N: In order to avoid confusion, I would say: As kamma result it can be either kusala vipaaka or akusala vipaaka. Do add the word vipaaka. Otherwise people confuse the cittas which are cause (active) with the cittas which are result (passive). L:But beauty isn't just one flash of color. It is a complex formation. N: Colour or visible object is intrinsically pleasant or unpleasant, but it is so ephemeral that we do not notice it. We think about it when there have been many moments of experiencing colour, and evenso, there may have been the experience of unpleasant colour in between. It is hard to know. I think of being in a flower garden: beautiful, but there are also unpleasant colours, who knows? Maybe a dog has been in that garden. You say, but beauty isn't just one flash of color. Very good, seeing the momentariness will help us to become detached. Eventually we shall attach less importance to what is only a flash. Insight leads to detachment, this is very essential. But we have the perversion of seeing beauty in what is not beautiful, even when the belief of permanence and self is eradicated. L: Strictly speaking any complex formation is a > concept and a concept isn't a kamma result and concepts don't age or > become disfigured. Additionally, beauty comes packaged in desirability. N: Flower garden is a whole, a concept. We imagine that it must be beautiful and we cling. L: It seems to me this means beauty is "with roots" and the roots can be > either kusala or akusala, inciting virtue or lust. N: When we speak about roots, we think of cittas, not a concept. L: Additionally, I think > in some sense "kamma" = "sankhara". N: They are abhisankhaara: volitions (kusala, akusala, and those with arupajhana) producing rebirth. L: This whole round of existence is caused by desire, so that makes it all kamma result, even the desire. > Even functional cittas, including an arahant's javana cittas. N: Ignorance and desire condition the cycle. But we have to carefully analyse each link and the types of conditions that are operating. That is why this subject is most complex. Later on in the Vis! We cannot say that every link is kamma result. Desire is akusala, not result. There are three rounds spinning: the round of kamma, of vipaka and of defilements. L: Btw, it is interesting that an arahant's javana cittas and an ordinary > person's adverting consciousness have something in common. They are both > functional. N: We come to that in Vis. Kiriya cittas are neither cause nor result. There are kiriyacittas shared by all and not shared by all, different types. L: I wonder if adverting consciousness is what some people > refer to in meditation as the "witness". N: I am glad Howard answered that one ;-)) I think it is important to understand kamma and vipaaka as momentary, not just in conventional sense. Otherwise we keep on blaming people and situations for unpleasant experiences, whereas they are the results of kamma performed in the past. By right understanding of kamma and vipaka we can react more wisely. Nina. 36860 From: agriosinski Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:58am Subject: Re: Warning - controversial post :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: [...] > > IMHO, the Suttas use conventional language and can easily be > misinterpreted as supporting the concept of an observer (by those > who do not understand). I see the style of the Abhidhamma as one > step "purer"; less likely to support the idea of an observer by > explaining nama as a natural process. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Hi Rob, Buddha has had forty years to make it as pure as he wanted. He was The Purist of the time! I think Abhidhamma is creating theory. Theory of reality (how am I) - never taught by Buddha. Can't really comment on what can be misinterpreted and how good it is to have this one and only right interpretation. metta, Agrios 36861 From: nori Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 0:13pm Subject: without pushing forward, without staying in place hi dhamma friends, Pushing too hard; desiring too much, even what is ultimately best for you, maybe, can be detrimental. Samyutta Nikaya I.1 Ogha-tarana Sutta ... "Tell me, dear sir, how you crossed over the flood." "I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place (or: unestablished)."[1] "But how, dear sir, did you cross over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place?" "When I pushed forward, I was whirled about. When I stayed in place, I sank. And so I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place." --- Sutta-Nipâta I. URAGAVAGGA. 1. URAGASUTTA. 12. He who did not go too fast forward, nor was left behind, being free from hatred, (seeing) that all this is false, that Bhikkhu leaves this and the further shore, as a snake (quits its) old worn out skin. (12) 'He who did not go too fast forward, nor was left behind' ... is repeated on six adjacent lines. --- ... without pushing forward. ... not too fast forward. metta, nori 36862 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:28pm Subject: Jhana Journey ( 18 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The jhana practitioner has attained the 4th jhana. He has just passed the 1st 4th jhana citta. This citta arises once and falls away after which bhavanga cittas follow. Then vithi cittas arise. They are directed to the 4th jhana citta that has just arisen. It is calm. It has sukha and ekaggata as jhana factors. Through this mental activity he realises that the 4th jhana citta has arisen. He tries it agian and now he can stay in jhana for a long time. As usual, he practises his jhana for the proficiency. First jhana is directed and checked. Then he tries to get access 4th jhana whenever he wants. After that he tries to lay out time span for staying in jhana. As he has determined, he has to emerge from his jhana at his will. Then jhana factors are scrutinized and closely examined. Due to repeated examination, he finally finds out that sukha jhana factor in his 4th jhana is a bit weak and this is quite close to piti which is the component in 3rd jhana. So he has to stay away from sukha if he has to maintain it. This finally leads hin to dispassionate on sukha. Because of this scritinization, he is no more atached to sukha and he tries again his jhana without sukha as jhana factor. At a time, when there is equanimity and ekaggata works well, the 5th jhana arises. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36863 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Many on DSG feel that "realities" are central to the Buddha's > teachings. > > If we look at the description of DSG, it talks about "original > record of the Buddha's word in the Theravada tradition" > and "developing precise understanding of the realities of the > present moment". > > The position that I am building up to is that the idea of "realities > of the present moment" is not from the word of the Buddha (i.e. not > in the Suttas, not in the original Abhidhamma) but a later addition. > > To me, this position stikes at the foundation of some people's > understanding of the Buddha's teachings... this is what makes it > controversial. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Friend Rob M., I very much agree with your assessment here but I have been reading your pamphlet "Theory Behind the Buddha's Smile" and it states: "Seeing things as they truly are means being able to differentiate between ultimate realities (dhammas) and those types of entities which exist only as conceptual constructs but are mistakenly grasped as ultimately real. The Abhidhamma describes these dhammas and shows how they relate to each other." So, are you now recanting what you wrote here? If so, I will be very happy about it ;-)). Metta, James 36864 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Howard, H: "I'm afraid I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I maintain that the so called witness is just plain illusion. Perhaps it is an awareness of just-passed awareness misidentified as a "watcher". In any case, I see it as a reification, an I-making, and an error." L: I disagree. It seems to me to be a distinct kind of consciousness. Are you familiar with the term "bare attention"? I think that is the same thing. On the other hand, what isn't illusion? Larry 36865 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:08pm Subject: Re: Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Rob M, Thanks for this "controversial post." And thanks for adding the following synopsis in your note to Herman: ---------- > The position that I am building up to is that the idea of "realities of the present moment" is not from the word of the Buddha (i.e. not in the Suttas, not in the original Abhidhamma) but a later addition. > ---------- Wow, that is controversial! As every thinking person knows, the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. So what does that leave? Is there a third time - a present time - or does the non- existent past become the non-existent future in no time at all? There are only two possible views: either there is a present quantum of time in which dhammas exist, or nothing exists. The Buddha settled the question by saying the view "nothing exists" is the wrong view. (Mahacattarikasutta) So, everything in daily life that is logically real, is real (however fleetingly). For example, seeing, hearing and touching, along with the seen, the heard and the touched (as they arise now in the present moment) are all absolutely real. ----------------- RM (quoting the Dhammasangani): > [1] Which are the states that are good? (katame dhamma kusala) When a good thought concerning the sensuous universe has arisen, which is accompanied by gladness and associated with knowledge and has as its object a sight, a sound, a taste, a touch, a mental state or what not, then there is: (i) contact (phasso) (ii) feeling (vedana) (iii) perception (sanna) (iv) volition (cetana) > . . . > (xlix) (lvi) balance (avikkhepo) Now these – or whatever other incorporeal, causally induced state there are on that occasion – these are the states that are good. > ------------- That seems clear to me! Each and every nama that arises in a moment of wholesome consciousness is, itself, wholesome. There is no implication that every one of those listed namas is present in every wholesome moment. Nor is it claimed that some namas are not mentioned more than once (e.g., that calm feeling and happy feeling are not just forms of feeling (vedana)). Also, it is made clear that the list is not exhaustive. So where is the problem? ------------- RM: > I take the list of the original Abhidhamma at face value; presenting different aspects of a good state of mind. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one recognize a good state of mind when one arises. This list as provided by the original Abhidhamma will help one understand the nature and characteristics of good states of minds. In my opinion, taking the components listed as a list of "ultimate realities" is reading into the list something that the original author did not intend. > ----------------------- Sorry, Rob, I am genuinely missing the point. Are you saying that the present state of mind, along with its component factors, is not real – that nothing really exists? Kind regards, Ken H 36866 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika. Hi Nina, Thanks for this comprehensive explanation. One thing that is a little unconvincing is that a smell, taste, or sound are never accompanied by unpleasant feeling. The bitter taste of medicine, the smell of a corpse, or the sound of fingernails scraping a blackboard seem to me to be very unpleasant. This is a direct sensation of unpleasantness that preceeds aversion. Larry 36867 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Rob, Imo, it is not surprising there is so much confusion and frustration regarding concept and realty. It is the central issue of what anatta means. Once we understand that, bingo! we're arahants :-)) As for the differences between abhidhamma and CMA, I think we have to look at them individually and decide (once we are arahants) if they are different for a good reason, or not. Until then, we learn what we can. Larry 36868 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi, James (and Rob) - In a message dated 9/24/04 5:17:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > >Hi Herman, > > > >Many on DSG feel that "realities" are central to the Buddha's > >teachings. > > > >If we look at the description of DSG, it talks about "original > >record of the Buddha's word in the Theravada tradition" > >and "developing precise understanding of the realities of the > >present moment". > > > >The position that I am building up to is that the idea > of "realities > >of the present moment" is not from the word of the Buddha (i.e. > not > >in the Suttas, not in the original Abhidhamma) but a later > addition. > > > >To me, this position stikes at the foundation of some people's > >understanding of the Buddha's teachings... this is what makes it > >controversial. > > > >Metta, > >Rob M :-) > > Friend Rob M., > > I very much agree with your assessment here but I have been reading > your pamphlet "Theory Behind the Buddha's Smile" and it states: > > "Seeing things as they truly are means being able to differentiate > between ultimate realities (dhammas) and those types of entities > which exist only as conceptual constructs but are mistakenly grasped > as ultimately real. The Abhidhamma describes these dhammas and > shows how they relate to each other." > > So, are you now recanting what you wrote here? If so, I will be > very happy about it ;-)). > > Metta, James > ============================ Saying that the Buddha didn't explicitly write in terms of dhammas vs pa~n~natti, and that explicit language was a later add-on is different from saying that the distinction is not implicit in and is inconsistent with the suttas. After all, consider, for example, the Sabba Sutta. The Buddha didn't include therein chairs and chariots, palaces and pariyatti as part of "the all", now did he? :-) 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) 36869 From: connieparker Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:01pm Subject: Sotaapattiya'nga.m hi, All, A couple of us wondered if anga was the word being translated as limb (of Streamwinning) in the following sutta, so I looked up the Pali to go with the English (from ADL, ch 24). Anyway, I've looked through the dsg archives enough times to see what the factors are and thought someone here might be interested in the Pali, too. peace, connie Kindred Sayings, MahaVagga Book IX on Streamwinning Ch.1 Paragraph 5, Sariputta [Mahaavagga Ch.11. Sotaapattisam.yutta.m, Section 5. Dutiyasaariputtasutta.m] 1001. Atha kho aayasmaa saariputto yena bhagavaa tenupasa'nkami; upasa'nkamitvaa bhagavanta.m abhivaadetvaa ekamanta.m nisiidi. Ekamanta.m nisinna.m kho aayasmanta.m saariputta.m bhagavaa etadavoca– Now the venerable Sariputta went to see the Exalted One, and on coming to him saluted him and sat down at one side. To the venerable Sariputta so seated the Exalted One said this: ""sotaapattiya'nga.m, sotaapattiya'ngan"ti hida.m, saariputta, vuccati. Katama.m nu kho saariputta, sotaapattiya'ngan"ti? ''A limb of stream-winning! A limb of stream-winning!' is the saying, Sariputta. Tell me, Sariputta, of what sort is a limb of stream-winning.' "Sappurisasa.msevo hi, bhante, sotaapattiya'nga.m, saddhammassavana.m sotaapattiya'nga.m, yonisomanasikaaro sotaapattiya'nga.m, dhammaanudhammappa.tipatti sotaapattiya'ngan"ti. 'Lord, association with the upright is a limb of stream-winning. Hearing the good Dhamma is a limb of stream-winning. Applying the mind is a limb of stream-winning. Conforming to the Dhamma is a limb of stream-winning.' "Saadhu saadhu, saariputta! Sappurisasa.msevo hi, saariputta, sotaapattiya'nga.m, saddhammassavana.m sotaapattiya'nga.m, yonisomanasikaaro sotaapattiya'nga.m, dhammaanudhammappa.tipatti sotaapattiya'nga.m". 'Well said, Sariputta! Well said, Sariputta! Indeed these are limbs of stream-winning. ""Soto, soto"ti hida.m, saariputta, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, saariputta, soto"ti? Now again, Sariputta, they say: 'The stream! the stream!' Of what sort is the stream, Sariputta?' "Ayameva hi, bhante, ariyo a.t.tha'ngiko maggo soto, seyyathida.m– sammaadi.t.thi, sammaasa'nkappo, sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaa-aajiivo, sammaavaayaamo, sammaasati, sammaasamaadhii"ti. 'The stream, lord, is just this Ariyan Eightfold Way, to wit: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.' "Saadhu saadhu, saariputta! Ayameva hi, saariputta, ariyo a.t.tha'ngiko maggo soto, seyyathida.m– sammaadi.t.thi…pe… sammaasamaadhi". 'Well said, Sariputta! Well said, Sariputta! The stream is just this Ariyan Eightfold Way. ""Sotaapanno sotaapanno"ti hida.m, saariputta, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, saariputta, sotaapanno"ti Now again, Sariputta, they say, 'Stream-winner! Stream-winner!' Of what sort is a stream-winner, Sariputta?' "Yo hi, bhante, iminaa ariyena a.t.tha'ngikena maggena samannaagato aya.m vuccati sotaapanno, svaaya.m aayasmaa eva.mnaamo eva.mgotto"ti. 'Whosoever, lord, is blessed with this Ariyan Eightfold Way,-- such an one of such a name, of such and such a clan, is called 'Stream-winner.'' "Saadhu saadhu, saariputta! Yo hi, saariputta, iminaa ariyena a.t.tha'ngikena maggena samannaagato aya.m vuccati sotaapanno, svaaya.m aayasmaa eva.mnaamo eva.mgotto"ti. Pa~ncama.m. 'Well said, Sariputta! Well said, Sariputta! Whoever, Sariputta, is blessed with this Ariyan Eightfold Way, -- such an one of such a name, of such and such a clan, is called 'Stream-winner.'" This is the first thing. 36870 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg]2 Rebirth[herman]OK, Abhidharma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > R What I specifically do > not believe is that there is a causal nexus between the death of this, > my body and the coming to be of another being in a next moment. > > That doesn't mean I don't believe there are no results for good and bad > actions, because that is blatantly obvious. I also do have a mother, > father, all in this world. But when this body dies, so does everything > else that goes with it, including any consciousness. That's the end, > finished, kaput!!! > > I see no need for an unobvious afterlife or other continuity after death > to explain the obvious functionality, here and now, of sound moral > behaviour. > >+++++++++++++++++++ Dear Herman, It is sometimes suggested that in kesaputta/kalama sutta it is suggested taht the Buddha din't want us to accept his words; but as we saw he did use 'praised by the wise' as one of the tests of the worth of a statement. And you accept that the Buddha was wise and that he taught rebirth. Thus this is one good reason to take it that there must be rebirth. Sound moral behaviour depends on beliefs and understanding. For some people moral behaviour could be appeasing a God by ritual sacrifice or the beheading of enemies. If we believe that we have only this life to live, and that any kamma we make can only bear fruit in this exceedingly short time as a human then that can be a cause for moral laxness. If Hitler had believed that killing must bring results not only in this life but in future lives could he have ordered the killing of so many beings? RobertK 36871 From: databound Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 4:54pm Subject: Questions regarding Theravada Hi, Forgive the long post. I've been studying Zen for about 9 months now, mainly reading the works of Dogen and Suzuki, and enjoying it. I was enjoying it so much, I started reading other texts recommended by several local zen teachers, one of which was the Lotus Sutra. I was utterly shocked by the Lotus Sutra -- to me, it seemed so offensive and, frankly, un-Buddhist that I began having a hard time even considering myself a part of any Mahayana school. It felt like a betrayal. What I really loved about Zen were the concepts of no-self, that we are all one, and the concepts of impermanence, that this world is illusory, etc. I now understand that these concepts are somewhat common to all schools of Buddhism? Anyway, what I *can't* agree with are the concepts of Buddha as some sort of God, enlightenment through faith, and pretty much everything in the Lotus Sutra -- i.e. Buddha magically spewing forth light from his forehead, revealing all the worlds, and jewels raining from the sky, etc. The Lotus Sutra got me interested in what it insultingly refers to as "the lesser vehicle." I am still interested in the Buddha's teaching, but not some weird magical, mystical mumbo-jumbo written by who-knows about how Buddha is some sort of God, and that there are Buddhas who take human form and protect me, and if I simply place faith in the Lotus, I will be "Rewarded." I'm looking for something real, and practical. Because I will never believe that Buddha sat down and magically lifted his followers into the sky to be among the ancient Buddhas, etc. etc. So...looking towards that direction, I discovered Theravada, which I understand is the last remaining school of Buddhism that follows the original teachings of the Buddha himself. Correct? My question to you is: Does the Pali Cannon state that Buddha is a man, or a God? Does he do magic? What does it say about self (or lack thereof) and impermanence of the world? Because I'm not looking for a God.... Thanks so much! 36872 From: m. nease Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the age of wisdom Hi Connie and Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- From: "connieparker" To: Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 6:01 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: the age of wisdom > When death comes, nothing but one's spiritual realization is of value. I would say 'understanding' rather than 'one's spiritual realization', but agree completely--with the proviso that death comes at every instant without fail. We cannot afford to wait for the future event of the death of this lifetime. mike 36873 From: antony272b2 Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anicca=inconstant rather than impermanent Dear Howard, Thanks for your attention to my post and your detailed reply. I have little direct knowledge of anicca but here are my thoughts: I like the word inconstant because I like when Bhikkhu Nanamoli wrote: "nothing arisen can reveal any permanence at all, however brief". Here is a quote on time that I find profound: Bhikkhu Nanamoli wrote: "When the seen, heard, sensed and cognized (see Udana I,10) are misperceived to be (this that I see... that I think about, is that man, so-and-so, that thing of mine), to have temporal endurance and reality, it is because the three periods of time, these three modes by which we subjectively process our raw world in perceiving it, have been projected outwards by ignorance on the raw world and misapprehended along with that as objectively real." from "Does Saddha mean Faith" p30 in "Pathways of Buddhist Thought" Wheel 52/53, Buddhist Publication Society, PO Box 61 Kandy Sri Lanka Thich Nhat Hanh in his book "The Heart of the Buddha's teaching" argues that impermanence only implies suffering if we are attached. If he used the translation inconstant then he would have no argument with Theravada characteristics of anicca implying dukkha and anatta. Thanks for your attention. with metta (respect and goodwill) / Antony. 36874 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 4:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/24/04 6:00:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > H: "I'm afraid I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I maintain that > the so called witness is just plain illusion. Perhaps it is an awareness > of just-passed awareness misidentified as a "watcher". In any case, I > see it as a reification, an I-making, and an error." > > L: I disagree. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. ;-) ------------------------------------------------ It seems to me to be a distinct kind of consciousness.> > Are you familiar with the term "bare attention"? I think that is the > same thing. On the other hand, what isn't illusion? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think it is the same thing at all. Nyanaponika Thera, in his article "The Power of Mindfulness" describes bare attention as follows: > By bare attention we understand the clear and single-minded awareness of > what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. > It is called "bare" because it attends to the bare facts of a perception > without reacting to them by deed, speech or mental comment. Ordinarily, that > purely receptive state of mind is, as we said, just a very brief phase of the > thought process of which one is often scarcely aware. But in the methodical > development of mindfulness aimed at the unfolding of its latent powers, bare > attention is sustained for as long a time as one's strength of concentration > permits. Bare attention then becomes the key to the meditative practice of > satipatthana, opening the door to mind's mastery and final liberation. ------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ================== 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) 36875 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the age of wisdom Dear Connie, op 24-09-2004 03:01 schreef connieparker op connieparker@i...: > Not to say I agree with what that 'practice' is supposed to be, but I'm > still biting my tongue and looking for that slippery common ground rather > than arguing, Nina! N: They say not to be neglectful lest we regret later on. We can always use good reminders. Nina. 36876 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:51pm Subject: vipaka in the kitchen. Hi Larry, After I was busy writing to you about kamma, I had an illustrative happening. We were going to have diner, and after taking out the dish from the oven, the glass oven door collapsed and there were thousands of glas splinters all over the floor. What was there through eyes? Hard to tell. I had aversion about the incredible mess, but not too much. We started cleaning it up. The splinters were glittering, like diamonds, a pleasant visible object. I had some attachment to it. Indeed, strenuous movements with the body, sweeping it up. It was not really very painful, but still, we can say many moments of bodily painful feeling accompanying the vipaakacitta that is body-consciouness. Some dust that I also swept up did not have a beautiful colour. I just realized how many different moments there are when we think of a whole situation. It was so interesting!! I am glad you had questions on kamma, otherwise I would not have written about it,considered it and have a reminder afterwards when there was that happening. This furnace was very old and I will buy a new one, more modern, and that is a convenience. A condition for pleasant experiences, but who can tell? Nina. 36877 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:51pm Subject: Re: basic citta processes 2 Hello Phil, op 24-09-2004 14:51 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: >> Thus, citta and >> the accompanying cetasikas arise together at the same vatthu; they share >> the same object and they fall away together. > > Let's say it's seeing. > As we know, we have the illusion of constant seeing, but in fact there > are countless number of these rising and falling citta processes > occurring in rapid succession, right? N: Yes, but in between always bhavangacittas. And an eye-door process is followed by a mind-door process of cittas that still have visible object, after that other mind-door processes may arise withich define, think about the meaning, etc. Ph: "They share the same object and they > fall away together" and then there are bhavanga cittas until the same > visible object is adverted to again, and so on, and so on...? N: See above. Afterwards another visible object may impinge again, and so on, in the same way. One rupa that is visible object only lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. When it is experienced through the following mind-door process cittas it has just fallen away. It all is in a flash so fast. Ph: Until some > other object takes the attention away? N: There are conditions for another object to impinge. Ph: Or until the object loses the > ability, if you will, to advert bhavangas? N: See above, it falls away. Ph: Or until the mind rushes off in > proliferation based on the object? N: Citta with lobha may have phantasies about the object that was seen. Think long stories. Nina. 36878 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Rob M, Ven. Nyanaponika, in his Abh Studies gives a very helpful explanation of the Lists in the Dhammasanagani. When there are many sysnonyms it just illustrates different aspects of the same cetasika, as you said. Howard and several others on this list have it. Maybe it is on line? As you know, also the 37 factors pertaining to enlightenment have the same cetasikas more than once, but under a different aspect. Karuna and mudita are not arising with every kusala citta, they are not sobhana sadharana cetasikas. Nina. op 24-09-2004 13:06 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > Book I The Uprising of Thoughts (cittupppada-kandam) > > Part I Good States of Consciousness > > Chapter I The Eight Main Types of Thought relating to the Sensuous > Universe (kamavacara-attha-mahacittani) 36879 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James (and Rob) - ============================ > Saying that the Buddha didn't explicitly write in terms of dhammas vs > pa~n~natti, and that explicit language was a later add-on is different from > saying that the distinction is not implicit in and is inconsistent with the > suttas. After all, consider, for example, the Sabba Sutta. The Buddha didn't > include therein chairs and chariots, palaces and pariyatti as part of "the all", > now did he? :-) > > With metta, > Howard Friend Howard, I'm sorry but I can't follow the implied meaning in your rhetorical question (or I may misinterpret your meaning). I feel obligated to respond but please re-explain with direct statements. Thanks. Metta, James 36880 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:31am Subject: Ego Extirpation !!! BlankFriends: Self is Not … !!! Question: Who are you ? Answer: Something Else ! There is no Self as the agent of any action.. There is no Self as the feeler of any sensation.. There is no Self as the experiencer of any perception.. There is no Self in or outside any bony frame of body.. There is no Self in or outside any shortly sensed feeling.. There is no Self in or outside any experienced perception.. There is no Self in or outside any remembered memory.. There is no Self in or outside any constructed intention.. There is no Self in or outside any momentary consciousness.. There is no Doer experiencing any effect of any action.. There is no Definable Entity transmigrating at Rebirth.. There is no Stable Identity lasting even for a moment.. There is no Owner of anything, whether material or mental.. THERE IS NOT !!! Yet beings, since an endless beginning, passionately maintains this mere IDEA of a stably enduring yet invisible entity, supposed to be the Self, I, Ego, Me, Identity or Personality, with which they fall deeply & dramatically in love… Assuming such an IDEA, constructing such an Imagination, Defining such an Invention is more than FATAL, as it cause the constructer to come back to birth, ageing, decay & death & thereby suffering again & again for aeons … This personality-belief, this Ego-assuming, this Self-imagination, this Me-invention, is the first hindrance, the first fetter, the first mental chain to break, when progressing towards Freedom, towards Peace, towards Bliss, towards Nibbana… Here is only Change, Flux, Transience, Impermanence, Passing, Dissolution & Disintegration. Here is only Pain, Suffering, Dissatisfaction, Disappointment, Danger, Frustration & Misery. Here is only Impersonality, Egolessness, Selflessness and Ownerlessness lacking any Core. No Self is found neither here nor there... There is Action yet no-one is known doing it. There is a Noble Way yet no-one is seen travelling it. There is a Nibbana yet no-one appears to enter it. These are the Facts. No constructed identification is worth Clinging to. Let it all go, Give it Up ! Relinquish it ! Release it ! Not Agreeable yet quite Advantageous! Not Pleasurable yet quite Liberating! Not Enjoyable yet quite Deathless… The Six Sextets http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn148.html Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.msn.com/DirectDhamma http://uk.geocities.com/bhikkhu_samahita http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma Dhamma-Questions sent to my email are quite Welcome. 36881 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Howard: H: "I don't think it is the same thing at all. Nyanaponika Thera, in his article "The Power of Mindfulness" describes bare attention as follows: 'By bare attention we understand the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called "bare" because it attends to the bare facts of a perception without reacting to them by deed, speech or mental comment. Ordinarily, that purely receptive state of mind is, as we said, just a very brief phase of the thought process of which one is often scarcely aware. But in the methodical development of mindfulness aimed at the unfolding of its latent powers, bare attention is sustained for as long a time as one's strength of concentration permits. Bare attention then becomes the key to the meditative practice of satipatthana, opening the door to mind's mastery and final liberation.' " L: I stand corrected. It isn't the same. Witness consciousness doesn't require any special effort or concentration. It is always there in every consciousness series, much like adverting consciousness. Bare attention is, however, similar to witness consciousness in not reacting by mental comment and attending to the presently arising moment. One limitation to witness consciousness, and possibly (?) bare attention, is that there is no understanding. One advantage over understanding is that it is outside of kamma, strictly speaking. I suspect that "witness" adepts make witness consciousness an object of samadhi and attain to something similar to the formless jhanas. Beyond that is the nonduality of the empty texture of consciousness and the object of consciousness in ordinary experience. This fails to recognize impermanence but it still might lead to cessation. Hard to say. One difference between witness consciousness and adverting consciousness is that it is said that witness consciousness is present in dreamless sleep, in other words, bhavanga. I take this to be referring to the relative peace of no active consciousness that is (mis)labelled 'consciousness without an object', in other words pure consciousness. This could also have associations with the formless jhanas. Larry 36882 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi, James - In a message dated 9/25/04 1:05:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, James (and Rob) - > ============================ > > Saying that the Buddha didn't explicitly write in terms of > dhammas vs > >pa~n~natti, and that explicit language was a later add-on is > different from > >saying that the distinction is not implicit in and is inconsistent > with the > >suttas. After all, consider, for example, the Sabba Sutta. The > Buddha didn't > >include therein chairs and chariots, palaces and pariyatti as part > of "the all", > >now did he? :-) > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > Friend Howard, > > I'm sorry but I can't follow the implied meaning in your rhetorical > question (or I may misinterpret your meaning). I feel obligated to > respond but please re-explain with direct statements. Thanks. > > Metta, James > > ============================= Okay, here goes. In the Sabba Sutta, the Buddha said "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas." My point was that these things correspond to what the Abhidhamma calls paramattha dhammas, and they constitute ALL that there is. In this sutta which presents exactly what is - *all* that there is, there is no mention of trees and tree sprites, or groves and radiant devas, or heaven realms, or hell realms, or hungry ghosts, or bhikkhus, or buddhas, or begging bowls, or arms, or legs, or Anathapindaka's park, or any of the other millions upon millions of mind-concocted entities that seem to populate our world. Just eye & forms, etc. So, the Buddha actually does distinguish experiential "realities" from conceptual constructs in the suttas, because it is only the experiential realities listed in the Sabba Sutta that he includes within "the all". This is actually a very strong distinguishing of dhamma from pa~n~natti, because by not including the multi-millions of conventional objects of our world within what he calls "the all", the Buddha is according them purely conventional status and denying them actual status. 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) 36883 From: Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/25/04 1:29:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > L: I stand corrected. It isn't the same. Witness consciousness doesn't > require any special effort or concentration. It is always there in every > consciousness series, much like adverting consciousness. Bare attention > is, however, similar to witness consciousness in not reacting by mental > comment and attending to the presently arising moment. > > One limitation to witness consciousness, and possibly (?) bare > attention, is that there is no understanding. One advantage over > understanding is that it is outside of kamma, strictly speaking. > > I suspect that "witness" adepts make witness consciousness an object of > samadhi and attain to something similar to the formless jhanas. Beyond > that is the nonduality of the empty texture of consciousness and the > object of consciousness in ordinary experience. This fails to recognize > impermanence but it still might lead to cessation. Hard to say. > > One difference between witness consciousness and adverting consciousness > is that it is said that witness consciousness is present in dreamless > sleep, in other words, bhavanga. I take this to be referring to the > relative peace of no active consciousness that is (mis)labelled > 'consciousness without an object', in other words pure consciousness. > This could also have associations with the formless jhanas. > > Larry > =========================== I don't know where you have heard or read about "the witness". Could you give some references? I would be interested. Where I have read about it, and it's always quite vague, has consistently been in popularizations by people in "the vipassana movement", which I think of as a slightly new-age, "westernized" watering down of the Dhamma which comes close to reducing it to a mix of "insight meditation", pop psychology, and self-help pap. From what you say, it sounds to me that you have encountered it elsewhere, and I would be interested in hearing about that. As regards your relating of "consciousness without an object," a favorite term of Merrill-Wolfe, to formless jhanas, I think you may well be right. BTW, I've never heard the term 'witness adepts'. Is it yours, or is it common in some circles? 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) 36884 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:20pm Subject: Re: Warning - controversial post :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - ============================= > Okay, here goes. > In the Sabba Sutta, the Buddha said "What is the All? Simply the eye & > forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile > sensations, intellect & ideas." My point was that these things correspond to what the > Abhidhamma calls > paramattha dhammas, and they constitute ALL that there is. > Friend Howard, Well, you and I have tangled over the Sabba Sutta more than once. ;- )) Since I am not a phenomenalist, I don't see that sutta in the same light that you do. To my reading, everything you listed is included in the Sabba Sutta. To explain my position again on concepts vs. ultimate realities: I do not deny that the Buddha (and Ven. Sariputta) taught the danger in mental proliferation and excessive conceptualization. However, I believe that the Abhidhamma (as later developed) has gone to the other extreme and implied that concepts have no place in the Buddha's teaching. I prefer the middle path, which I believe the Buddha taught, which posits that concepts are acceptable as long as they do not proliferate and create desire/craving. The goal of the Buddha's dispensation isn't to rid the mind of concepts; it is to see the three characteristics of all conditioned reality: impermanent, suffering, and non-self. The computer I am typing on right now isn't going to last forever, it engenders suffering, and it cannot exist independently, but it is still a computer. It isn't just a collection of namas and rupas and so my designation of "computer" is simply a fantasy. That type of approach/thinking borders on the insane. Conditioned reality doesn't have to be either/or, it can be both. Metta, James 36885 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hallo RobM, James and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Friend Rob M., > > I very much agree with your assessment here but I have been reading > your pamphlet "Theory Behind the Buddha's Smile" and it states: > > "Seeing things as they truly are means being able to differentiate > between ultimate realities (dhammas) and those types of entities > which exist only as conceptual constructs but are mistakenly grasped > as ultimately real. The Abhidhamma describes these dhammas and > shows how they relate to each other." > > So, are you now recanting what you wrote here? If so, I will be > very happy about it ;-)). > > Metta, James A question: Sometime you (and others) use the words "two realities": absolute and conceptual. And sometimes "two languages": absolute and conventional. I think these two duo's are not the same. In theory we can talk in each of both languages about each of both realities. (Like we can talk in 'normal' language or in mathematical jargon about astrophysics and about daily affairs) But perhaps we, human beings, can only talk in conventional language about the Dhamma: about conceptual things rather good and about absolute realities rather clumsy. Is that correct? And maybe this is an answer to the question of James. Metta Joop 36886 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi Howard and all, Well said, Howard. Nina. op 25-09-2004 00:53 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Saying that the Buddha didn't explicitly write in terms of dhammas vs > pa~n~natti, and that explicit language was a later add-on is different from > saying that the distinction is not implicit in and is inconsistent with the > suttas. After all, consider, for example, the Sabba Sutta. The Buddha didn't > include therein chairs and chariots, palaces and pariyatti as part of "the > all", > now did he? :-) 36887 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] No contraversies. Hi Rob M and Larry, Rob, your post is a good opportunity to contemplate the Dhammasangani more. I cannot help being impressed every time when I see these lists. I wrote before about the first words: at a time, yasmi.m samaye, the many conditions (also of the past) that have to concur for the arising of the first type of kusala citta accompanied by pañña. I was reflecting on synonyms, very meaningful. The list is not a static, abstract thing, it is dynamic! Faculties (indriya) when developed can become powers (bala), and this is very encouraging. Sati can become a power, bala, and then it arises in whatever circumstance. This happens already during the development of insight stages. Larry, this is even before enlightenment of the stage of the sotapanna. You do not have to wait until you are an arahat. And even intellectually we can have more understanding of such lists which are not at all technical, abstract lists. Further on in the Dhsgn we see many more aspects of dhammas. There are many classifications which are very meaningful. Take for example karu.na and mudita, these are mentioned further on under an other aspect: English p. 62, in connection with the development of jhana. As to the , ye vaa panaka), nine cetasikas which are included by these words but not expressively mentioned in this list. The Expositor I, p. 174 mentions them separately. It was not the purpose of the Dhsg to give here an exhaustive technical list. These cetasikas were known already. Ven. Nyanaponika mentions the Anupada sutta (MIII) in his article, p. 49. Sariputta analysed and defined the cetasikas of the jhanacittas through their characteristics (lakkhana). They were known from the beginning, namely: wish-to-do (chanda), determination and attention. Ven. N. p. 94. also refers to the Samma Ditthi sutta (M I, no 9). The Expositor says they can be found in various suttas. P. 38, Ven. N says: And here is the clue, Ven. N., p. 53: So, we have to reflect more on the meaning of these lists, why they were arranged in such a way, why some cetasikas are not expressively mentioned. This was certainly not an omission. When comparing the lists of the Dhsg and the Abhidhammattha Sangaha there are not contradictions at all if we reflect on the meaning of each of these lists. Nina. op 24-09-2004 13:06 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > [1] Which are the states that are good? (katame dhamma kusala) > 36888 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Toll Booth Operators and the Brahmaviharas Hi Rob Something occurred today to condition a return to this thread. Ph > > The key words here are "developed a habit." I suspect that rather > than > > deciding to smile > > at toll operators, you became aware one day that it was happening, > and that > > conditioned > > these mindful moments of smiling. Ph :Walking to the station, I pass a supermarket where a traffic guard stands to stop cars turning in so pedestrains can pass by. They stand out there for hours, no matter the weather, holding their arms out in a protective way as we walk by whether there are cars coming or not. I became aware of a grwoing tendency to give them a little bow and a word of thanks, but it doesn't happen every day. Personally, I think if and when that metta arises and motivates me to do that is a moment of pure metta, though rare. BTW, I haven't had time to read the "controversial post" thread, but I guess it's a question about whether the Buddha really taught about the seeing of dhammas, or absolute realities. When I have moments where a moment of metta arises beyond my control and falls away again before I can make the mistake of trying to hold on to it, whether it is a dhamma absolute reality or a ding dong or whatever, it is certainly not-self, impermanent and dukkha by virtue of this impermanence. That's for sure. ==== Ph: I would say that if someone read > your post > > who had never practiced > > awareness of brahma-viharas and was impressed by your post and > decided to go > > out and smile > > at strangers/neutral people in daily life, it wouldn't be the same. > > > Rob> Not sure how it would be different. Imagine that I had written a > texbook on the brahmaviharas. Would that make my smile any different > from a person who had never heard the term before? Ph: Obviously people can have smiles that arise from wholsesome cittas whether they are Buddhists or not. But when there are not wholesome cittas at the time (they are reare) and someone smiles no matter what state of mind he or she is in, the effect if verifiably not the same. Look at politicians or synchronized swimmers. The most insincere smile on earth will arise someday when a retired synchronized swimmer enters politics. There must be days when you get up on the wrong side of the bed and go to work in a bad mood. Is your smile the same that day as on other days. The citta behind the smile is not self. It can't be controlled, I think. ========= Ph: > > > I think of the thing i posted recently from "Deeds of merit" in > which K > > Sujin says that the rupa of the tone of voice > > is a reflection of the citta lying beneath, or words to that > effect. I > > wonder if the same can be said for > > smiles. The rupa involved in the smile conditioned by citta > beneath. Maybe > > the connection is not so direct. > > But certainly a smile arising from wholesome citta is different > than a smile > > that is not. > > Rob: > The connection is extremely direct. > > K. Sujin was talking about verbal intimation, the creation of sound > that communicates our intentions. Verbal intimation is rupa, it does > not know anything. It is a special modification of the earth element > that causes the vocal apparatus to create sounds to reveal > intentions. > > There is also bodily imtimation, the movement of the body that > communicates our intentions (smiles, gestures, etc.). Bodily > intimation is also rupa, it does not know anything. It is a special > modification of the wind element that causes the body to move in > ways to reveal intentions. Ph: So if there are akusala cittas, the intention (cetana?) is also askula, right? So surely that would effect the smile. My wife does a good imitation of the pinched smile I make when I'm irritated by something and try to smile. === Ph >I have many students who > > are nervous, fatigued or disinterested-looking from the beginning. > (Many > > businessmen are required by their companies to take English lessons > > whether they want to or not.) There is a lot of ice to break at > times. I > > have become aware of the way a smile can do so much > > to break the ice, and there are times I take pride in my ability > to coax > > smiles from the dourest of students. > ===== Rob: > There is a difference in my interaction with the toll booth operator > and your interaction with your students. By its nature, my > interaction with the toll booth operator is quite close to > momentary. This makes it much, much simpler than your interaction > with your students. Ph: True. So I'll use that traffic guard as an example instead. There is metta on some days, indifference on others -i.e I don't even notice him - and aversion on other days, perhaps when he allows a car to impede my speedy stride to the station. These akusala and kusala states coming and go beyond my control. I can be mindful of them, at times. === Rob: > Can't comment on our comparitive accumulations, but I agree that > both kusala and akusala arise and often in close proximity. Ph: Isn't it fascinating? Only the Buddha taught anatta. Whether these momentary mental states are called absolute realities or not, they point at anatta, and that is where our liberation lies. ====== Ph: >> > I would have to disagree with this. We can't know the other's > cittas. For > > all > > you know, there may be conceit and even sexual desire in the other > brought > > on by your > > smile! Beware!!! That smile of yours could lead to the downfall of > the toll > > booth operator's > > happy family life! Rob M> My assumption is based on: > - a toll booth operator smile arises in response to my smile > - this smile is bodily intimation, indicating the presence of cittas > with pleasant mental feeling. Ph: Not necessarily, I would say. People can smile for all sorts of reasons, such as nervousness. I'l agree that the momentary nature of your encounter with the tollbooth man makes it less likely that akusala is involved in his smile. > - Pleasant mental feeling arising with akusala cittas is > characterized as inducing excitement whereas pleasant mental feeling > arising with kusala cittas is characterized as inducing calm; the > type of smiles I get back are of the "calm" type, not of > the "excited" type Ph: I don't think you can assume this. If it were Japan, there would be excitement, not because of sex appeal but because an encounter with a native English speaker is a rare thing, and there might be a chance to speak English. There is more likely to be aversion at thsi prospect. Malaysia is more multi-cultural, so perhaps you don't stick out as much as I do here. There is certainly not likely to be calm if I smile at a stranger. > - the characterisitic of mudita is "gladdening" and that seems to > fit my observation > - the function of mudita is being unenvious at another's success; > the toll booth operator is "sharing" my smile > - the manifestation of mudita is elimination of boredom; Ph Surprising. It seems to me that the elimination of bordeom is more often realted to doa and lobha. Think of all the mental trouble we get into because the mind gets bored. But I know you know what you're talking about here. that > certainly seems to fit > - the proximate cause of mudita is seeing the success of others; my > smile certainly prompted the toll booth operator's reaction > - mudita can be considered as succeeding when it makes boredom > subside and failing when it produces merriment (excitement) > > In summary, I feel the odds are extremely good that mudita is > arising in the mind of the toll booth operator (but of course, I > cannot be 100% sure). Ph: Well,, I guess my point is to affirm that I believe brhahma-viharas are not-self and arise beyond our control. "We don't move into the divine abides," I wrote the other day, "we are moved in by conditions." I like that line! I'm not comfortable with the idea of mudita arising in such a predictable way. Sobhanna cetasikas - can they be so predictable? A question. I mentionned above about the way the impact of my interaction with strangers is heightened by being a westerner in an almost entirely homogenuous society. I wonder if that could be related to object condition. In a society that for better or worse has a fascination with blonde haired, blue -eyed people (even geeky looking ones like yours truly) I wonder if being one would make me a great/important object and therefore condition mind-door citta processes in a more pronounced way than if I were a Japanese. I hope that doesn't sound absurd. You can be sure I don't mean it in a conceited way. I'm just curious about conditions. As visible object, do people who stand out from the crowd conditoin responses in a different way. Of course, all that would be at the conceptual level - it's not really visible object, is it? Strange question, I know. But since you are caught up with a serious controversy (wink) elsewhere, perhaps you'll enjoy the diversion into something more eccentris. Metta, Phil 36889 From: connieparker Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:51am Subject: Re: the age of wisdom nice seeing you, sir mike! >> When death comes, nothing but one's spiritual realization is of value. > I would say 'understanding' rather than 'one's spiritual realization', > but > agree completely--with the proviso that death comes at every instant > without > fail. We cannot afford to wait for the future event of the death of this > lifetime. was about to say I totally agree with you and that that's how I was thinking of it, but maybe we could say any of the 16 nanas leading to sotapanna would be spiritual realization, too... let alone any ariyan ('real buddhists' ;)) realization, of course! hmmm... that's all well and good, but now i'm thinking that realistically, all our accumulations are our 'spiritual realizations'. peace, connie 36890 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:28am Subject: Deeds of Merit: rejoicing in others' kusala Hello all. More from "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/ S. : The person who did not perform wholesome deeds himself, but who rejoices in the wholesome deeds of someone else, has kusala cittas, cittas without attachment, anger, jealousy or other defilements. The appreciation of someone else's kusala is another way of kusala. Its arising is conditioned by the kusala of someone else. This way of kusala is called in Paali: pattanumodana [5. At such a moment there is kusala citta with anumodana, appreciation of someone elses kusala. Therefore, even if someone cannot perform a wholesome deed himself he can still have kusala citta. When he has cittas without jealousy and when he rejoices in someone else's wholesome deed, his cittas are kusala cittas without necessarily giving away things himself to someone else. (end quote) Ph: "The appreciation of someone else's kusala is another way of kusala. Its arising is conditoned by the kusala of someone else." Hmm. As I was saying to Rob M in another thread, I wonder how we can know the citta of someone else. It cannot be assumed that there is kusala citta behind deeds that seem to be kusala on the surface. Kusala and akusala arise in such quick succession, and fall away again. We can be sure there is kusala in there somewhere, and rejoice in that while disregarding our knowledge that there may be akusala as well? Not even panna will see into another person's cittas. Only the Buddha could do that. So I wonder about this teaching. If it were another teacher's teaching, a pop Buddhist writer's teaching I would go with it, but K Sujin is strict about looking into realities of the moment. They are here and gone in a moment. How can we rejoice in something that is already gone and that we are unable to see in the other anyways? Well, why not. I know it seems like I'm overdoing it on this point, but please bear with me. I'm not really fretting about it. Just working out my understanding of kusala. It's interesting that when I first posted about this a couple of months ago I went along with it immediately but now am having more resistance. Wholesome doubt, I hope and not the restless variety. Metta, Phil 36891 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:05am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 069 ) About Rupa Dear Htoo The most you write I understand or agree with. Two points: Htoo: I understand. You are talking rupas that are in contact with only you. I agree. This is what it should be. This is the exit. If rupas outside are followed, then as you said science may explain more. But all these will be in the conceptual world. They will not be ultimate realities. Joop: I don't understand. Do you mean that an object I don't see is something in the conceptual world; and that the same object at the moment it's light touches my eye is a ultimate reality? Joop: And I experience modernized rupa (in meditation), not the classical. Htoo: Explain these please. 'modernized rupa' and 'classical rupa'. Joop: For example I experience as pathavi 'gravity' and not 'earth- quality' or 'extension-quality'. And when think about the eye-sense I realize that after light (photons) touch the retina in the eye, a eletric pulse going tot my brain where in fact 'seeing' takes place: I can and will not forget this knowledge. I hope that you when writing about Cetasika also mention the relation of them with Rupa, because when you write about Rupa it's impossible not to mention Nama; and nama and rupa must be in balance With metta Joop 36892 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Warning - controversial post :-) Hi, Joop - In a message dated 9/25/04 5:18:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > But perhaps we, human beings, can only talk in conventional language > about the Dhamma: about conceptual things rather good and about > absolute realities rather clumsy. > Is that correct? And maybe this is an answer to the question of James. > ====================== Actually, ALL language is conventional. It cannot be otherwise. Every language is a set of communicational conventions. I think that as regards language, the conventional-ultimate dichotomy is poorly named. I tend to use 'literal' versus 'figurative' (in terms of speech intention) as an alternative. Even this terminology is imperfect, as the matter is not a two valued one but rather one of degrees of literalness. 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) 36893 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] contact Hi Howard, op 23-09-2004 12:15 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> ***** >> We read in the 'Discourse of the Honey-ball' (Middle Length >> sayings I, no. 18) that Maha-kaccana explained to the monks concerning >> contact: >> >> -This situation occurs: that when there is eye, your reverences, when >> -there is visible object, when there is visual consciousness, one will >> -recognise the manifestation of sensory impingement (phassa)... >> >> When there is the concurrence of the ear, sound and hearing-consciousness, >> there is the manifestation of ear-contact. > H: The foregoing displays, I believe, a subtle difference between > Abhidhamma Pitaka and Sutta Pitaka. > In the suttas, it is said that sense-door object and > (activated/energized/arisen) sense organ serve to condition corresponding > sense consciousness, > and *the coming together of the three* is contact. But here contact seems to > be presented as a subtle, mental, kammic formation - a formation within > sankharakkhandha - which *manifests* as that convergence, i.e., which is a > needed > condition for the convergence of the three. As Nina writes, for example: "When > there is the concurrence of body-sense, a tangible object such as hardness and > the experience of hardness, there is the manifestation of body-contact." > Do you see the difference? In the suttas contact is the convergence, > itself - the event of concurrence, whereas in Abhidhamma it is a dhamma that > is a condition for that. N: There is another sutta about contact: K.S. IV, Ch 4, § 93, Duality. As you say, the meeting together of the three is eye-contact. ...That condition... that relation.. in Pali: yo pi hetu, yo pi paccayo... In the definition of the Expositor it is mentioned as manifestation. But contact is also a necessary condition. Both are true, I do not see any controversy, but neither do you, I think. When we read the sutta we have to be careful not to confuse the impingement of an object on a doorway with phassa cetasika. When an object presents itself citta can experience that object and contact helps the citta, it asists. I know you do not feel confortable with object and subject. Since citta is an experience there must be that which is experienced, the baby must have a name. Other names for object: gocara, sensefield; aalambana.m, support or that which citta hangs on to, sense object; visaya, region, realm, sphere. BTW the Expositor explains that even the highest arupa jhanacitta must have an object, but the experience here is very subtle. The simile used here is about a little spilt oil one hardly sees. One hardly knows that it is there. Object-condition is the second one mentioned in the Patthana. Phassa is an important condition: nutriment-condition. See U Narada, p. 56: contact supports and maintains the round of rebirths. Apart from physical nutriment there are three mental nutriments: contact, volition and citta. Coming back to your post, I like to know what is really going on now. At this moment there is hearing, and thus I know, intellectually, that there is ear-contact, and this is different from bodycontact when there is touching. We cannot catch the cetasika contact, it is very subtle. But through insight it will eventually be known. When we know that the characteristic that appears should be known there is less danger to think with wrong view of subject and object, or to think with wrong view of an experiencer. The danger is not in the words but in the latent tendency. Nina. 36894 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma Dear AL, op 24-09-2004 04:15 schreef Andrew Levin op andrewlevin@e...:> > Well, I've seen the first divine messenger and I'm still in > negligence. It doesn't have to stay like this though. I can still do > good. > I will give you some ground on this because I've read in the > Vyaggapajja Sutta, from a booklet I have entitled 'Buddhist Rules for > the Laity,' the Buddha describes four principles to establish onesself > in to come to success in the world beyond, and one of them, prudence, > includes eliminating ignorance, attaining enlightenment, pondering > over the skandhas, and viewing the world of formations as impermanent. > (So it follows that he could prescribe the vipassana nanas for laity > too). N: I like this sutta very much. Yes, also laypeople can develop vipassana. AL: The question is, then, just how much of this right view is > composed of insight-knowledges, and how much can be acquired through > other means. You can't say the knowledge that there is what is given > and what is offered or sacrificed comes about through the > insight-knowledges, can you? N: There are levels of right view. Intellectual correct understanding is one level, and it is necessary as a foundation. Insight is deeper, it is direct understanding. AL: So there has to be another way to > acquire this right view. I won't say I know how to do it, but the > same goes for view of mother and father, possibly that of there being > this world and the next world. It seems there should be some kind of > direct understanding or vision of things as they are. Possibly > through dana we can get to our views and they would be more malleable, > I don't really know. I just don't think it can all come about through > the insight knowledges, and I don't want wrong view. N: Dana with right understanding of the citta at that moment, thus, accompanied by right understanding is a helpful condition. And, as said, intellectual correct understanding. (snipped) AL: I would say I have some kind of a mixed view right now. Knowledge of > there being this world and the next, being sufficient to motivate me > to do some acts of good. N: Even a person who does good out of fear and aversion towards an unhappy birth has kusala citta, but conditioned by akusala citta. Not at the same time. We learn in the patthana that also akusala can condition kusala by way of natural strong dependence-condiiton. We can check this!...(snipped) AL: Ahh but how do we come to the view that there is mother and father? > Bare attention to the present moment? (I'm not discarding this > possibility) And are you suggesting that insight into kamma and > vipaka gives us knowledge and vision of spontaneously reborn beings? > Because if not, we still have an open question of how to resolve this > basic wrong view. N: See above: through insight there will be a deeper understanding. The text about mother and father I do not understand well. I think it may be that the person who denies it does not believe in causes which bring results. >> N: My remark pertains to purification that can come about through > rites and >> rituals.. If this is present the other wrong views will not be > eradicated, >> no hope. We do not have to try to know all kinds of wrong view. > AL: Nina Ive got to disagree here, what youre saying implies that a great > majority of the followers of the Buddha who were given directions on > how to reach a heavenly rebirth had to be stream-enterers to acheive > it. It can't be like that. There *were* some people the Buddha > instructed to acheive a heavenly rebirth without making attainments on > the path. N: True, but they still had the latent tendency of wrong view. A:He called it a 'heavenly abode'. And I even know, I have > not eradicated wrong view of purification of rites and rituals, yet I > know (through my own vision) there is the next world. A: This does not mean that the latent tendency of wrong view is eradicated. Abhidhamma and the third foundation of mindfulness. ===================================== AL: My view, coming into this, was that knowledge of Abhidharma > constitutes the third foundation of mindfulness, mindfulness of mind, > that is, knowledge of the different types of consciousness that can > arise and their concomittants. That is, all 89 of them. And > recognizing wrong view when present. > > You are now saying that some degree of panna is necessary to see wrong > views. This is fine, because I have seen at least one wrong view. > But other than that I am not seeing what direction Abhidharma goes in > if not to fit as the third foundation of mindfulness. Maybe you could > give me an idea? N: The Abhidhamma helps us to understand all kinds of dhammas in daily life, also rupa. Thus, it helps with all four foundations of mindfulness. It helps you to understand your life right now, that is what matters. We do not have to think of names and words like foundations of mindfulness. Conditions for sati. ============> > So if I have this straight, kusala conditions the arising of such > beneficial qualities as sati, correct? This is more complex. There is sati with each kusala citta, it does not waste the opportunity for kusala. But as to sati of satipatthana which is aware of nama and rupa, this needs as condition correct understanding of the practice. > Abstaining from idle chatter: =================== A: I'm of the view that we can abstain outright from it, which the Buddha > said is in itself wholesome. N: But it depends on conditions. One day we may abstain, another day we cannot, because it is not self who abstains, but a citta that is conditioned by many factors, some of which are from the past. Nina. 36895 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sotaapattiya'nga.m Dear Connie, Thank you very much, enjoying the Pali. This is also a sutta for Herman, similar to the one I gave him. Instead of blessed with the eightfold way I would prefer the more litteral: endowed with. Nina. op 25-09-2004 02:01 schreef connieparker op connieparker@i...: > > Kindred Sayings, MahaVagga Book IX on Streamwinning Ch.1 Paragraph 5, > Sariputta > [Mahaavagga Ch.11. Sotaapattisam.yutta.m, Section 5. > Dutiyasaariputtasutta.m] 36896 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika. Hi Larry, op 25-09-2004 00:18 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: One thing that is a little > unconvincing is that a smell, taste, or sound are never accompanied by > unpleasant feeling. N:I think you mean the experience of smell, etc. , not the smell itself. L: The bitter taste of medicine, the smell of a corpse, > or the sound of fingernails scraping a blackboard seem to me to be very > unpleasant. N: Agreed. L:This is a direct sensation of unpleasantness that preceeds > aversion. N: The vipaakacitta that experiences an unpleasant object through ears, for example, is not accompanied by unhappy feeling. Impossible, because unhappy feeling only accompanies akusala citta with aversion. It is accompanied by inferior indifferent feeling which is a kind of affliction, but passive, like a weak man that cannot strike back when a strong man afflicts him. There is no unhappy feeling together with the unpleasant sensation, but in reality unhappy feeling arises very soon afterwards and then it seems that it is together with the akusala vipaakacitta. We think like that because of ignorance. Nina. 36897 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 0:06pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 069 ) About Rupa Dear Joop, Thanks for your reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: Dear Htoo The most you write I understand or agree with. Two points: >Htoo: I understand. You are talking rupas that are in contact with only you. I agree. This is what it should be. This is the exit. If rupas outside are followed, then as you said science may explain more. But all these will be in the conceptual world. They will not be ultimate realities. Joop: I don't understand. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There is no reason for not understanding here. You are talking 'the rupas' that are in contact with 'only you'. No other people. Only you. There are endless rupas outside you. You would not be in contact with rupas beside me now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: Do you mean that an object I don't see is something in the conceptual world; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I did not mean 'that an object 'you' don't see is something in the conceptual world'. Rupas are rupas. They are realities. But when they are not in contact with you cannot know them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: and that the same object at the moment it's light touches my eye is a ultimate reality? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Unclear sentence. If rephrased, this can possibly be discussed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Joop: And I experience modernized rupa (in meditation), not the classical. > Htoo: Explain these please. 'modernized rupa' and 'classical rupa'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: For example I experience as pathavi 'gravity' and not 'earth- quality' or 'extension-quality'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Pathavi is not gravity. Pathavi is not extension. Your modernized rupa is still not clear. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: And when think about the eye-sense I realize that after light (photons) touch the retina in the eye, a eletric pulse going tot my brain where in fact 'seeing' takes place: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This just show 'misunderstanding in kammaja rupa cakkhu pasada and your scientific knowledge.' There is an image outside of one eye. There is light. The light strikes the image. The light rays go to the eyes. They pass through cornea. Then through a clear fluid of acqueous humor they continue to pass through the len. Then through vitreous humour. Then the light rays which carry photons strike the retina. There are visual pigments rods and cones. As soon as photons strike them the energies in rods and cones change and they transmit to the back of the eye where bipolar neurones are intermingle with and forming finally as a nerve. The impulse is not direct. They cause some changes in neurotransmission and the nerve cells become active. The active nerves carry the impulses by jumping many many nodes and segments. And the impulse then is carried to a ganglion. At that ganglion, impulses are relayed and another changes arise and this cause further nerves to become active. They carry the impulse and pass through several orders call 1st order, 2nd order, 3rd order and so on. The impulses are then carried along their specific channels through the lobes of the brain called temporal lobe, parietal lobe etc etc. And finally the impulses reach to occipital lobe of the brain. There are special areas in the brain such as area 17, area 18, area 19 and so on. When the impulses reach last order neurone, the image is still not known but just seen. There are several visual association areas that work together and they are interconnected and items of information they stored are linked each other. There are still many other neurophysiological events. The more they are investigated the more they become complicated as the more facts are discovered. These benefit people. But these do not help liberation. In the whole process what you will think as rupa as a base for seeing is not there. I mean cakkhu pasada is not there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: I can and will not forget this knowledge. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: That is up to you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop: I hope that you when writing about Cetasika also mention the relation of them with Rupa, because when you write about Rupa it's impossible not to mention Nama; and nama and rupa must be in balance ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Nama and rupa almost always work together. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > With metta > Joop ---------------------------------------------------------------------- May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36898 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 0:20pm Subject: Re: Questions regarding Theravada --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "databound" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Databound: Hi, ''..snip.. everything..snip..'' My question to you is: Does the Pali Cannon state that Buddha is a man, or a God? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: The Buddha is not a God. The Buddhas are always human beings. There were conversation that mentioned that The Buddha was a man. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Databound: Does he do magic? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Not at all. He is straight forward, honest, sincere, never tell lies, never makes illusion to people. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Databound: What does it say about self (or lack thereof) and impermanence of the world? Because I'm not looking for a God.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There is no self at all. No soul at all. Even you are looking for a God, you will never find. Because as there is no God at all. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Databound: Thanks so much! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You are most welcome. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36899 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 0:34pm Subject: Re: vipaka in the kitchen. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina: > Hi Larry, ..snip ..snip..everything here is snipped.. :-).. This furnace was very old and I will buy a new one, more modern, and that is a convenience. A condition for pleasant experiences, but who can tell? Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Nina, forgive me that I butt in. And I aplogise if I am insinuating you. But with good wishes. Sometimes people recondition the situation. Example: If something is lost, some person goes mad. some person gets angry. some person goes anxious. some person becomes depressed. But sometimes some recondition their mind through different perception. The example you experienced is a kind of lost. But the lost thing was very old. At least this releases some tension or attachment inside. Another thought is that if a new one has to replace the lost one, it will be much more convenient. This again releases further tension created by attachment. Reconditions may help to some degrees. But precondition is better than recondition. If you precondition your mind by derooting or eradicating all possible attachment including subtle ones, then there will not be suffering. Instead, things will be seen as they are through out their process of arising and falling away. Thanks for your time to read this up. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36900 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post :-) In a message dated 9/24/2004 3:10:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: Wow, that is controversial! As every thinking person knows, the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. So what does that leave? Is there a third time - a present time - or does the non- existent past become the non-existent future in no time at all? There are only two possible views: either there is a present quantum of time in which dhammas exist, or nothing exists. The Buddha settled the question by saying the view "nothing exists" is the wrong view. (Mahacattarikasutta) So, everything in daily life that is logically real, is real (however fleetingly). For example, seeing, hearing and touching, along with the seen, the heard and the touched (as they arise now in the present moment) are all absolutely real. Hi Ken H, All "This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends on a duality--upon the notion of existence and the notion of non-existence. But for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of non-existence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world." (The connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, Pg. 544.) The views of non-existence and existence would both seem to be incorrect. TG 36901 From: nori Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation ? Hi Sarah and Ken, I'm just going to add my two cents. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Ken O (& Nori), > > As you know, I'm always glad to see you around....., > > You wrote to Nori (I think it was), > > --- Ken O wrote: > N:> > > His definition of meditation is partly this: > > > > A sustained and directed investigation into a chosen aspect of > > > our > > > > nature and reality. > > > > This, I believe, includes processes of directed thought and > > > > reflection (i.e. investigation and evaluation), in addition to > > > direct observation. > .... > K: > Isn't this what we do in our everyday waking moments :) Ah so hard > > to notice, it just passes us moment by moment and yet we have many > > people keep telling us that we need to sit in one corner to "think" > > Sometimes I wonder, when we first awake, isn't thought already arise. > > Do we need to sit and think to think :). Thinking is only valid in > > the every moment of our life and not waiting in one corner to > > reinforce the believe that 'I' must do something. When there is an > > I, then thinking is already lost, panna is already lost bc we are > > still attached to the idea of I doing :) and believing that it takes > > an 'I' to eradicate an 'I'. Conditions arise without 'I' :). So > > lets be happy with thinking now and not later. Cheers > ... > S: Your posts always make me smile. (RobM would approve;-)). --- In respect to: "Do we need to sit and think to think ?" I believe there is a great benefit to sitting: - when all is quiet... - there is nobody else around... - you are not in the process of some agenda... - your awareness/mind is not scattered... When your awareness is not scattered, when you have your entire mind/awareness available, there is more discernment and clarity in this setting... ... discernment and clarity which can be utilized whether to observe the five hinderances / defilements present within oneself, or to investigate, reflect, contemplate. This is my opinion. When the water is calm, then you can see your own reflection clearly in the water. metta, nori 36902 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:00pm Subject: Re: Questions regarding Theravada Hello Databound, Welcome to DSG. You wrote: -------------------- > I've been studying Zen for about 9 months now, mainly reading the works of Dogen and Suzuki, and enjoying it. I was enjoying it so much, I started reading other texts recommended by several local zen teachers, one of which was the Lotus Sutra. I was utterly shocked by the Lotus Sutra -- to me, it seemed so offensive and, frankly, un-Buddhist that I began having a hard time even considering myself a part of any Mahayana school. It felt like a betrayal. > ---------------- I share your attitude. It is lamentable that so many Schools of Buddhism have dressed-up the Buddha's teaching to make it look like a religion. DSG is the right place for you. Here, some of us will find even your ideas too religious: ----------------- D: > What I really loved about Zen were the concepts of no-self, that we are all one, and the concepts of impermanence, that this world is illusory, etc. > ------------------ Forgive me for asking, but if there is no self( as I agree), how can we all be one? :-) ------------------- D: > I now understand that these concepts are somewhat common to all schools of Buddhism? Anyway, what I *can't* agree with are the concepts of Buddha as some sort of God, enlightenment through faith, and pretty much everything in the Lotus Sutra -- i.e. Buddha magically spewing forth light from his forehead, revealing all the worlds, and jewels raining from the sky, etc. The Lotus Sutra got me interested in what it insultingly refers to as "the lesser vehicle." I am still interested in the Buddha's teaching, but not some weird magical, mystical mumbo-jumbo written by who-knows about how Buddha is some sort of God, and that there are Buddhas who take human form and protect me, and if I simply place faith in the Lotus, I will be "Rewarded." I'm looking for something real, and practical. Because I will never believe that Buddha sat down and magically lifted his followers into the sky to be among the ancient Buddhas, etc. etc. So...looking towards that direction, I discovered Theravada, which I understand is the last remaining school of Buddhism that follows the original teachings of the Buddha himself. Correct? > -------------------- There is no limit to the religiosity that is tacked on to the Dhamma. It will continue because most people want it that way. So there's no point in being outraged at the injustice of it all. Once you have found the original Theravada texts, you can safely ignore the rest. ------------------- D: > My question to you is: Does the Pali Cannon state that Buddha is a man, or a God? Does he do magic? What does it say about self (or lack thereof) and impermanence of the world? Because I'm not looking for a God.... > --------------------------------- I agree with Htoo's answers: the Dhamma is all very honest and down to earth. Even so, the Pali Canon does contain amazing stories of every kind (including coloured rays emanating from the Buddha's body). I have no problem with them, and I am even more anti- religious than you are. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 36903 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:50pm Subject: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 07 ) by Htoo Dear Dhamma Friends, For those who are new or who have not been aware of there there is ebook 'Theory Behind The Buddha's Smile' by Rob M, I would suggest them to read it. I have been discussing on some points in that ebook. Continue: Page 26. 1. ''As we can see from the diagram below, most of the time the mental state is within bhavanga ( ''sleeping mind'' ) or javana (creating kamma). In almost all cases, when we observe the mind, it is the javana mental state that are seen.'' I agree what you said. But once I have discussed that not all javana cittas are kamma-creating. But you seem to centered on an average person. I agree that you said 'javana cittas are seen'. But there are other vithi cittas or sense door process mental states. Like adverting consciousness, sense-consciousness, receiving consciousness, investigating mental state, determining mental state. But you refer that 'most of the time'. Then this is true. Because at a single object 1 series happens. Then several mind process follow. These processes have many javana cittas. This is just expansion of thought. 2. page 26 9. .....associated with ill-will 10. .....associated with ill-will In these 2 cittas, the original Pali says that they are associated with 'patigha'. Patigha is hurting, striking, hitting, touching violently. Will it be better to use the word 'hurting-mind'? Page 27 3. ''The English word ''feeling'' is very broad in meaning.'' I totally agree with you here. This point is why I am using Pali words instead of translated words. 4. ''Wisdom: When accompanied by wisdom/ knowledge ( nana ) a mental state comprehends things as they are.'' Rob, I think that expression is for mahasatipatthana. Panna have different levels. There are some mental states where there do have nana but they do not know or comprehend things as they are. Actually you just reveal 8 mahakusala cittas and then mention this. 5. This is not for the point, but to say that I will leave 'Jhana Quiz' and their answer. I will come around after finishing on others. So the page 28 and 29 are left. Page 30. 6. '' Cetana ( volition, intention, will ) I would leave 'will'. Because it may confuse with 'chanda cetasika'. Chanda and cetana are not the same and they are totally different. Chanda is 'will' 'wish' 'desire'. Here again, 'wish' and 'desire' may confuse with attachment or lobha. Some westerners do confuse on this matter. Once I read a message in a website. I think, it is an ebook or linked page. In that the writer states that'The Buddha has the desire to attain nibbana and the writer says this is lobha'. Anyway, cetana is not 'will'. I think. Cetana pushes. Cetana urges. Cetana remind. 7. ''Ekaggata ( one-pointedness, concentration )'' All understand that ekaggata is concentration. But when there is a single citta, it is difficult to understand as concentration. I agree on 'one-pointedness'. I would add it as 'fixability' or 'fixator'. Because it fixes at the object. When ekaggata cetasika in 'upekkha sahagatam uddhacca sampayutta citta' or restless mental state as you write is considered it is hard to understand. These 2 co-exist in that citta. One is concentration and one is deconcentration. It is really hard to understand. 8. Page 30. The figure is a good representation. Especially 'cetana' and 'jivitindriya' are beautifully depicted. But other cetasikas are not so attractively animated. May these criticisms be beneficial. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36904 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:06pm Subject: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Hello all A paraphrasing of AN IV 248 that I found online: "There are four things conducive to the growth of wisdom: associating with a good person; hearing the good Dhamma; maintaining a right attitude of mind and leading a life in accordance with the Dhamma" I would have to check the Pali for "maintaining a right attitude of mind" but I will reflect today on what it could mean. I think of upekkha (equanimity) as the only attitude of mind that we can come close to "maintaining." Mental states come and go beyond our control, but equanimity based on whatever degree of understanding I have of anatta and the four noble truths *does* seems to hang around these days. I note that "leading a life in accordance with Dhamma" is also something that arises or doesn't due to conditions. Well, all four are. This would seem to be the kind of sutta (there are many) that could cause beginners like myself to mis-step deeper into the bog of self if it weren't for the teaching of Abhidhamma, which helps me to understand conditions and anatta. There is no determination to "maintain a right attitude of mind." There is only investigation of realities now (dhamma vicaya - one of the 7 factors of enlightenemnt), and that investigation may condition" right attitude of mind" to come. Metta, Phil p.s How many beginners who approach the Buddha's teaching through suttas understand that wisdom (panna) is also not-self, rising due to conditions, and falling away again? I know I used to think that wisdom was something I could gather like acorns, and I'm sure many make the same mistake. More gratitude to Abhdihamma for sorting me out on that in a hurry. Of course understanding could have arisen with a teacher or commentary to guide me through the suttas, but not many in the West who approach suttas have that support. 36905 From: Robert McDaniel Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:26am Subject: Questions on meditation Can anyone point a newbie towards some references that go over performing Samatha and Vipassana meditation, including posture, etc. Thanks! 36906 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Visuddhimagga XIV, 101. Hi Howard, H: "I don't know where you have heard or read about "the witness". Could you give some references? I would be interested." L: What I had in mind is Advaita Vedanta and later I remembered that Dzogchen, a Tibetan sect, has something similar to the witness consciousness under the name "rigpa". There are a couple of links below. As you can see they make quite a big deal out of this consciousness and from an abhidhamma perspective misinterpret it. However, I think what they are pointing at (for the most part) is a real consciousness and of the 89 it seems to me the two adverting consciousnesses make a good fit. I particularly like that they are functional, neither root nor result. I made up the name "witness adept" because I don't know what advaita vedantins call themselves and, as you say, "witness" has a wide popular use which, it seems to me, is roughly in the same ball park. By "adept" I meant someone who has extensive experience of what they are talking about. Larry http://www.hermetic-philosophy.com/advaita_vedanta3.htm http://www.hermetic-philosophy.com/dzogchen_part3.htm 36907 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:38pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 072 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There is an army inside us. The leader is the general. The followers are the soldiers. Citta is the general. Cetasikas are the soldiers. Citta is the king. Cetasikas are the ministers of the king citta. As the king is the head of the state, all lesser heads that are ministers have to follow what the king citta has decided and what the king citta does and prescribes as laws. There are different ministries in the whole state which is governed by the king citta. Among ministries, job distribution is nicely done. At least there are 4 different groups. One group of cetasikas are those who agree with kusala citta when they arise together with kusala citta. And equally, when they arise together with akusala citta, they will agree with akusala cittas. More importantly, there are 7 cetasikas that arise together with each and every citta. They also agree with any citta. But as they arise always, they may be assumed as permanent ministers. They do not change through out the reign and their posts are permanent. Here, permanent is just a simile. Please do not confuse with they are permanent. They do arise and fall away, anyway. At each election, they do not have to change their status. There is another group of cetasikas. They also agree with the citta they arise. That is when they arise with akusala cittas they become akusala cetasikas and when they arise with kusala cittas, they become kusala cetasikas. So these cetasikas may be called as flexible ministers. Because they flexibly follow what the king citta does. If the king citta is akusala citta, then they all will be akusala cetasikas and they will serve the king with liquor and dancers. If the king citta is kusala citta, then his ministers will all become kusala cetasikas and they will arrange good things for the king. So these cetasikas can be called as flexible ministers. There is the third group of cetasikas. They are called beautiful mental factors or sobhana cetasikas. As they all are good cetasikas, these ministers are all good in manner and they all support the good king who is good citta that is these cittas are beautiful consciousness or sobhana cittas. As the king citta is beautiful then all his ministers are beautiful and they have constructive power. Because of this constructive power, these ministers all construct good things for the king citta. So they can be caled as constructive ministers. Still there is another group of cetasikas. These cetasikas are bad ministers. They all advise the king citta to do all the bad things. In their presence, the king citta is no more a good king, instead he becomes a bad king or akusala citta. All akusala cittas are accompanied by akusala cetasikas. They destroy the originally pure king citta. They drink and they make the king drink. They destroy tranquility. So they can be referred to as destructive ministers. There are 4 separate groups of cetasikas. They are 1. permanent ministers 2. flexible ministers 3. destructive ministers 4. constructive ministers Permanent ministers are called sabbaacitta sadharana cetasikas. Sabba means 'all'. Sabbaacitta means 'all cittas'. 'Sadharana' means 'always accompany' 'always parallel'. So these cetasikas arise with each citta whatever kind they are. There are 7 of these. Flexible ministers are called pakinnaka cetasikas. Pakinnaka means 'particular'. They are particular mental factors. There are 6 of these cetasikas and as they are particular, they do not arise with each and every citta. But they arise with particular citta. So they are called particular mental factors. Destructive ministers are called akusala cetasikas. Actually akusala dhammas are because of these akusala cetasikas. If these cetasikas do not arise, there will not be any akusala and all cittas that are devoid of akusala cetasikas will be beautiful. There are 14 akusala cetasikas. None of them is good and presence of any of them makes citta become very ugly. Constructive ministers are called sobhana cetasikas. They are beautiful mental factors. Because cittas that are accompanied by these cetasikas are sobhana cittas. There are 25 beautiful mental factors. These cetasikas make the king citta beautiful. In their presence, no akusala cetasika can approach the king citta. Among these 25 beauitiful mental factors, pannindriya cetasika or panna is the most important and it is this cetasika that finally cause the release of all potentials of arising of akusala cetasika. As the potentials extinct, there no more arise any akusala citta. Even though there arise sobhana cetasikas or beautiful mental factors, the cittas that are assoicated with these cetasikas are not kusala cittas. Instead they all become kiriya cittas if the cittas are javana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: a).Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. b). 1. 7 sabbaacitta sadharana cetasikas 2. 6 pakinnaka cetasikas 3. 14 akusala cetasikas 4. 25 sobhana cetasikas --- ------------------ 52 cetasikas ( total ) 36908 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:43pm Subject: Re: Questions on meditation Hello Robert, all, Something in one of these links may be helpful: 1. A previous post by Upasaka Howard commenting the various perspectives on meditation of members of dhammastudygroup: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/33830 2. Links to websites: Insight Meditation On-Line http://www.buddhanet.net/insight.htm Metta Bhavana (loving-kindness meditation) by Ven. Sujiva http://www.buddhanet.net/metta_b.htm Why meditate? by Ven. M.Upali Thera http://www.metta.lk/temples/kandubodha/index.html#home Samatha and Vipassaná in Harmony by Ajahn Chandako http://www.volny.cz/chandako/text/article_samath_vipasana.html Meditation = Awareness by The Most Ven Dr M Vajiragnana http://www.londonbuddhistvihara.co.uk/pmedtechniques.htm "Ch. 3 Beginning Meditation Practice" - from The Buddhist Way of Mental Training by Ven. Phra Tepvisuddhikavi (Pichitr Thitavanno) Lord Abbot of Wat Somanasvihara http://mahamakuta.inet.co.th/english/b-way(3).html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert McDaniel" wrote: > Can anyone point a newbie towards some references that go over > performing Samatha and Vipassana meditation, including posture, etc. > > Thanks! 36909 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:12pm Subject: Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Dear Phil and All, Just to add to your statement. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: Hello all A paraphrasing of AN IV 248 that I found online: --- snip all --- Metta, Phil p.s How many beginners who approach the Buddha's teaching through suttas understand that wisdom (panna) is also not-self, rising due to conditions,and falling away again? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: 'Te dhamma suttanteva suttanta dhammeva sutta pavuccati'. Those dhammas that are showing or revealing the meanings of dhammas can be called as suttanta dhamma such as suttas. Beginners deserve to learn suttas first. Because suttas explain the meaning in them. If there is no specifically mentioned in suttas , suttas learners will hardly know such indepth knowledge. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: I know I used to think that wisdom was something I could gather like acorns, and I'm sure many make the same mistake. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Yes. Many people make this mistake. They would say panna accumulates. They arise at right level. They arise at low level. They arise at high level. They arise at theoretical level. Without practical effort, real dhamma cannot be penetrated. Some people just study scriptures and they are extremely happy evidently without any effort to experience by themselves. Actually such happiness is more likely of akusala rather than dhamma piti. Because, when they see or hear the ideas that are not of in their bookish knowledge, they would become very angry and may even attack others. This is something like clinging to the scripture. Due to this sort of clinging, when they die because of this clinging they may be reborn as animals like spiders, cockcroaches, centipedes etc etc in the old library where the scriptures are kept. Phil, you are right. Panna itself is anatta. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: More gratitude to Abhdihamma for sorting me out on that in a hurry. Of course understanding could have arisen with a teacher or commentary to guide me through the suttas, but not many in the West who approach suttas have that support. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: After Abhidhamma have been touched, the study of suttas become much more easier and effective. Suttas reveal what the dhammas are while abhidhamma reveal all the essence of dhammas. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36910 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:47pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi TG, --------- TG: > "This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends on a duality-- upon the notion of existence and the notion of non-existence. But for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of non-existence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world." (The connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, Pg. 544.) The views of non-existence and existence would both seem to be incorrect. > ---------- KH: I'm not sure how to understand the quote you have given. Elsewhere in the Tipitaka it is made clear that the world (the nama and rupa of the present moment) does exist. So, looking for a consistent interpretation, I would say this quote refers to the existence / non-existence of a living being in the world. Could that be right? Ken H 36911 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG In a message dated 9/25/2004 5:48:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: KH: I'm not sure how to understand the quote you have given. Elsewhere in the Tipitaka it is made clear that the world (the nama and rupa of the present moment) does exist. So, looking for a consistent interpretation, I would say this quote refers to the existence / non-existence of a living being in the world. Could that be right? Ken H Hi Ken H Continuing on with the same Sutta (Connected Discourses vol. 1, pg. 544) the Buddha says... "'All exists', Kaccana, this is one extreme. 'All does not exist': this is the second extreme. Without veering toward either of these extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle:..." He proceeds with a teaching on Dependent Arising. TG: Occurrences arise, alter, and cease as mere echoes of conditional interactions. A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop insight into the selfless, insubstantial aspect of occurrences. To spend great effort in deciphering what is ultimately real from what is not, seems to go against the grain of that teaching. And perhaps creates a philosophical premise (of existing ultimate realities) where no such premise should have credence. “Form is like a lump of foam, Feeling like a water bubble; Perception is like a mirage, Volitions like a plantain trunk (coreless), And consciousness like an illusion, (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 952 – 953.) TG 36912 From: nori Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:47pm Subject: Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals Hi friends, I came across an interesting site with quotes from different "intellectuals". Here are some: --- "The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description." -Albert Einstein --- "I cannot myself feel that either in the matter of wisdom or in the matter of virtue Christ stands quite as high as some other people known to history – I think I should put Buddha above him in those respects." - Bertrand Russell, " Why I am not a Christian" --- "Over great areas of the world it still survives. It is possible that in contact with Western science, and inspired by the spirit of history, the original teaching of Gotama, revived and purified, may yet play a large part in the direction of human destiny." -H.G. Wells "Buddhism has done more for the advance of world civilization and true culture than any other influence in the chronicles of mankind." -H.G. Wells --- "Buddha was the embodiment of all virtues he preached. During his successful and eventful ministry of 45 years he translated all his words into action; and in no place did he give vent to any human frailty, or any base passion. The Buddha's moral code is the most perfect which the world has ever known." - Prof. Max Muller, German Scholar --- "Buddhist or not Buddhist, I have examined everyone of the great religious systems of the world, and in none of them have I found anything to surpass, in beauty and comprehensiveness, the Noble Eightford Path and the Four Noble Truths of the Buddha. I am content to shape my life according to that path." - Prof. Rhys Davids --- "It is my deliberate opinion that the essential part of the teachings of the Buddha now forms an integral part of Hinduism. IT is impossible for Hindu India today to retrace her steps and go behind the great reformations that Gautama effected in Hinduism. By his immense sacrfice, by his great renuniation, and by the immaculate purity of his life he left an indelible impress upon Hinduism, and Hinduism owes an eternal debt of gratitude to the great teacher." -Mahatma Gandhi, "Maha Bodhi" --- "Buddhism is realistic, for it takes a realistic view of life and the world. It does not falsely pull us into living in a fool's paradise, nor does it frighten and agonize us with all kinds of imaginary fears and guilt-feelings. It calls us exactly and objectively what we are and what the world around us is, and shows us the way to perfect freedom, peace, tranquility and happiness." -Ven. Dr. W. Rahula --- "Serenity of spirit and love for all sentient creation are enjoined by the Buddha. He does not speak of sin, but only of ignorance and foolishness which could be cured by enlightenment and sympathy." -Dr.S Radhakrisnan,"Gautama the Buddha" --- "Buddhism is quite opposed to the melancholic, sorrowful, petinent and gloomy attitude of mind which is considered a hindrance to the realization of Truth. On the other hand, it is interesting to remember here that joy is one of the seven `Factors of Illumination', the essential qualities to be cultivated for the realization of Nirvana." -Ven.Dr. W. Rahula,'What the Buddha Taught' This and more quotes are at this site: http://64.233.179.104/search? q=cache:a5cLsXVCs9QJ:www.quangduc.net/English/buddhismineyes.html+cons uming+honey+buddhism&hl=en I am not sure but I think you will have to type it into your web browser manually since the string is too long. metta, nori 36913 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals In a message dated 9/25/2004 8:48:16 PM Pacific Standard Time, nori_public@a... writes: "The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description." -Albert Einstein Hi Nori Do you have the source for the above quote and if so could you send it? Thanks. TG 36914 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi, Ken (and TG) - In a message dated 9/25/04 8:48:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Hi TG, > > --------- > TG: >"This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends on a duality-- > upon the notion of existence and the notion of non-existence. But > for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with > correct wisdom, there is no notion of non-existence in regard to the > world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really > is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to > the world." > (The connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, Pg. 544.) > > The views of non-existence and existence would both seem to be > incorrect. > > > ---------- > > KH: I'm not sure how to understand the quote you have given. > Elsewhere in the Tipitaka it is made clear that the world (the nama > and rupa of the present moment) does exist. So, looking for a > consistent interpretation, I would say this quote refers to the > existence / non-existence of a living being in the world. Could > that be right? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: In my opinion, to put it briefly - no. I think that the way to understand this sutta lies in the proper interpretation of the usage there of 'existence' and 'non-existence'. They are not simple negations of each other, but extreme opposites. There 'existence' means substantial, independent, self-existence, and 'non-existence' means utterly nihilistic non-existence. These are extreme opposites. Each is remote from the middle-way mode of existence which is the actual mode of existence of phenomena, namely existing as a fleeting event fully dependent on, and inseparable from, other equally empty conditions. ------------------------------------------------- > > Ken H ====================== 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) 36915 From: nori Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals Hi TG, No, I just copied it off the site. I was looking for the source myself but just got a bunch of other sites with the same quote, but no source. If you find it give me an email. peace, nori 36916 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals Thanks for checking Nori. TG In a message dated 9/25/2004 8:58:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, nori_public@a... writes: Hi TG, No, I just copied it off the site. I was looking for the source myself but just got a bunch of other sites with the same quote, but no source. If you find it give me an email. peace, nori 36917 From: Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals In a message dated 9/25/2004 8:58:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, nori_public@a... writes: Hi TG, No, I just copied it off the site. I was looking for the source myself but just got a bunch of other sites with the same quote, but no source. If you find it give me an email. peace, nori Found the source in case you're interested. "Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity" -- Albert Einstein [1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press] 36918 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Deeds of Merit: rejoicing in others' kusala Hello Phil, It is common that there are also akusala cittas, but let us rejoice in someone's kusala. We do not have to pinpoint at which moment exactly the other had kusala cittas, it does not matter. It can be a condition for kusala citta for ourselves, it can just happen by conditions. We do not have to do anything special for it. We do not have to think, now, look, when is his citta kusala? That is not our concern. As to you being a stranger in Japan, we cannot know others' cittas as you say. If I am thinking: I am a stranger there is already conceit, I better mind my own akusala citta. Nina. op 25-09-2004 15:28 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > I wonder how we can know the citta of > someone else. It cannot be assumed that there is kusala citta behind deeds > that seem to be kusala on the surface. Kusala and akusala arise in such > quick succession, and fall away again. We can be sure there is kusala in > there somewhere, and rejoice in that while disregarding our knowledge that > there may be akusala as well? 36919 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 0:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals Hi Nori, TG and All, TG has identified the source of the quote from Albert Einstein. The book "Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals" was compiled by Dr. K. Sri. Dhammananda, the Chief Reverend at the temple I attend in Kuala Lumpur. I have the complete book. Most of Chief Reverend's books are available for complete download from his site: http://www.ksridhammananda.com/ For this particular book, only a 5-page synopsis is available for download. The entire book is available for purchase. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: I am behind on a few posts... I will catch up... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > In a message dated 9/25/2004 8:58:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, > nori_public@a... writes: > Hi TG, > > No, I just copied it off the site. > > I was looking for the source myself but just got a bunch of other > sites with the same quote, but no source. > > If you find it give me an email. > > peace, > nori > > Found the source in case you're interested. > > "Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic > religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; > it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense > aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a > meaningful unity" -- Albert Einstein [1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, > edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press] > > 36920 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi TG, --------------- TG: > Occurrences arise, alter, and cease as mere echoes of conditional interactions. > --------------- I see you prefer the word "occurrences" in place of "dhammas." I think you believe in conditional interactions but not in dhammas that conditionally interact. That's not the way of the Abhidhamma is it? It teaches the absolute reality of dhammas that interact and condition one another. -------------------------- TG: > A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop insight into the selfless, insubstantial aspect of occurrences. ------------------------- Is that another way of saying, "A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop insight into the absence of dhammas?" (Dhammas being the substance of occurrences.) I suppose that could be a Mahayana teaching –or a Nagarjuna teaching – but it is not a Theravada teaching, is it? ------------------------- TG: > To spend great effort in deciphering what is ultimately real from what is not, seems to go against the grain of that teaching. ------------------------- I wish I could convince you otherwise. I fear you will spend your valuable time looking at things that are not real expecting to see them the way the Buddha described things that are real. That will never happen. You are looking at illusions. Illusions have no inherent characteristics: they are not anicca dukkha and anatta. You are looking in the wrong place! --------------------- TG: > And perhaps creates a philosophical premise (of existing ultimate realities) where no such premise should have credence. > --------------------- If the ancient Theras recorded a wrong version of the Dhamma, then I'm wasting my time. If they got it right, then you are wasting yours. Thanks, anyway, for trying to help. :-) Ken H 36921 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] No contraversies. Dear Nina, There's so many good posts at the moment, I can't keep up with them, but can add my bit on this one... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Rob M and Larry, > Rob, your post is a good opportunity to contemplate the Dhammasangani more. > I cannot help being impressed every time when I see these lists. I wrote > before about the first words: at a time, yasmi.m samaye, the many conditions > (also of the past) that have to concur for the arising of the first type of > kusala citta accompanied by pañña. > I was reflecting on synonyms, very meaningful. The list is not a static, > abstract thing, it is dynamic! .......snip...... > And here is the clue, Ven. N., p. 53: an abstract and systematic arrangement of factors but refer to definite > moments of consciousness in their dynamic actuality where these factors > appear as members of relational groups.> > So, we have to reflect more on the meaning of these lists, why they were > arranged in such a way, why some cetasikas are not expressively mentioned. > This was certainly not an omission. > When comparing the lists of the Dhsg and the Abhidhammattha Sangaha there > are not contradictions at all if we reflect on the meaning of each of these > lists. > Nina. A. Sometimes when I'm trying hard to understand many of these points, I remember that some of it is happening now. What I take for 'me trying to understand' are these very cittas, cetasikas, and conditions arising and falling away so rapidly - I sometimes feel great elation that this whole 'mess of things' is all there is. I liked your description of the broken glass oven door. What we might take for a disastrous event does have many, many other 'mini' events going on as well. Even the sound of breaking glass can be musical!!! Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36922 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:32am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner20-Contact /Phassa(f) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.1, Contact (Phassa)contd] ***** The different cittas with their accompanying cetasikas arise when there are the appropriate conditions for their arising. Even when our eyes are open, there is not seeing all the time. There are many different types of cittas which arise one at a time. When there is, for example, hearing or thinking there cannot be seeing at the same time. when there are the appropriate conditions for seeing-consciousness, it arises. Then there is the concurrence of the eye, visible object and seeing. Eye-contact performs its function so that seeing can experience visible object. Contact 'supports' the citta and the other cetasikas which accompany the citta. There must be contact arising with the citta in order that it can cognize its object, Contact also supports the other cetasikas it arises together with: without contact there could not be feeling, perception (sanna) or volition (cetana). The Atthasalini (108) compares phassa with a pillar in a palace which is a strong support to the rest of the structure. In the same way contact is a strong support to the citta and the accompanying cetasikas. ***** [Contact (Phassa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 36923 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 1:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi, Ken (and TG) - In a message dated 9/26/04 6:22:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > I see you prefer the word "occurrences" in place of "dhammas." I > think you believe in conditional interactions but not in dhammas > that conditionally interact. That's not the way of the Abhidhamma > is it? It teaches the absolute reality of dhammas that interact and > condition one another. > ===================== Separate, self-existent, substantial entities, with own-being (sabhava in the literal sense), and which, yet, miraculously, condition each other, constitute a metaphysical nightmare, a contradiction, and a reificationist's delight. If I were to accept your characterization of Abhidhamma, I would give abandon it as not being Dhamma. Dhammas are phenomena that exist in relation, and not on their own. Their nature is that of emptiness, which is neither non-existence nor substantialist self-existence. Perhaps I completely misread your use of "absolute reality", but in that case I would wonder why you would choose to adopt such substantialist, essentialist terminology. The Buddha doesn't use such terminology. The Buddha uses the middle-way terminology of emptiness. In the Sutta Pitaka, for example, you will find the following two paragraphs, for example: > He who does not find core or substance > in any of the realms of being, > like flowers which are vainly sought > in fig trees that bear none, > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. > > And lest you say "Oh, these don't refer to ultimate phenomena," there is the following lovely verse from the Phena Sutta: > Form is like a glob of foam; > feeling, a bubble; > perception, a mirage; > fabrications, a banana tree; > consciousness, a magic trick -- > this has been taught > by the Kinsman of the Sun. > However you observe them, > appropriately examine them, > they're empty, void > to whoever sees them > appropriately. 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) 36924 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi, Ken - In a message dated 9/26/04 8:52:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: > If I were to accept your characterization of Abhidhamma, I would give > abandon it as not being Dhamma. ======================= I mixed two thoughts in the foregoing: "I would give it up" and "I would abandon it". (Please drop the word 'give' in your reading of my post.) 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) 36925 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Hello Htoo Thank you for your encouraging comments. Phil > A paraphrasing of AN IV 248 that I found online: > > p.s How many beginners who approach the Buddha's teaching through > suttas understand that wisdom (panna) is also not-self, rising due to > conditions,and falling away again? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > 'Te dhamma suttanteva suttanta dhammeva sutta pavuccati'. > > Those dhammas that are showing or revealing the meanings of dhammas > can be called as suttanta dhamma such as suttas. Beginners deserve to > learn suttas first. Because suttas explain the meaning in them. Ph: Can you help me to understand this? Is the English that follows the Pali a paraphrasing of the Pali, or your commentary? It looks like a very important sentence. Do you mean that some dhammas are revealed through the Suttanta? And I don't understand "deserve" to learn suttas first. Could you clarify that? I don't really understand the above sentences, Htoo. Thank you for your time. By the way, for what it's worth, it seems to me these days that first encountering the Buddha's teaching through suttas, and then learning something about Abhidhamma, and then going back to the suttas is a good way. We revisit suttas we had seen before and see them in a new light. And this is a confirmation of our progress, and builds our confidence. > If there is no specifically mentioned in suttas , suttas learners > will hardly know such indepth knowledge. Ph: In my opinion, it would be very difficult to get at the deeper meaning of suttas without some knowledge of abhidhamma, unless one had a very good teacher. It is said that the Buddha taught to different people in different ways according to their degree of insight. It seems to me that he knew one teaching could reach the same person to a different depth as that person's insight developed. Thus the conventional terms of the suttas draw people in closer to His teaching, and He then teaches them at a different level, that of the ultimate realities in abdhidhamma, and then the conventional language of the suttas that was seen in the first encounter becomes transparent and reveals the realities beneath...or something like that. It's fascinating. I'm looking forward to reading many suttas next year. I wish I could understand pali, though. I always want to know more about the verbs, such as "maintain." The translation is so important. We can't fully appreciate suttas without understanding Pali, in my opinion. (snip) > Htoo: > > After Abhidhamma have been touched, the study of suttas become much > more easier and effective. Suttas reveal what the dhammas are while > abhidhamma reveal all the essence of dhammas. Ph: It seems to me that suttas demonstrate or provide case studies involving the dhammas that are revealed by abhidhamma. In the morning, when I pay homage to the Buddha, the Dhamma and Sangha, and think of the Dhamma, I am deeply inspired by the depth and breadth of the Buddha's teaching. Thanks in advance for your clarification of your comments on the Pali above. Metta, Phil 36926 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:32am Subject: Accumulation in the citta? (was Re: Basic citta processes ) Hello Nina, Rob M and all This is something I've been putting off, it seems, because I find it very difficult, but I should make more of an effort to figure it out. This is an exchange I had with Rob M a couple of weeks ago. > > Phil: Well, I'm looking at p.20. > > I read > > Rob's book: "if one has akusala accumulations, the javana mental > > states will: > > * cling to the object (lobha accumulations) > > * have aversion to the object (dosa accumulations) > > * be indifferent to the object ( moha accumulations) > > > > Phil: Akusala accumulations are in the citta, right? > > ===== > > Sorry, Phil. Accumulations are not in a citta. Accumulations > influence the nature of citta that arises (through natural decisive > support condition). Ph: I find it easier to understand this than I do to understand accumulations "in" the citta, which is a term that is used in ADL. Nina, I read a few weeks ago, perhaps in the discussion about introduction to "Cetasikas", I think I read you say that you used to say cetasikas arise "in" citta, but now you say "with." Do I recall that correctly? Does that apply to accumulations as well, that they are "with" the citta rather than "in?" I just can't wrap my head around the idea of something being "in" a citta, but I am very willing, as usualy, to postpone understanding! One thing that always adds to my puzzlement is this passage quoted on p. 15 of ADL< from Visu XX 96. "THere is no heap or store of unarisen nama-rupa (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises it does not come from any heap or store, and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. (snip) so too all material and immaterial states (rupa and nama) not having been, are brought into being, having been, they vanish." When I read that, it makes it so hard to understand accumulations being in the citta, because the citta is vanished, so why don't accumulations vanish too? I guiess that puzzlement would also apply to Rob's explanation as well, because he saud "accumulations influence the nature of citta that arises" But where are the accumulations? There is only one citta at a time, and it vanishes. Where do accumulations reside before they appear to condition through natural decisive support condition? As usual, I'm not fretting about this, but it certainly is puzzling to me at my stage of insight. Thanks in advance for any feedback Nina or Rob, or anyone. Metta, Phil 36927 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:54am Subject: Deeds of Merit - reflecting on one's own dana Hello all. More from "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, available at http://www.dhammastudy.com/merits1.html and zolag. S: Besides the above mentioned ways of kusala there is still another way. When we have performed a deed of generosity there can again be kusala cittas afterwards. We can reflect on the daana or generous deed we have performed with cittas which are calm and pure. Thus, when someone has accumulated the inclination and habit to perform deeds of generosity, and he reflects time and again on his deeds, the cittas will be more and more peaceful, pure and steadfast in kusala. Some people can have steadfastness in kusala and calm to the degree of access-concentration [6. This is the development of tranquil meditation, samatha, with recollection of generosity (caagaanusati) as meditation subject [7. 36928 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:00am Subject: FW: [dsg] No contraversies. Dear Rob M and friends. Icaro is correct. See below. Realities are the same, everywhere, always. But there are different ways of arranging and presenting them. The Abhidhammattha Sangaha is always in conformity with the Dhsgn. I also notice this with my Vis. and Tiika study. I often compare with the Co to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. Thus, there are no contradictions. Nina. ---------- Van: icaro franca Datum: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 11:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Aan: nina van gorkom Onderwerp: Re: FW: [dsg] No contraversies. > I was missing you!!! > Nina. Oh! Don?t fret Nina! I am busy at these last days in Air Force Bureau... but I?ve managed to get my own Abhidhamma Sangaha?s copy (by Bhikkhu Bodhi). It seems to me that Bhikkhu Bodhi mentions something like these remarks at the Introduction, and the differences between this book and the Dhammasangani are not so unusual, due the fact that Abhidhamma Sangaha?s main purpose is to be only an "Aid?e de Champ" to Abhidhamma Students and Readers. But...last but not least...I am missing you too Nina! All of you, Pack of Noble Dhamma Students!!!! Mettaya and kisses, Icaro 36929 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: vipaka in the kitchen. Htoo. Dear Htoo, thank you for your remarks, and these are good for reflection. See below. op 25-09-2004 21:34 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > This furnace was very old and I will buy a new one, more modern, and > that is a convenience. A condition for pleasant experiences, but who > can tell? ----------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Dear Nina, forgive me that I butt in. And I aplogise if I am > insinuating you. But with good wishes. N: Always welcome, never an insinuation. H: Sometimes people recondition the situation. The example you experienced is a kind of lost. But the > lost thing was very old. At least this releases some tension or > attachment inside. Another thought is that if a new one has to > replace the lost one, it will be much more convenient. This again > releases further tension created by attachment. > > Reconditions may help to some degrees. But precondition is better > than recondition. If you precondition your mind by derooting or > eradicating all possible attachment including subtle ones, then there > will not be suffering. Instead, things will be seen as they are > through out their process of arising and falling away. N: Htoo, you know, only the anagami has eradicated attachment to sense objects. How did the anagami come to that stage? First he attained the stage of sotapanna. How? He had eradicated wrong view, not taking attachment or defilements for mine. That is one step. How can one reach that? We learn from the satipatthana sutta under citta: mindfulness and understanding of citta with attachment and citta without attachment. How do we know citta with attachment as it is, a conditioned nama? By being aware of it whenever it appears, not ignoring it. We have to be brave and face defilements with correct understanding. Little by little it can be understood as just a dhamma, not my attachment. You are completely right that there is no suffering when attachment is eradicated, but it is a step by step development. We can begin to be aware of seeing or visible object that appears now, and it does appear! Aware of whatever appears, no selection, because then an idea of self is at work. With my example i wanted to show that we usually think of a whole situation: kitchen, stove, broken glass. But in reality there are many different dhammas appearing one at a time through the six doors. We may think of vipaka as a whole situation, but in fact there are different sense-impressions experiencing different objects and there are akusala cittas arising because of pleasant objects and unpleasant objects. You know all this, but some people here have problems knowing the difference between reality and concept. Htoo, you may also be willing to help here with examples. I think examples can illustrate, the more the better! Everything that is not citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana is paññatti, a concept. Then we have words denoting realities, and these words are nama paññatti. Concepts are useful to help us understanding realities. That is why it is said in the suttas and commentaries that the Buddha sometimes spoke in conventional terms and sometimes he explained directly dhammas as they can be experienced one at a time through the six doors. Howard gave the example of the sabbavasutta, where the Buddha did not speak about table, chair or person. That is clear. Some people do not like the word paramattha dhammas, but this does not matter, we can use the word dhamma, so long as we understand the meaning. I do not mind woords so much, I mind correct understanding. Nina. 36930 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existence and non-existence, realities. Hi TG, Ken, Howard, Yes Howard, I was also thinking of Annihilation and Eternalism, and keeping the Middle Way. The Co also speaks about eternalism and annihilation belief. The Middle Way helps us to understand rebirth into this life: there is no identity with the past nor otherness, thus, our past life conditioned this life which is neither the same not completely different. op 26-09-2004 05:56 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: .... These are extreme opposites. Each is remote from the > middle-way mode of existence which is the actual mode of existence of > phenomena, namely existing as a fleeting event fully dependent on, and > inseparable > from, other equally empty conditions. N: Now TG's post. I had some trouble locating the sutta, but PTS has: K II, 15. Thank you, TG for giving the sutta, I need to read more suttas. op 26-09-2004 05:46 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > TG: Occurrences arise, alter, and cease as mere echoes of conditional > interactions. A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop > insight > into the selfless, insubstantial aspect of occurrences. To spend great effort > in deciphering what is ultimately real from what is not, seems to go against > the grain of that teaching. And perhaps creates a philosophical premise (of > existing ultimate realities) where no such premise should have credence. N:As to the last point: as Ken said many times before, paramattha dhammas, or dhammas if you prefer, have the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta. We can think about the impermanence of a table, but that is not the same as the deep, direct understanding of each rupa and nama that is impermanent. There is no danger of existing ultimate realities when the three characteristics can be realized. Ken wrote: Yes, but only for a moment, TG: ³Form is like a lump of foam, > Feeling like a water bubble; > Perception is like a mirage, > Volitions like a plantain trunk (coreless), > And consciousness like an illusion, N: This is about the five khandhas. And what are they: conditioned nama and rupa, nothing else. Let's look at the Co. The world, loka, is here sankharaloka: the world of conditioned dhammas. In the Co to the satipatthana sutta, the world is also defined as the five khandhas. World has different meanings. Right view: magga pañña with vipassana. Sutta: Knowledge is not merely another's. co: and: It is very necessary to know when citta, cetasika or rupa (sankhara loka) is appearing and can be the object of right understanding, and when we are merely thinking of table, person, situations, etc. We have to know the world of conditioned dhammas, sankhara loka. The world has several meanings. The Vis. VII, 37, explains: the Buddha is the knower of the worlds. There are three worlds: the world of formations (sankhara), of beings and of location. In M I, 426, the world is eternal, not eternal, the world of beings is meant. Of location: the universe. Thus we have to study in each case what kind of world is meant. I think, B.B. must have made commentarial notes? I do not have his translation. I have the Co in Thai and in Pali. Nina 36931 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Hello Phil, Did you see the transl Connie used in a similar sutta? This is clearer. op 26-09-2004 01:06 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > A paraphrasing of AN IV 248 that I found online: > > "There are four things conducive to the growth of wisdom: associating > with a good person; hearing the good Dhamma; maintaining a right attitude of > mind and leading a life in accordance with the Dhamma" > > I would have to check the Pali for "maintaining a right attitude of > mind" but I will reflect today on what it could mean. N: Proper attention, yoniso manaasikaara. Thus, listening with correct understanding. Ph: I note that "leading a life in accordance with Dhamma" is also something > that arises or doesn't due to conditions. N: dhammaanudhammappa.tipatti, this is translated; conforming to the Dhamma, but actually, pa.tipatti is the practice. dhamma=anu=dhamma: dhamma in confromity with dhamma, to practise the Dhamma so that the result will be enlightenment. This is the right practice. Ph: .... if it weren't for the > teaching of Abhidhamma, which helps me to understand conditions and anatta. > There is no determination to "maintain a right attitude of mind." There is > only investigation of realities now (dhamma vicaya - one of the 7 factors > of enlightenemnt), and that investigation may condition" right attitude of > mind" to come. N: Appreciating your confidence in the Abhidhamma. Investigation is already wise attention to the object that appears now, and I am so glad you understand that also that is conditioned. Nina. 36932 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Dear Phil, Dhamma is for understanding and for liberation. We see everything through Dhamma very clearly. The Dhamma clear away all the dust that hinder the sight and vision. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: Hello Htoo Thank you for your encouraging comments. Phil > A paraphrasing of AN IV 248 that I found online: p.s How many beginners who approach the Buddha's teaching through suttas understand that wisdom (panna) is also not-self, rising due to conditions,and falling away again? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: >'Te dhamma suttanteva suttanta dhammeva sutta pavuccati'. >Those dhammas that are showing or revealing the meanings of dhammas can be called as suttanta dhamma such as suttas. Beginners deserve to learn suttas first. Because suttas explain the meaning in them. Ph: Can you help me to understand this? Is the English that follows the Pali a paraphrasing of the Pali, or your commentary? It looks like a very important sentence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: 'Te' means 'that' 'those' 'they'. 'Suta' means 'knowledge like general knowledge-not consciousness here'. Suttanta means 'knowledge- giving'. Eva means 'such' 'such as' 'like'. Sutta means 'teachings that give knowledge'. Pavuccati means 'can be siad' 'should be said' 'are called' 'is called'. Beginners should start with study of suttas. Because suttas give them knowledge. If they start with study of abhidhamma if they do not have enough intellect, they might desert studying further because of complexities of abhidhamma dhamma. The question you asked is both. It is both paraphrasing and commenting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: Do you mean that some dhammas are revealed through the Suttanta? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. In suttas there are all dhammas. But in other pitakas, dhammas are expressed in another way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: And I don't understand "deserve" to learn suttas first. Could you clarify that? I don't really understand the above sentences, Htoo. Thank you for your time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Suttas explain in conventional way and use conventional words. Suttas are intermingled with daily life happenings. Suttas use conventional language. This makes conventionally learned people to follow suttas much more easily than abhidhamma dhamma. Deserve here means 'worth'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: By the way, for what it's worth, it seems to me these days that first encountering the Buddha's teaching through suttas, and then learning something about Abhidhamma, and then going back to the suttas is a good way. We revisit suttas we had seen before and see them in a new light. And this is a confirmation of our progress, and builds our confidence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is true. Some abandon abhidhamma dhamma and they would say 'I would rather follow suttas'. This is way to follow. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: >If there is no specifically mentioned in suttas , suttas learners will hardly know such indepth knowledge. Ph: In my opinion, it would be very difficult to get at the deeper meaning of suttas without some knowledge of abhidhamma, unless one had a very good teacher. It is said that the Buddha taught to different people in different ways according to their degree of insight. It seems to me that he knew one teaching could reach the same person to a different depth as that person's insight developed. Thus the conventional terms of the suttas draw people in closer to His teaching, and He then teaches them at a different level, that of the ultimate realities in abdhidhamma, and then the conventional language of the suttas that was seen in the first encounter becomes transparent and reveals the realities beneath...or something like that. It's fascinating. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is true. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: I'm looking forward to reading many suttas next year. I wish I could understand pali, though. I always want to know more about the verbs, such as "maintain." The translation is so important. We can't fully appreciate suttas without understanding Pali, in my opinion. (snip) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am also learning Pali to get indepth knowledge from the original teachings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > >After Abhidhamma have been touched, the study of suttas become much more easier and effective. Suttas reveal what the dhammas are while abhidhamma reveal all the essence of dhammas. Ph: It seems to me that suttas demonstrate or provide case studies involving the dhammas that are revealed by abhidhamma. In the morning, when I pay homage to the Buddha, the Dhamma and Sangha, and think of the Dhamma, I am deeply inspired by the depth and breadth of the Buddha's teaching. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. Suttas are like case studies. Abhidhamma reveal all the skeletal structures inside of all suttas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil: Thanks in advance for your clarification of your comments on the Pali above. Metta, Phil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You are most welcome. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36933 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: vipaka in the kitchen. Htoo. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina: Dear Htoo, thank you for your remarks, and these are good for reflection. See below. ----------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: >Dear Nina, forgive me that I butt in. And I aplogise if I am insinuating you. But with good wishes. N: Always welcome, never an insinuation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks Nina. Dhamma is for understanding. Examples, evidence, experiences, similes are good to reveal where dhammas are what dhammas are. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >H: Sometimes people recondition the situation. N: Htoo, you know, only the anagami has eradicated attachment to sense objects. ..snip..:mindfulness and understanding of citta with attachment and citta without attachment. ..snip.. We have to be brave and face defilements with correct understanding. Little by little it can be understood as just a dhamma, not my attachment. You are completely right that there is no suffering when attachment is eradicated, but it is a step by step development. We can begin to be aware of seeing or visible object that appears now, and it does appear! Aware of whatever appears, no selection, because then an idea of self is at work. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. Only arahats have eradicated all the defilements. I just introduced two words 'recondition' and 'precondition'. At least reconditioning through our knowledge of dhamma help us suffering less even though we have not attained higher nanas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina: With my example i wanted to show that we usually think of a whole situation: kitchen, stove, broken glass. But in reality there are many different dhammas appearing one at a time through the six doors. We may think of vipaka as a whole situation, but in fact there are different sense-impressions experiencing different objects and there are akusala cittas arising because of pleasant objects and unpleasant objects. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True, Nina. Most people do like 'this'. Whenever they experience things, they assume the whole situation as vipaka good or bad. Actually there are many dhammas that make up of situations and events. Confrontation to defilements is a good way as well. While defilements arise we confront them and at the same time, we know the realities defilements. As soon as we know that these defilements are realities, we are developing panna. At least at that time, defilements stop to arise. But as long as we have habit, that is as long as we are not mature to develop higher nanas, this developing of panna among the scatters of defilements will lapse immediately back to staying with defilements. I think, here practice will help. In which way it helps? Defilements become thiner and thiner even though there may be a large bulk inside of us. The practice makes us as if we are externally free of defilements. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina: You know all this, but some people here have problems knowing the difference between reality and concept. Htoo, you may also be willing to help here with examples. I think examples can illustrate, the more the better! Everything that is not citta, cetasika,rupa or nibbana is paññatti, a concept. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: As you said below, it is better to stick to mentioning just dhamma instead of 'paramattha dhamma'. If not well learned, realities and concepts always mix. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina: Then we have words denoting realities, and these words are nama paññatti. Concepts are useful to help us understanding realities. That is why it is said in the suttas and commentaries that the Buddha sometimes spoke in conventional terms and sometimes he explained directly dhammas as they can be experienced one at a time through the six doors. Howard gave the example of the sabbavasutta, where the Buddha did not speak about table, chair or person. That is clear. Some people do not like the word paramattha dhammas, but this does not matter, we can use the word dhamma, so long as we understand the meaning. I do not mind woords so much, I mind correct understanding. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I do the same Nina. Once one of the firms or work places, there were people. The head of the department ordered something to do. It was apparently bad. But the listener employee understood what the head wanted to mean and he did accordingly. If the employee assumed the exact words as right order and did it, the outcome would have been different. But understanding here works. For example 'stop' and 'continue' are different. Stop and 'not stop' are opposite. The listener thought that might be a tongue slip. If it has to some extent some meaning, then the listener would ask for clarification. I mean as long as words and concepts are understood, there is no problem at all. As you said even 'nama' 'rupa' etc are also concepts even though they carry the meaning of realities. Understanding is the most important. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: May you be free from suffering. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36934 From: Larry Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika. Hi Nina, Just a few comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry, > op 25-09-2004 00:18 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > One thing that is a little > > unconvincing is that a smell, taste, or sound are never accompanied by > > unpleasant feeling. > N:I think you mean the experience of smell, etc. , not the smell itself. Larry: Hmmm. Well here we have a problem. I would say sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch are all consciousnesses. In fact, I think I am coming over to Howard's camp and will say that derived matter is consciousness and touch is derived matter. Derived matter is consciousness that is dependent on specific base sensitivities. > L: The bitter taste of medicine, the smell of a corpse, > > or the sound of fingernails scraping a blackboard seem to me to be very > > unpleasant. > N: Agreed. > L:This is a direct sensation of unpleasantness that precedes > > aversion. > N: The vipaakacitta that experiences an unpleasant object through ears, for > example, is not accompanied by unhappy feeling. Impossible, because unhappy > feeling only accompanies akusala citta with aversion. It is accompanied by > inferior indifferent feeling which is a kind of affliction, but passive, > like a weak man that cannot strike back when a strong man afflicts him. > There is no unhappy feeling together with the unpleasant sensation, but in > reality unhappy feeling arises very soon afterwards and then it seems that > it is together with the akusala vipaakacitta. We think like that because of > ignorance. > Nina. Larry: I'm not saying that unhappy feeling accompanies taste, for example; rather I would say pleasant or unpleasant feeling accompanies taste and I would call it a bodily feeling because it is dependent on conditions of the tongue base sensitivity. I would call bodily feeling any feeling that arises with material consciousness. However, this insistence on neutral feeling with taste might give us a glimpse of an arahant's experience. Apparently food neither tastes good nor bad for an arahant. I see this as being like the touch of a feather. The touch of a feather can be either pleasant or unpleasant dependent on bodily sensitivity; if a feather touches the eye it can be unpleasant. So tongue sensitivity must change with a path moment. I realize this throws a spanner in the nama rupa distinction, but in the spirit of abhidhamma in daily life I think we have to call them as we see them. Larry 36935 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:27am Subject: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 08 ) by Htoo Dear Dhamma Friends, Continue-: Page 31. 1. ' practising breaking link with emotions' ' practise dissociating feeling from 'I',' These words of Rob M appears while he is trying to explain 7 universal cetasikas. He is trying to explain on vedana cetasika, feeling. Feeling cause arising of craving. Here he describes ' practise breaking link with emotions'. If there is no pathway to emotional storage area there will not be any emotion. But feeling is there always. He explains on feeling among other 6 cetasikas or universal mental factors. It is true that feeling is apparent to all even though neutral feeling is difficult to sense. The Buddha preached feeling as a separate body that is vedanakkhandha. 2. vitakka Rob M sys 'leads the mental state to the object ( makes introduction ). I would not use both words 'lead to the object' and 'make introduction'. 'Lead to the object' sounds like the function of manasikara. 'Makes introduction' sounds like the function of contact phassa. 3. vicara It is not clearly explained. Rob M just gives an example of 'bell tolling'. 4. 'viriya pushes mental factors on to the object'( active/ not passive ). This is not clear, at least for me. Activeness is not the function of viriya. It is the opposite of thina and middha. Kayalahuta and cittalahuta do these jobs. Cetana pushes other cetasika. But not on to the object but to cetasikas to do their job. I think viriya is non-withdrawal from the object. It is effort. 5. 'chanda' Rob said 'motivation of mental factors'. This is good. But can lobha not motivate mental factors? This is a bit difficult area. Page 32. 6. 'Moha' 'mental blindness' This is good. This reflect some nature of moha. Delusion, illusion, ignorance may not show such clearity. Page 33. 7.'Uddhacca' Rob M mentions 'confusion'. But I think confusion is a bit specific in daily life and it does not carry the meaning of uddhacca which means 'restless' 'upset' 'spread' 'scatter about'. Frequent arising of bhavanga cittas may represent as confusion. Page 34. 8. 'monkey and hunter' I read this before. This is a good simile to demonstrate what lobha is like. May these criticisms be beneficial. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36936 From: connieparker Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:44am Subject: Re: Accumulation in the citta? (was Re: Basic citta processes ) Dear Phil, The trouble with talking about or trying to 'see' namas is that they have no physicality... they are no place yet can arise any place in no space of time, so it doesn't really matter (pun intended) whether we talk about the cetasikas being 'in' or 'with' the cittas. It is just a way to understand... like your questioning where they go when they 'vanish' although they were never visible in the first place even though they had to appear. Still, our accumulations throughout beginningless time are so vast, we can borrow the ocean wave analogy where the wave would be a citta arising and falling away when we are only looking at the surface. Really, the whole body of water is there supporting and making up the wave. I guess you could go on to relate ahosi kammas to evaporation and new accumulations to the rain and all the other waters flowing into the ocean or what have you, but I'm getting sidetracked. The thing is, the citta/wave rises, crests and falls away and in doing so, passes on the whole ocean to the next wave. Don't worry, it stays confusing with all the ins and outs of the various explanations viewing things from different angles. Even rupas don't have/aren't physical/material in the way I normally think of that... just another matter of where the focus is and not paying attention to my mixing up all the degrees of hardness with what is seen, etc. as well as how memory plays a big part in how I perceive things. The citta/cetasika mirror analogy comes to mind and how true is it that how I experience anything reflects my own state of being? peace, connie Phil: One thing that always adds to my puzzlement is this passage quoted on p.15 of ADL from Visu XX 96. "THere is no heap or store of unarisen nama-rupa (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises it does not come from any heap or store, and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. (snip) so too all material and immaterial states (rupa and nama) not having been, are brought into being, having been, they vanish." 36937 From: connieparker Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:43am Subject: Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Dear Phil, I see Nina and Htoo have already answered you regarding AN IV 248, but as long as I've looked up the Pali anyway: AN IV 248: "There are four things conducive to the growth of wisdom: associating with a good person; hearing the good Dhamma; maintaining a right attitude of mind and leading a life in accordance with the Dhamma" (25) 5. Aapattibhayavaggo 6. Pa~n~naavuddhisutta.m 248. "Cattaarome bhikkhave, dhammaa pa~n~naavuddhiyaa sa.mvattanti. Katame cattaaro? Sappurisasa.msevo, saddhammasavana.m, yonisomanasikaaro, dhammaanudhammappa.tipatti? ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro dhammaa pa~n~naavuddhiyaa sa.mvattantii"ti. Cha.t.tha.m. peace, connie 36938 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:52am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 073 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There vare 89 cittas. There are 121 cittas. Each of these cittas are at least accompanied by 7 associated mental factors. They are universal to all cittas and all cittas bring along these 7 cetasikas as their accompanying mental factors. They are contact which is phassa, feeling which is vedana, perception or sanna, volition or cetana, one-pointedness or concentration or ekaggata, mental life or jivitindriya, and attention or manasikara. Phassa or contact is a cetasika that always arises with any citta. It arises at the contact point of meeting of at least three things. They are 1.arammana or object, 2. dvara or door, and 3. citta or consciousness. When rupaarammana or sight, cakkhu pasada or cakkhu dvara or eye- sense-base and cakkhuvinnana citta meet together, this meeting is because of introduction of phassa or contact. Contact makes meeting of object and citta, meeting of object and dvara or pasada, pasada and citta and so on. Moreover, contact also makes meeting with other associated cetasikas.Without contact or phassa cetasika, citta will never arise. Feeling is evident in most of mental states. It is vedana cetasika. It feels the object. It advises the king citta to feel the object and then citta knows that there is a feeling. Function of citta is to know the object while function of vedana is to feel the object. As in case of phassa or contact, each and every citta has a feeling. Even when we are sleeping, when bhavanga cittas are arising, there are feelings along with each bhavanga citta. Cuti citta does have feeling and patisandhi citta also has feeling. All bhavana cittas do have feeling as their accompanying cetasika. In all vithi citta, there are different feelings depending on the citta. The Buddha preached vedana as a separate khandha while He did not preach contact or phassa as a separate khandha. Vedana is easy to understand. There are 3 vedana or feelings according to how it is felt. They are dukkha, sukha, adukkhamasukha. When feelings are considered from the view point of faculties or indriya, there are 5 different feelings. They are somanassa vedana or pleasant mental feeling, domanassa vedana or unpleasant mental feeling, sukha or pleasurable physical feeling , dukkha or unpleasurable physical feeling, and upekkha vedana or neutral feeling. This is the point where most people confuse. Here we are discussing vedana or feeling. We have not discussed tatramajjhattata or balance yet. Upekkha here means not extreme. Upekkha is made up of 'upa' and 'ekkha'. Upa means not extreme that is not pleasurabe and equally not unpleasurable. Ekkha means feeling. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 36939 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:54am Subject: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.] Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 9/26/04 11:34:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Larry: Hmmm. Well here we have a problem. I would say sight, sound, > smell, taste, and touch are all consciousnesses. In fact, I think I > am coming over to Howard's camp and will say that derived matter is > consciousness and touch is derived matter. Derived matter is > consciousness that is dependent on specific base sensitivities. > ========================= You may be moving into my section of the woods, Larry, but I don't think you've quite entered my campsite. ;-) Or to use another metaphor, you may be visiting my neighborhood, but you aren't on my block yet. ;-)) What I mean is that that I wouldn't quite describe sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches as "consciousnesses". I would call them "experiences" (or "experiential content"). There is a subtle difference in the terminology between 'consciousnesses' and 'experiences'. When a sound is (experientially) present, the sound is the content or experience, and its presence is, I believe, what we mean (or should mean) when we properly speak of "consciousness of the sound". The consciousness of the sound is not a separate knowing thing, nor is it the sound, itself. It is the experiential presence of the sound. The heard sound and its presence are mutually dependent and co-occurring. Now, I'm going to add something here that I've been meaning to mention, and this seems like a reasonable place to do so. I've recently come to the realization that when we soften our notion of 'conscousness' from one of "cognizing thing or function" to mere "experiential presence", the idea of self is weakened tremendously! I've also discovered that in doing this - in thinking in terms merely of phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, without any "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of freedom! One comes to see that there really is no self at all - at this very moment, no self - and should phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me or mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would change one way or the other! Already, at this very moment, there is freedom!!! 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) 36940 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi Ken H Needless to say I take every point you made below and see them the opposite. Its a shame you don't address the Quotes from the Sutta. Notice I quote Suttas to back up positions and not Mahayana or Nagarjuna sources which you accuse those positions of reflecting. There is zero evidence in the Suttas that the Buddha had any kind of goal in mind for us to see things as "Dhammas." (Although the opposite can be pointed to.) In my view...when the word Dhamma is used as you have below, it might as well be substituted by "substantial state." And this term might as well be substituted by "self same state." I cannot see how a mind can get beyond self view when things are seen as "Dhammas" in the way you describe. Its never a waste of time to make an investigation of the truth. The endeavor can reveal what doesn't work and then the process can advance as long as an open mind prevails. Look at how many teachers the Buddha ended up rejecting before he found what he was looking for. TG In a message dated 9/26/2004 3:23:02 AM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: Hi TG, --------------- TG: > Occurrences arise, alter, and cease as mere echoes of conditional interactions. > --------------- I see you prefer the word "occurrences" in place of "dhammas." I think you believe in conditional interactions but not in dhammas that conditionally interact. That's not the way of the Abhidhamma is it? It teaches the absolute reality of dhammas that interact and condition one another. -------------------------- TG: > A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop insight into the selfless, insubstantial aspect of occurrences. ------------------------- Is that another way of saying, "A huge part of the Buddha's teaching is designed to develop insight into the absence of dhammas?" (Dhammas being the substance of occurrences.) I suppose that could be a Mahayana teaching –or a Nagarjuna teaching – but it is not a Theravada teaching, is it? ------------------------- TG: > To spend great effort in deciphering what is ultimately real from what is not, seems to go against the grain of that teaching. ------------------------- I wish I could convince you otherwise. I fear you will spend your valuable time looking at things that are not real expecting to see them the way the Buddha described things that are real. That will never happen. You are looking at illusions. Illusions have no inherent characteristics: they are not anicca dukkha and anatta. You are looking in the wrong place! --------------------- TG: > And perhaps creates a philosophical premise (of existing ultimate realities) where no such premise should have credence. > --------------------- If the ancient Theras recorded a wrong version of the Dhamma, then I'm wasting my time. If they got it right, then you are wasting yours. Thanks, anyway, for trying to help. :-) Ken H 36941 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] No contraversies. Dear Azita, op 26-09-2004 13:04 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: >> A. Sometimes when I'm trying hard to understand many of these > points, I remember that some of it is happening now. > What I take for 'me trying to understand' are these very cittas, > cetasikas, and conditions arising and falling away so rapidly - N: That is the main point. The Dhsgn only speaks about what is happening now. A: What we > might take for a disastrous event does have many, many other 'mini' > events going on as well. Even the sound of breaking glass can be > musical!!! N: Many mini events. I had not considered the sound, it all went so sudden and so fast, unexpectedly. Nina. 36942 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Accumulation in the citta? (was Re: Basic citta processes ) Hello Phil, op 26-09-2004 15:32 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: >>> Phil: Akusala accumulations are in the citta, right? >Rob: Sorry, Phil. Accumulations are not in a citta. Accumulations >> influence the nature of citta that arises (through natural decisive >> support condition). > > Ph: I find it easier to understand this than I do to understand > accumulations "in" the citta, which is a term that is used in ADL. > Nina, I read a few weeks ago, perhaps in the discussion about introduction > to "Cetasikas", I think I read you say that you used to say cetasikas arise > "in" citta, but now you say "with." Do I recall that correctly? N: No. Together with. PH:Does that > apply to accumulations as well, that they are "with" the citta rather than > "in?" N: Difficult to find the right word. I am inclined to use in. If I say with: it seems they arise together with and are active, like the cetasikas. But accumulations do not arise, they are latent conditions that cause arising of good and bad qualities with the citta. If we think of latent, lying dormant, as the Co says, we can say: they lie dormant in the citta. Ph:"THere is no heap or store of unarisen nama-rupa > (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises it does not come from any > heap or store, and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. (snip) > so too all material and immaterial states (rupa and nama) not having been, > are brought into being, having been, they vanish." > > When I read that, it makes it so hard to understand accumulations being in > the citta, because the citta is vanished, so why don't accumulations vanish > too? N: They fall away with the citta and are then, as it were, carried on to the next citta. We could say, they are in the citta or with the citta as a latent condition. I used the simile of the microbes for latent tendencies. This pertains to akusala accumulations, latent tendencies. Citta is sick, and this sickness can break out any time. Ph: I guiess that puzzlement would also apply to Rob's explanation as well, > because he saud "accumulations influence the nature of citta that arises" > But where > are the accumulations? N: Like microbes you do not notice, but they are there, they are laying dormant in the citta. Ph; There is only one citta at a time, and it vanishes. > Where do accumulations reside before they appear to condition through > natural decisive support condition? N: They are not static, they also change, more akusala is added to them. They are in the stream of cittas that are succeeding one another.They are always on the move. Thus we cannot say that they last. Again: difficult to find the right words. Whatever we say people may misunderstand and have pictorial ideas about these things. We need a lot of explanations. Just as in the case of object, citta experiences an object. It seems a small self? No, we should explain. Now some texts where in Pali the locativus is used. In My translation of the Latent tendencies i use Pali and Thai Co. Santaane: locativus, in the continuity (of cittas). What is a continuity of cittas: cittas that succeed one another without a break, so long as we are in the cycle. Since the Pali uses locativus I find it safe to use in. But we cannot know exactly how it all works. Nina. 36943 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:37pm Subject: Conditions for a human rebirth Hi there. Been thinking about how I can be somewhat certain of how I can obtain a human rebirth if something bad were to occur so that I could stay on the spiritual path. Now I have four distinct theories on this based on what I have heard and read, and a question: Theories: 1) Ayya Khema, in 'Being Nobody, Going Nowhere' says that most humans are reborn humans, with the necessary condition of not breaking any of the five precepts habitually, wherein the fourth precept is not to lie. This assumes that most humans observe decent morality. Sounds nice, but is it a fair assumption to make? 2) In this theory, a human rebirth is very hard to attain, even when passing away as a human. This is based on some of the analogies in scripture where the Buddha compares the Earth to the dust under his fingernail as a simile for those who are reborn humans compared to those in the other (predominatly lower, of course) realms). Ten wholesome actions, and not just abstinence from the ten unwholesome courses of action (lying, idle talk, covetousness, etc), are considered a good grounding for a human rebirth. They are o Generosity o morality o mental development (study and meditation) o reverence o service o sharing of merit o rejoicing in others merit o listening to (or studying) the Dhamma o teaching the Dhamma, o straightening wrong views (by questioning learned monks or studying good Dhamma books). 3) Observance of the five precepts where the fourth precept includes refraining from harsh speech, useless speech, and divisive speech in addition to false speech. (This would be more in line with mere abstience or opposites of ten unwhoelsome actions, as seven of them would be covered by these precepts, and makes sense, as the Buddha says righteous conduct itself (conduct along the lines described in MN 41, Saleyyaka Sutta), let alone the ten wholesome actions, can result in a heavenly rebirth, let alone a human rebirth) 4) Righteous conduct along the lines of the aforementioned sutta, doing good deeds, and doing four specific meditations to make our minds clear, calm, and able to recollect our good deeds at the time of death. These meditations are, metta meditation (I think this has the additional benefit of decreasing negative karma), meditation on repulsiveness of the body (would detachment from our bodies help when death comes?), meditation on death (so when death comes we are taken less afraid, i would assume), and recollection of the qualities of the buddha, for the spiritual faculty of conviction and ostensibly so we can continue on the path in future lives. My questions would then be 1) We often speak of non-remorse as one of the fruits of purification of virtue, or morality. This non-remorse allows for some sense of joy to arise, or for the arising of concentration. Can we say non-remorse is also a prerequisite for a good human rebirth? IE, should I try to get myself less complacent and be doing what I should be doing, and/or not be doing what I will later regret, in a similar way so that when death approaches I will not have heavy regrets about what I've done? I guess this is obvious and turning into idle chatter. I have to somehow stop doing mischeif and start doing good or I'm done for X-P May we all be moral, abstain from evil deeds, and be in Dharma. Enjoy, Andrew Levin 36944 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi Howard, You wrote: ------------------ > Separate, self-existent, substantial entities, with own-being (sabhava in the literal sense), and which, yet, miraculously, condition each other, constitute a metaphysical nightmare, a contradiction, and a reificationist's delight. > ------------------ How do they constitute a contradiction? Can you give a simile? ------------------ H: > If I were to accept your characterization of Abhidhamma, I would abandon it as not being Dhamma. Dhammas are phenomena that exist in relation, and not on their own. > ------------------- Yes, they exist in the company of other dhammas, but they have their own, independent natures. Consider the chariot simile: (Just as when chariot parts are rightly assembled a chariot is said to exist, so too, when the five khandhas arise together a living being is said to exist.) Chariot parts support each other's functions don't they? And yet a wheel is still a wheel and an axel is still an axel. A person examining a chariot can see that those parts exist. So too, the five khandhas (citta, sankhara-cetasikas, sanna, vedana and rupa) support each other's functions. And yet a citta is still a citta and a vedana is still a vedana. They arise together, but they can be observed one at a time. ---------------------- H: > Their nature is that of emptiness, which is neither non-existence nor substantialist self-existence. > ---------------------- No, when dhammas are said to be "empty" it is, "empty of self" that is meant. Talk of `neither existing nor not-existing' is reserved for living beings. A living being is something conventionally said to exist whenever the five khandhas arise together. So a living being is neither existent nor non-existent. Dhammas, on the other hand, are existent (however fleetingly, unsatisfactorily and self- devoidedly that might be). ------------------------ H: > Perhaps I completely misread your use of "absolute reality", but in that case I would wonder why you would choose to adopt such substantialist, essentialist terminology. > ----------------------- I am just trying to parrot those DSG friends of ours who are more advanced in their Abhidhamma studies than I am. When my own opinions get in the way, please point them out to me! ---------------------- H: > The Buddha doesn't use such terminology. > -------------------- It seems clear to me that he does. To my mind, he says that the loka is comprised of things (eye-consciousness, visible object etc.) that exist. ------------------- H: > The Buddha uses the middle-way terminology of emptiness. > ------------------- No, the middle-way terminology is of the five khandhas, nama and rupa (the only things that ultimately exist). ------------------ H: > In the Sutta Pitaka, for example, you will find the following two paragraphs, for example: > He who does not find core or substance > in any of the realms of being, > like flowers which are vainly sought > in fig trees that bear none, > ------------- We had this discussion recently, Howard. I said that the quote you have given denies the existence of fig-tree flowers but not the existence of fig trees. Figuratively speaking, a fig tree exists but not so its flowers. Literally speaking, a dhamma exists but not so its owner (atta, the self). What was your response to that? Kind regards, Ken H 36945 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 4:58pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.] Hello Howard, and all Howard: >>>Now, I'm going to add something here that I've been meaning to mention, and this seems like a reasonable place to do so. I've recently come to the realization that when we soften our notion of 'consciousness' from one of "cognizing thing or function" to mere "experiential presence", the idea of self is weakened tremendously! I've also discovered that in doing this - in thinking in terms merely of phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, without any "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of freedom! One comes to see that there really is no self at all - at this very moment, no self - and should phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me or mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would change one way or the other! Already, at this very moment, there is freedom!!! Ph: Well said. And I understand your use of exclamation marks!! This captures the feeling I've had since coming across abhidhamma. You are stricter about your understanding of citta and, if I understand correctly, are uncomfortable with descriptions that lead to an idea of citta as something that cognizes, because that implies an agent, a self of some kind. I can see what you mean. In my case, it seems that this cognizing function is just one of many functions that are indispensable in the processes, that for me, solidify my sense of freedom through abhidhamma. I haven't fully understood these processes yet, but the more I learn and reflect on them, the more they contribute to the feeling that, as you put it, "should phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me or mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would change one way or the other!" And there can be none of these processes that go on in a way that I cannot control without cittas performing functions, I'd say. Metta, Phil 36946 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:04pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.] Hi Howard, Just a few comments, the gist of which is that I think we can simplify things without doing damage to your view. H: "You may be moving into my section of the woods, Larry, but I don't think you've quite entered my campsite. ;-) Or to use another metaphor, you may be visiting my neighborhood, but you aren't on my block yet. ;-)) What I mean is that that I wouldn't quite describe sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches as "consciousnesses". I would call them "experiences" (or "experiential content"). There is a subtle difference in the terminology between 'consciousnesses' and 'experiences'. When a sound is (experientially) present, the sound is the content or experience, and its presence is, I believe, what we mean (or should mean) when we properly speak of "consciousness of the sound". The consciousness of the sound is not a separate knowing thing, nor is it the sound, itself. It is the experiential presence of the sound. The heard sound and its presence are mutually dependent and co-occurring." L: I don't see any difference between consciousness and experience and I would say sound is consciousness. Sound waves are not sound. Are you suggesting there is unconscious experience? Or is there another reason why you think this wrinkle is necessary? H: "Now, I'm going to add something here that I've been meaning to mention, and this seems like a reasonable place to do so. I've recently come to the realization that when we soften our notion of 'consciousness' from one of "cognizing thing or function" to mere "experiential presence", the idea of self is weakened tremendously! I've also discovered that in doing this - in thinking in terms merely of phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, without any "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of freedom! One comes to see that there really is no self at all - at this very moment, no self - and should phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me or mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would change one way or the other! Already, at this very moment, there is freedom!!!" L: I agree and would say consciousness is knowledge but knowledge is not all its marked-up to be. Also, there is no reason to throw realism out the door. Though we can't know external objects directly there are many good reasons to assume they are out there and functioning in reasonably predictable, or at least orderly, ways. Larry 36947 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:10pm Subject: Vism.XIV,103 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 103. III. i. B. That of the 'fine-material sphere', however, is of five kinds (57)-(61) like the profitable (9)-(13). But the profitable occurs in a cognitive series with the impulsions as an attainment [of jhana], while this occurs in an existence [in the fine-material sphere] as rebirth-linking, life-continuum, and death. 36948 From: connieparker Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:24pm Subject: 5 and 7 ties Another for the Vis fans, I'd rather not ask any of the search engines anything about sexuality and any type of bond(age), but what are the 7 bonds of sexuality and how do they differ from the five cords of sensual desire? In Vis ch 1, beginning with 143, there is: ...Now that tornness, etc., is comprised under the breach that has gain, fame, etc., as its cause, and under ***the seven bonds of sexuality*** [Siilasa.mkilesavodaana.m 21. Ya.m pana vutta.m ti. Tatra vadaama– kha.n.daadibhaavo siilassa sa.mkileso, akha.n.daadibhaavo vodaana.m. So pana kha.n.daadibhaavo laabhayasaadihetukena bhedena ca ***sattavidhamethunasa.myogena*** ca sa"ngahito.] and it goes on discussing faulty sila, mentioning things like massage and overhearing women's voices from the other side of a fence or recalling laughing with them. Thank you, connie ps to Macsters, does the double quote as in sa"ngahito look funny to you and if so, what should I use? 36949 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Hello Connie (and Htoo and Nina) > I see Nina and Htoo have already answered you regarding AN IV 248, but as > long as I've looked up the Pali anyway: > > AN IV 248: "There are four things conducive to the growth of wisdom: > associating with a good person; hearing the good Dhamma; maintaining a > right attitude of mind and leading a life in accordance with the Dhamma" > > (25) 5. Aapattibhayavaggo 6. Pa~n~naavuddhisutta.m > 248. "Cattaarome bhikkhave, dhammaa pa~n~naavuddhiyaa sa.mvattanti. Katame > cattaaro? Sappurisasa.msevo, saddhammasavana.m, yonisomanasikaaro, > dhammaanudhammappa.tipatti? ime kho, bhikkhave, cattaaro dhammaa > pa~n~naavuddhiyaa sa.mvattantii"ti. Cha.t.tha.m. Thanks for this. It confirmed my feeling that "maintaining a right attitude of mind" was a bit misleading and it's another example of why it is best to learn Pali, or at least be able to look at suttas in Pali and pick out key terms as I can here with yonisomanasikaaro. Can I ask you (and everyone) for some advice about how to track down suttas in Pali? For example, I have learned about a sutta (A VI 107) that sounds very important. Here is a passage: "The perception of impurity is to be developed in order to overcome greed; loving-kindness in order to overcome hate; wisdom in order to overcome delusion." I would like to see the Pali for this because I'd like to confirm that "develop" is something like bhavane. Now, Christine provided us with a link to a site where suttas are available in Pali English and Sinhala.. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/index.html The problem is, I don't know how to find Suttas in there. There seems to be a different system of notation, of numbering. If you or anyone could give me a tip how to find A VI 107 in there, I'd be grateful. I will be buying Bhikkhu Bodhi's anthologies, one by one, starting with SN. I think Santa is going to bring it this year. I wonder if he includes notes on the Pali for key phrases. (B Bodhi, not Santa) I hope so. What are the recommended bilingual collections of suttas available in book form? Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil p.s here's something from Nina's post: "Did you see the transl Connie used in a similar sutta? This is clearer." I can't recall it. Can you help me out here Connie? Thanks. 36951 From: Egbert Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:48pm Subject: "The same" in Buddhism Hi all, I have been doing some study on the concept of sameness in Buddhism and have only found it expressed in a negative form ie not other (anna - ananna). Are there any other terms that are used for sameness/otherness? What is the Pali term used where the question is asked if it is the same being (I think it was) that is born as the one that dies? Kind Regards Herman 36952 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 and 7 ties HI Connie, and all I don't know if this is to your point, but I think AN VII 48 is very interesting. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an07-048.html The warning against men being tied to masculine self-images and women to feminine self-images is quite revolutionary, I think. And I'll fight any man who says differently! ;) Metta, Phil 36953 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 2:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi, Ken - In a message dated 9/26/04 7:38:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > You wrote: > ------------------ > >Separate, self-existent, substantial entities, with own-being > (sabhava in the literal sense), and which, yet, miraculously, > condition each other, constitute a metaphysical nightmare, a > contradiction, and a reificationist's delight. > > ------------------ > > How do they constitute a contradiction? Can you give a simile? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I can't think of a simile. The point is that what is a separate, self-existent entity (of which there are no instances whatsoever! ;-) cannot be in relation to something else. This is so on the basis of what these terms mean. ----------------------------------------------- > > ------------------ > H: >If I were to accept your characterization of Abhidhamma, I > would abandon it as not being Dhamma. Dhammas are phenomena that > exist in relation, and not on their own. > > ------------------- > > Yes, they exist in the company of other dhammas, but they have their > own, independent natures. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, not independent. Their very existence is not independent. They are distinguishable, but not separable and not independent. They are existent, but not self-existent. -------------------------------------------------- Consider the chariot simile: (Just as when > > chariot parts are rightly assembled a chariot is said to exist, so > too, when the five khandhas arise together a living being is said to > exist.) Chariot parts support each other's functions don't they? > And yet a wheel is still a wheel and an axel is still an axel. A > person examining a chariot can see that those parts exist. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I thought we were talking about paramattha dhammas, Ken, not pa~n~natti, ----------------------------------------------- > > So too, the five khandhas (citta, sankhara-cetasikas, sanna, vedana > and rupa) support each other's functions. And yet a citta is still a > citta and a vedana is still a vedana. They arise together, but they > can be observed one at a time. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: They are distinguishable. I don't deny that. I don't confuse hardness with sound. -------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------- > H: >Their nature is that of emptiness, which is neither > non-existence nor substantialist self-existence. > > ---------------------- > > No, when dhammas are said to be "empty" it is, "empty of self" that > is meant. Talk of `neither existing nor not-existing' is reserved > for living beings. A living being is something conventionally said > to exist whenever the five khandhas arise together. So a living > being is neither existent nor non-existent. Dhammas, on the other > hand, are existent (however fleetingly, unsatisfactorily and self- > devoidedly that might be). ----------------------------------------------- Howard: No. Please read again the material I quoted from the Sutta Nipata and the Phena Sutta, especially the latter, which directly deals with paramattha dhammas. BTW, I note that you provide no comment on these. I wonder why. ------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------ > H: >Perhaps I completely misread your use of "absolute reality", > but in that case I would wonder why you would choose to adopt such > substantialist, essentialist terminology. > > ----------------------- > > I am just trying to parrot those DSG friends of ours who are more > advanced in their Abhidhamma studies than I am. When my own > opinions get in the way, please point them out to me! > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) You prefer parroting to considering??? Hmmm! I am now wondering whether the sutta material I quote below makes you uncomfortable due to its differing from the Abhidhammic viewpoint you seem to think is espoused on DSG. ------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------------------- > H: >The Buddha doesn't use such terminology. > > -------------------- > > It seems clear to me that he does. To my mind, he says that the loka > is comprised of things (eye-consciousness, visible object etc.) that > exist. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Jesus, Ken! (Whoops, I mean "For Buddha's sake, Ken!) Where did I say that dhammas don't exist? Read the quoted material. --------------------------------------------- > > ------------------- > H: >The Buddha uses the middle-way terminology of emptiness. > > ------------------- > > No, the middle-way terminology is of the five khandhas, nama and > rupa (the only things that ultimately exist). > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Ken, you're not giving a serious reply here. The khandhas are empty, Ken, but not nonexistent. Read the quoted material, and read to the sutta to Kaccayana. ------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------ > H: >In the Sutta Pitaka, for example, > you will find the following two paragraphs, for example: > >He who does not find core or substance > >in any of the realms of being, > >like flowers which are vainly sought > >in fig trees that bear none, > > > > ------------- > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. Snip quickly, lest we look at it too carefully. ;-) ------------------------------------------------------ > > We had this discussion recently, Howard. I said that the quote you > have given denies the existence of fig-tree flowers but not the > existence of fig trees. Figuratively speaking, a fig tree exists but > not so its flowers. Literally speaking, a dhamma exists but not so > its owner (atta, the self). What was your response to that? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Read all the material I quoted, Ken. Even if you snip it from the page, don't be so quick to snip it from your mind. Let these seeds stay there a while, and water them with unbiased consideration. -------------------------------------------------- > > Kind regards, > Ken H > ========================= 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) 36954 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 2:37pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi, Phil - In a message dated 9/26/04 8:02:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, plnao@j... writes: > Hello Howard, and all > > Howard: >>>Now, I'm going to add something here that I've been meaning to > mention, and this seems like a reasonable place to do so. I've recently come > to the > realization that when we soften our notion of 'consciousness' from one of > "cognizing thing or function" to mere "experiential presence", the idea of > self is > weakened tremendously! I've also discovered that in doing this - in thinking > in > terms merely of phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, > without > any "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of > freedom! One comes to see that there really is no self at all - at this very > moment, > no self - and should phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease > utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me > or > mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would > change one way or the other! Already, at this very moment, there is > freedom!!! > > > Ph: Well said. And I understand your use of exclamation marks!! > This captures the feeling I've had since coming across abhidhamma. > You are stricter about your understanding of citta and, if I understand > correctly, are > uncomfortable with descriptions that lead to an idea of citta as something > that cognizes, > because that implies an agent, a self of some kind. I can see what you mean. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. You understand me well. :-) ------------------------------------------------- > In my case, it seems that this cognizing function is just one of many > functions that are indispensable in the processes, that for me, solidify my > sense of freedom > through abhidhamma. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's fine. We each approach truth as is best for us, in our own fashion as is useful to us. And what is useful often changes from time to time and context to context. There is tremendous value in abhidhamma, and I am very happy that you gain from it. -------------------------------------------------- I haven't fully understood these processes yet, but the> > more I learn and reflect on them, > the more they contribute to the feeling that, as you put it, "should > phenomena continue to arise, or should phenomena cease > utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, for none of it is me > or > mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in terms of "me" nothing would > change one way or the other!" > And there can be none of these processes that go on in a way that I cannot > control without cittas performing functions, I'd say. > > Metta, > Phil > ======================== 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) 36955 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 6:58pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi Howard > We each approach truth as is best for us, in our own >fashion as is useful to us. And what is useful often changes from time to time and >context to context Again, well said. This is the thing that I find so inspiring everyone morning, when I reflect on the Buddha. That he taught to so many different people in so many ways, and, at another level of complexity, teaches to each person in different ways according to the twists and turns of each person's mental development. What a teacher!! Metta, Phil p.s I sometimes think that if we all kept this in mind, there would be less tussling over interpretations, but I should remember that the tussling itself can contribute to mental development. 36956 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:09pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/26/04 8:06:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Just a few comments, the gist of which is that I think we can simplify > things without doing damage to your view. > > H: "You may be moving into my section of the woods, Larry, but I don't > think you've quite entered my campsite. ;-) Or to use another metaphor, > you may be visiting my neighborhood, but you aren't on my block yet. > ;-)) > What I mean is that that I > wouldn't quite describe sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches as > "consciousnesses". I would call them "experiences" (or "experiential > content"). There is a subtle difference in the terminology between > 'consciousnesses' and 'experiences'. When a sound is (experientially) > present, the sound is the content or experience, and its presence is, I > believe, what we mean (or should mean) when we properly speak of > "consciousness of the sound". The consciousness of the sound is not a > separate knowing thing, nor is it the sound, itself. It is the > experiential presence of the sound. The heard sound and its presence are > mutually dependent and co-occurring." > > L: I don't see any difference between consciousness and experience and I > would say sound is consciousness. Sound waves are not sound. Are you > suggesting there is unconscious experience? Or is there another reason > why you think this wrinkle is necessary? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are several things going on here, Larry, and most of them are language use issues. For starters, the word 'consiousness' bothers me, as I see it as smacking of the sense of subject. A knowing subject is a personal self, and we have to be very wary of that. I also very much dislike the usages "a consciousness" and "consciousnesses", for here we seem to be talking about "little selves"! ;-) Sound waves are pa~n~natti. I'm not concerned with them. Sounds, in the phenomeological sense, are auditory elements of experience. They are types of experiential content. Sometimes we use the word 'experience' to talk about experiential content, sometimes we use it the word to designate the knowing of that content. So when someone asks us to "describe an experience" we may say "Well, it was a high-pitched squeal of a sound". That reply refers to experience in the sense of experiential content. Other times we might say "The experience was the hearing of a bare whisper". That reply refers to experience in the sense of knowing of some content (or, as I would put it, the presence of that content). In any event, I would never say that sound is a consciousness. That is just an odd use of language, because "a consciousness" amounts to the second sense of "experience" as outlined above (but with an added sense of subject implied), but when we correctly say that a sound is an experience, that is in the first sense outlined above - that is, content of an experience. ------------------------------------------------------ > > H: "Now, I'm going to add something here that I've been meaning to > mention, and this seems like a reasonable place to do so. I've recently > come to the realization that when we soften our notion of > 'consciousness' from one of "cognizing thing or function" to mere > "experiential presence", the idea of self is weakened tremendously! I've > also discovered that in doing this - in thinking in terms merely of > phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, without any > "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of > freedom! One comes to see that there really is no self at all - at this > very moment, no self - and should phenomena continue to arise, or should > phenomena cease utterly and for good, there would be no threat at all, > for none of it is me or mine, the "me" is already nonexistent, and in > terms of "me" nothing would change one way or the other! Already, at > this very moment, there is freedom!!!" > > L: I agree and would say consciousness is knowledge but knowledge is not > all its marked-up to be. Also, there is no reason to throw realism out > the door. Though we can't know external objects directly there are many > good reasons to assume they are out there and functioning in reasonably > predictable, or at least orderly, > ways. > > Larry > ========================== 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) 36957 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:52pm Subject: Deeds of Merit - intro to mental development Hello all, More from "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, available at http://www.dhammastudy.com/merits3.html and zolag. We have seen the deeds of merit that fall under dana and sila, as well as "correction of views", which supports all deeds of merit. We now move on to the third and final category of deeds of merit, mental development. In the following exchange, W is Ms. Wandhana Thippewan. W: We will now deal with the kind of meritorious action which is mental development, bhaavanaa. In the Thai language we use the word bhaavanaa in the sense of wishing something or praying. For example, when there is drought, we apply ourselves to bhaavanaa, wishing that it will rain. Or when it rains, we apply ourselves to bhaavanaa, wishing that the rain will quickly stop. Is this kind of bhaavanaa one of the meritorious actions? S. : Applying oneself to bhaavanaa, wishing that it will rain or that the rain will stop is not the meritorious action of bhaavanaa. All meritorious actions are actually the elimination of the strength of defilements, stage by stage. First of all there is the level of kusala which is daana, the abandoning of clinging to possessions by giving away things for the benefit of someone else. Moreover, there is the level of kusala which is siila, the elimination of coarse defilements which cause evil deeds through body and speech, by which one hurts or harms other people. Then there is the level of kusala which is bhaavanaa, mental development. This includes samatha, the development of calm by the temporary subduing of medium defilements [33 as well as vipassanaa, the development of pa~n~naa which can, stage by stage, eradicate the subtle defilements completely. 36958 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:45pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi TG, You wrote: ----------------- > Needless to say I take every point you made below and see them the opposite. > ------------------ I know! Who would have thought a simple teaching could be interpreted in two entirely different ways? :-) ---------- TG: > Its a shame you don't address the Quotes from the Sutta. > ------------------- I did address them to some extent. I suggested that "existent" and "non-existent" should be understood as two [wrong] ways of referring to living beings. They were not, as you saw them, [wrong] ways of referring to dhammas. I didn't want to be more assertive than that because interpreting suttas is not my forte. By now, you will have seen Nina's comments on your quotes: I look forward to your response. I wonder if you will agree that the Middle Way is concerned, not with living beings, but with the five khandhas (conditioned nama and rupa). When our minds are occupied with the ultimate existence or non-existence of living beings, we are denying that the only ultimate reality is nama and rupa. In other words, we are advocating wrong views. --------------------------- TG: > Notice I quote Suttas to back up positions and not Mahayana or Nagarjuna sources which you accuse those positions of reflecting. > --------------------------- When there is more than one way of interpreting a sutta, do you quote its ancient commentaries? I have seen enough of modern Buddhism to know that there is an esteemed source of support for almost every possible interpretation. Access-to-Insight, for example, discounts the delineation of concept and reality (pannatti and paramattha dhamma) because it upsets their theory that anatta is just a technique, not a fact. Stephen Batchelor, I think, claims that the Buddha did not teach rebirth. (!) So we can't rely on our own interpretations and we can't rely on other, original, thinkers. The best Theravada commentaries are the oldest ones. -------------- TG: > There is zero evidence in the Suttas that the Buddha had any kind of goal in mind for us to see things as "Dhammas." (Although the opposite can be pointed to.) In my view...when the word Dhamma is used as you have below, it might as well be substituted by "substantial state." And this term might as well be substituted by "self same state." I cannot see how a mind can get beyond self view when things are seen as "Dhammas" in the way you describe. > ------------- What can I say? :-) I can't deny that I see everything as, ultimately, dhammas. ------- TG: > Its never a waste of time to make an investigation of the truth. The endeavor can reveal what doesn't work and then the process can advance as long as an open mind prevails. Look at how many teachers the Buddha ended up rejecting before he found what he was looking for. > -------- I have barely enough time in this life to investigate the Dhamma as found in the three baskets of the Pali Canon their ancient commentaries. Having settled on this source, I won't be looking elsewhere. I don't expect to prove the teaching by my own experience in the foreseeable future, however, the more I understand of it, the more compelling it gets. Kind regards, Ken H 36959 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:33pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi Howard, The word 'consciousness' doesn't have any sense of subjectivity for me. It is just a phenomenon. And like 'A' phenomenon it makes sense to talk about 'A' consciousness. Plus without singular and plural I don't see how to understand impermanence. However, as you say, it's just words. The best place to look for subjectivity here is in the desire to formulate and communicate and be right. Larry ------------------------------- H: "There are several things going on here, Larry, and most of them are language use issues. For starters, the word 'consiousness' bothers me, as I see it as smacking of the sense of subject. A knowing subject is a personal self, and we have to be very wary of that. I also very much dislike the usages "a consciousness" and "consciousnesses", for here we seem to be talking about "little selves"! ;-) Sound waves are pa~n~natti. I'm not concerned with them. Sounds, in the phenomeological sense, are auditory elements of experience. They are types of experiential content. Sometimes we use the word 'experience' to talk about experiential content, sometimes we use it the word to designate the knowing of that content. So when someone asks us to "describe an experience" we may say "Well, it was a high-pitched squeal of a sound". That reply refers to experience in the sense of experiential content. Other times we might say "The experience was the hearing of a bare whisper". That reply refers to experience in the sense of knowing of some content (or, as I would put it, the presence of that content). In any event, I would never say that sound is a consciousness. That is just an odd use of language, because "a consciousness" amounts to the second sense of "experience" as outlined above (but with an added sense of subject implied), but when we correctly say that a sound is an experience, that is in the first sense outlined above - that is, content of an experience." 36960 From: Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:47pm Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi again Howard, One addendum. When I said, "The best place to look for subjectivity here is in the desire to formulate and communicate and be right" I was referring to my own desires. Yours I'm not interested in ;-)) Larry 36961 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warning - controversial post / TG Hi TG, KenH, Nina & All, --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Ken H > > Needless to say I take every point you made below and see them the > opposite. > Its a shame you don't address the Quotes from the Sutta. Notice I quote > > Suttas to back up positions .... .... S: You may find it helpful to refer to the following old posts in which I included BB’s commentary notes and further quotes from the sutta (Kaccanagotta, SN12:15(5)) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10500 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15227 Metta, Sarah ====== 36962 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 1:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Howard & KenH, Whilst I'm giving links to suttas and commentary notes, you may like to check the following with relevance to another discussion you were having here: KenH: > > As in the other (snipped) excellent quotes you have provided: the > > meaning is that paramattha dhammas are empty of self. They lack the > > substance of self, but they have their own substance. They are real: > > they have their own functions and characteristics and they need > > their own special conditions to arise. The five khandhas are not > > mere ideas made up to serve a purpose (as teaching aids). > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Too bad you snipped the Phena Sutta. It is the most telling quote > for > expressing the insubstantiality of all dhammas. The opening lines say it > all: > > > Form is like a glob of foam; > > feeling, a bubble; > > perception, a mirage; > > fabrications, a banana tree; > > consciousness, a magic trick -- > > this has been taught > > by the Kinsman of the Sun. .... S: Sutta and commentary notes in the first and BB's comments in the second post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13062 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27963 Also for Nyanaponika's notes inc. some commentary ones I believe on the snake and worn-out skin similes: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel241.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel241.html Metta, Sarah ======== 36963 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 1:18am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact /Phassa(g) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.1, Contact (Phassa)contd] ***** Is there contact now? There is the experience of an object right now and thus there has to be contact as well. There are seeing, hearing or thinking occurring time and again. We think that it is 'I' who sees, hears or thinks, but in reality there are different cittas conditioned by different factors. Knowing more about the different factors through which realities are conditioned will help us to understand that there is no self who experiences an object. Seeing is a nama which arises because of the concurrence of different factors and it cannot stay, it has to fall away again. We cannot force it to arise nor can we force it to stay. When we are busy with our work, there are different realities presenting themselves through the senses, but we are usually forgetful of them, when hardness presents itself, phassa performs its function so that citta can experience the object. There is no self who experiences hardness. Considering realities can condition the arising of mindfulness, no matter whether we walk stand, sit or lie down. When we study cetasikas we should not forget that cetasikas never arise alone; they have to arise together with citta. They arise with the cittas of our daily Iife, they are not abstract categories. Since citta and cetasikas which arise together condition one another, the cetasikas and thus also phassa have different qualities when they arise with different types of citta. Phassa which arises with akusala citta is also akusala; phassa which arises with kusala citta is also kusala. When phassa arises with lokuttara citta phassa is also lokuttara: at that moment it 'contacts' nibbana, the object of the lokuttara citta. ***** [Contact (Phassa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 36964 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 2:11am Subject: Dighanakha Sutta, MN74 Dear Dighanakha or D., I’m looking at your recent posts to me and also at the Dighanakha Sutta as I write. I hope it's not too confusing for everyone. I’m glad to return to this sutta after not having read it for a long time. As Christine said, it is the same sutta in which Sariputta becomes an arahant whilst fanning the Buddha and attending to the Buddha’s words. Here is your four line signature sign off which had me rather puzzled: ...... "The view of those ascetics and brahmins who are of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me' is close to non-attachment, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-cleaving, close to non-grasping". (Dighanakha Sutta) ..... The Nanamoli/Bodhi translation gives a note about the commentary explanation of Dighanakha’s view (‘nothing is acceptable to me’ or as you translate 'everything is not pleasing to me'), saying it is an annihilationist (ucchedavaadin) view and that it ‘explains this assertion to mean: ‘No [mode of] rebirth is acceptable to me’. ...... I see no reason at all not to accept the commentary interpretation, though B.Bodhi adds his own further interpretation that Dighanakha is a 'radical sceptic of the class satirically characterised at MN 76.30 as 'eel-wrigglers'!. ..... When the Buddha questions whether the view itself is acceptable to Dighanakha (called Aggivessana by him), the latter agrees it ‘would be the same’. More notes from the commentary as paraphrased say: ‘the Buddha suggests, by his question, that Dighankakha’s assertion involves an inherent contradiction, for he cannot reject everything without also rejecting his own view, and this would entail the opposite position, namely that something is acceptable to him. However, though Dighankha recognises the implication of the Buddha’s question, he continues to insist on his view that nothing is acceptable to him.’ ..... As the notes also point out, having clearly identified the view above with ‘annihilationism’, ‘annihilationism is close to non-lust,etc, because, though involving a wrong conception of self, it leads to disenchantment with existence.’ ..... B.Bodhi again suggests that ‘most sceptics, while professing a rejection of all views, surreptitiously adopt some definite view, while a few abandon their scepticism to seek a path to personal knowledge.’ He also suggests that ‘if [this view] is understood as radical scepticism, it could also be seen as close to non-lust in that it expresses disillusionment with the attempt to buttress the attachment to existence with a theoretical foundation and thus represents a tentative, though mistaken, step in the direction of dispassion.’ ..... Hmm, interesting. What are your comments on these comments? It may be a little simpler for those of us who just follow the ancient commentary with confidence in its value;-). It seems like I’m getting carried away with the sutta and commentary notes at the expense of your posts, but I’ll come back to them, I promise. ..... In brief, Dighanakha is shown the danger of his view. From the sutta: “A wise man among those recluses and brahmins who holds the doctrine and view ‘Nothing is acceptable to me’ considers thus: ‘If I obstinately adhere to my view ‘Nothing is acceptable to me’ and declare: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong,’ then I may clash with the two others: with a recluse or brahmin who holds the doctrine and view ‘Everything is acceptable to me’ and with a recluse or brhamin who holds the doctrine and view ‘something is acceptable to me, something is not acceptable to me.’ [i.e eternalist and partial eternalist views accord. to the comy]. So, ‘Foreseeing for himself clashes, disputes, quarrels, and vexation, he abandons that view and does not take up some other view.’ ..... At this point, D., I’m rather perplexed. Usually people use a signature line or lines because they include useful reminders or a particular message. I assume that by identifying with these lines and the name too, that you see value in this particular view. Is this right? Surely, we are none of us interested in views that just lead to clashes, disputes etc? ..... How does Dighanakha abandon his wrong view in the sutta? He listens to the Buddha’s teaching about how the body consists of impermanent elements only, which are not self. “It should be regarded as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a dart, as a calmity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as void, as not self. when one regards this body thus, one abandons desire for the body, affection for the body, subservience to the body.” Feelings too are ‘impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, vanishing, fading away, and ceasing.’ Only one feeling arises as a time, experiences its object and falls away. ..... By understanding the nature of these realities for what they are, there is dispassion and the well-taught noble disciple becomes liberated. “A bhikkhu whose mind is liberated thus, Aggivessana, sides with none and disputes with none; he employs the speech currently used in the world without adhering to it.” ..... Now you mentioned in one of your posts that ‘it is only from the commentators that we get the idea that the Buddha’s Dhamma has to do with paramatha dhammas and citta-khanas. These terms are not found in the Tipitaka......’ Whilst I’m sure you’re right about the actual terms (for dhammas/ultimate realities and momentary cittas), we can see that even in this sutta of your choice presumably, that: a) Dighanakha becomes a sotapanna (and Sariputta an arahant) whilst listening to the Buddha explain the danger of wrong views and the impermanence and so on of elements, of dhammas, which are conditioned and devoid of self. b) Quoting again from the sutta, ‘he employs the speech currently used in the world without adhering to it’. This means we shouldn’t get hung up on the language or terminology that’s used as I understand it. For those brought up or trained in Pali, this is their natural language and the wise will understand the deep meanings when they hear it. For others of us, this will be in English, or Thai or any other language. Many of the terms used by the ancient commentators may be different from those used in the suttas, but it is the underlying meaning that is important and for this we need to read a sutta, a Jataka tale or an Abhidhamma extract, for example, in the light of the essence of the Buddha’s teaching: the development of satipatthana and the Four Noble Truths. ..... In yet another note to these lines about ‘the speech currently used...’, we read: “MA quotes a verse that says that an arahant may use the words ‘I’ and ‘mine’ without giving rise to conceit or misconceiving them as referring to a self or ego (SN 1:5/i.14). See too DN 9.53/i.202, where the Buddha says of expressions employing the word ‘self’: ‘These are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world, which the Tathagata uses without misapprehending them." ..... This post is already long and I’ve only touched on a few of your comments. One last one on the meaning of ‘independence’ which you raised, with a suggestion that some of us are more/less ‘independently-minded’. We read in the sutta at the end: “But in the wanderer Dighanakha the spotless immaculate vision of the Dhamma arose: ‘All that is subject to arising is subject to cessation.’ The wanderer Dighankha saw the Dhamma, attained the Dhamma, understood the Dhamma, fathomed the Dhamma; he crossed beyond doubt, did away with perplexity, gained intrepidity, and *became independent of others in the Teacher’s Dispensation*”. ‘Aparapaccayo’ - independent, not relying on others, as a result of giving up wrong views of self, of annihilationism, eternalism etc. ..... Another note to a similar passage to the one quoted above in MN56: “MA: Vision of Dhamma (dhammacakkhu) is the path of stream-entry. the phrase ‘All that is subject to arising is subject to cessation’ shows the mode in which the path arises. The path takes cessation (Nibbana) as its object, but its function is to penetrate all conditioned states as subject to arising and cessation” ..... Let us hope we all learn to become ‘independent’ by penetrating ‘all conditioned states as subject to arising and cessation’ and relinquishing any wrong views that our worlds consist of anything other than paramatha dhammas or impermanent elements without self or core. This is the way that panna (wisdom) can really understand and eradicate our own kilesa (defilements), including any present ignorance, rather than being over-concerned about others’ lack of wisdom or independence;-). ..... One more note: “The ‘Dhamma’ referred to here is the Four Noble Truths. Having seen these truths for himself, he has cut off the fetter of doubt and now possesses the ‘view that is noble and emancipating and (which) leads the one who practises in accordance with it to the complete destruction of suffering’ (MN 48.7)” ..... I’m sure you’re far more familiar with most of this sutta than I am, so I thank you for your patience in following this post as I reflect on it and share extracts with others less familiar with it. Of course I’ll welcome any comments or feedback or healthy criticism even;-) Metta, Sarah p.s I hope to get back to at least a couple of parts of your other posts later. ====== 36965 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hi Dighanakha (& RobK)< --- dighanakha wrote: > Commenting on the verse: > > "As all rivers meander, > As all forests are made of wood, > So all women would do evil > When given the opportunity." > > Buddhaghosa says: " 'All women' means that all women, excepting > those whose defilements have been reduced by insight, would do > evil." .... S: These comments always refer to 'women in general' I think. Those who haven't developed insight. These are always descriptions of wordlings, not of ariyans or those with developed insight. If we look at the Maatugaamsa.myutta, Connected Discourses on Women, SN37, for example, we read about those women destined for miserable states - those without faith, shameless, unafraid of wrong doing, angry and unwise as in (37:5) or destined for hell (37:14)if: "She destroys life, takes what is not given, engages in sexual misconduct, speaks falsehood, indulges in..intoxicants..." As we know, the latent tendency for breaking the precepts is there until the stage of sotapanna. Only when the tendency has been completely eradicated is she the one definitely 'dwells confident at home' (37:33) no matter the opportunity or provocation or rebirth. .... > "Opportunity" he then explains as meaning whenever a woman can > find a private place large enough to conceal herself and another. ... S: I find the further elaborations and discussion in Qus of K.Milinda extremely interesting and helpful. I don't see any conflicts but will look later at the other post to see if there's anything further to add. Metta, Sarah ======== 36966 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hi Dighanakha, --- dighanakha wrote: > S> Something which is very puzzling to me, however, is the > S> following: > > > dig> Something else I would draw your attention to (though it is > dig> less probative than the above) is that the Kunala depicts > dig> the Bodhisatta as lying. He lies three times when he is > dig> seducing the white-robed nun Saccatapavi. But in other > dig> commentaries (I think in the Buddhavamsa or the Cariyapitaka > dig> Comm) it is stated that a Bodhisatta never violates the > dig> fourth precept. He might break the others, but never the > dig> fourth. > > S> Yes. I read the text for this and also had a quick look > S> at the Pali for the relevant lines and you seem to be > S> right. IÕve also read/heard the same as you about the > S> *third* precept as the exception and I have no explanation > S> here(!!). > > It isn't the third precept. .... S: Sorry, that was my mistake, I had the order mixed up. We're both talking about the fourth precept of lying and I'm still puzzled too. this was the reference I was thinking of in this connection: In the Harita Jataka (431) commentary we specifically read: " 'They who forsake the truth, though they sit in the sacred enclosure of the Bo tree, cannot attain to Buddhahood. I must needs just speak the truth.' In certain cases a Bodhisatta may destroy life, take what is not given him, commit adultery, drink strong drink, but he may not tell a lie, attended by deception that violates the reality of things." He then tells the king how he 'erred' with the queen. So we see that even a Bodhisatta under certain conditions and given 'opportunity' can indulge in very strong unwholesome acts. Harita (the Bodhisata) says: "There are four passions in this world, great king, That in their power are over-mastering: Lust, hate, excess and ignorance their name; Knowledge can here no certain footing claim". At the end of the tale, the Master said: "Thus Harita for truth right stoutly did contend, And lust forsaking did to Brahma world ascend." .... Is there any way of reading the Pali for the Kunala sutta which doesn't read it as 'lies'? .... >In fact there are many Jatakas where > the Bodhisatta is a philanderer who goes around seducing > other men's wives. It's definitely the fourth precept the > commentators say he can't break. But I gave a wrong source. It's > not the Cariyapitaka but the Jatakanidana, in the scene where > Dipankara Buddha is teaching sacca-parami to the brahmin Sumedha. .... S: Ok, got it: "If thou forsake not truth and utter no lie, thou shalt become Buddha." Ok, I think it would be useful to look at a literal translation of the three lies you refer to in the Kunala sutta with the Pali-Eng. Interesting discussions;-) Metta, Sarah ======== 36967 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Dear Friends, For those who wish to read more about the Harita Jataka, see this extract from Nina's translation of A.Sujin's book on the Perfections: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/20998 Some may also wish to seethe other posts saved under 'Sacca (Truth)' in U.P. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Metta, Sarah ====== --- sarah abbott wrote: > In the Harita Jataka (431) commentary we specifically read: > > " 'They who forsake the truth, though they sit in the sacred enclosure > of > the Bo tree, cannot attain to Buddhahood. I must needs just speak the > truth.' In certain cases a Bodhisatta may destroy life, take what is not > given him, commit adultery, drink strong drink, but he may not tell a > lie, > attended by deception that violates the reality of things." > > He then tells the king how he 'erred' with the queen. So we see that > even > a Bodhisatta under certain conditions and given 'opportunity' can > indulge > in very strong unwholesome acts. > > Harita (the Bodhisata) says: > "There are four passions in this world, great king, > That in their power are over-mastering: > Lust, hate, excess and ignorance their name; > Knowledge can here no certain footing claim". > > At the end of the tale, the Master said: > > "Thus Harita for truth right stoutly did contend, > And lust forsaking did to Brahma world ascend." > .... 36968 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:25am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 074 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have been discussing about cetasikas or mental factors. There are 52 cetasikas or 52 mental factors that may accompany a citta. Citta never arises alone. Instead it arises with accompanying cetasikas. This is like a king wandering through out a city. The king has many followers when he does city-wandering. Like this citta the king always brings along his minister cetasikas. There are permanent ministers or universasl cetasikas or universal mental factors. They are universal because they have to arise with each of 89 cittas. Phassa or contact and vedana or feeling as cetasikas have been discussed in the previous post. There are many things to talk on vedana and phassa. But as there are many other cetasikas, they will be discussed again later. Another cetasika in the panel of permanent ministers or universal cetasikas is cetana. Cetana is anyway related to citta. Ceto means 'citta' or mind. Cetana is volition. Cetana always arises with each citta whatever kind they are. Cetana arises with patisandhi citta or linking consciousness, bhavanga cittas or life continuum, cuti citta or dying consciousness. Cetana also arises with vithi cittas like panca dvara avajjana citta or 5-sense-door-adverting-consciousness, 10 panca-vinnana-cittas or 10 sense-consciousness, 2 sampaticchana cittas or 2 receiving consciousness, 3 santirana cittas or 3 investigating consciousness, 1 mano dvara avajjana citta or mind-sense-door-adverting consciousness. Panca dvara avajjana citta and mano dvara avajjana citta are ahetuka kiriya cittas. They do not have any hetu [ lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, amoha ]and they are non-javana kiriya cittas. These two cittas do have cetana cetasika. More importantly, there are 55 javana cittas or mental impulse consciousness. 29 cittas arise at 5 sense doors or at pancadvara and 26 cittas arise at mind-sense door or at mano dvara. They all have cetana as their cetasika. 29 javana cittas are 1 hasituppada citta which is the smiling citta of arahats and The Buddha, 12 akusala cittas or unwholesome consciousness, 8 mahakusala cittas or 8 sensual sphere wholesome consciousness, 8 mahakiriya cittas or 8 sensual sphere inoperational consciousness. 1 + 12 + 8 + 8 = 29 cittas arise at 5 sense doors. They all have cetana as their cetasika. With the exception of hasituppada citta and 8 mahakiriya cittas which are kiriya cittas, all other 20 cittas immediately give rise to kamma through this cetana as soon as they arise. 26 javana citta arise at mano dvara. They are 5 rupakusala cittas or 5 rupa jhana cittas, 5 rupakiriya cittas or 5 rupa jhana inoperational consciousness, 4 arupakusala cittas or 4 arupa jhana cittas, 4 arupakiriya cittas or 4 arupa jhana inoperational consciousness, 4 magga cittas or 4 path-consciousness and 4 phala cittas or 4 fruition-consciousness. 5 + 5 + 4 + 4/+ 4 + 4 = 26 cittas. These 26 javana cittas do have cetana as their accompanying cetasika. Here 5 rupakusala citta and 4 arupakusala cittas have cetana and this cetana immediatedly give rise to rupa kamma and arupa kamma. This kamma is a garuka ( heavy, huge ) kamma and as soon as the being dies, this kamma gives rise to its fruit that is rebirth at rupa or arupa brahma bhumi or realm. 5 rupakiriya cittas and 4 arupakiriya cittas are inoperational consciousness and they do not give rise to any future kamma that would give rise to another birth. Cetana in 4 path-consciousness immediatedly gives rise its fruit to phala cittas. Magga cetana are the heaviest they immediately give rise to their effect unlike other kusala citta. 4 phala cittas or fruition-consciousness do have cetana. But this cetana is vipaka cetana and they do not give rise to any further kamma. There are other vipaka cittas and they do have cetana as their accompanying cetasika. This cetana is vipaka cetana and it does not give rise to any future kamma. But this cetana does its job there in vipaka citta while it arises with vipaka cittas. Cetana is said to be kamma. But as explained above, not all cetana will give rise to future effect. But all cetana do their job. What is their job? Cetana is one of 7 permanent ministers of the king citta or it is one of 7 universal cetasikas that always arise with each of 89 cittas. Cetana minister advises the king citta to do his job of knowing object. So citta knows the object. Citta is aware of the object. Cetana advises the king citta to do his job and he himself is functioning as a reminder or urger or encourager that he advises other cetasikas to do their respective jobs. For example, this minister cetana encourages phassa to contact, vedana to feel, sanna to cognise or to see mark, ekaggata to fix at a point or at an object, jivitindriya to support all mental faculties, and manasikara to attend the object. As he is actively encouraging all of these mental factors and citta the king, then he is the chief culprit that everything that citta the king does is because of him. As a culprit, cetana worth to receive punishment. As soon as cetana arises, kamma already arises. This is more true in case of non-kiriya javana cittas. In vipaka cittas, cetana has to arise and this is his receiving of punishment. As he is receiving punishment, cetana in vipaka cittas do not give rise to further kamma. Cetana urges. Cetana reminds. Cetana encourages. This is much more evident when we have an impulse to do some very bad thing or some very good thing. This is the work of cetana. It is not citta. It is a cetasika. It helps citta. As it has separate character and separate function, it is recognised as a reality. It is dhamma. It is a nature. No one is creating cetana. No one is abolishing cetana. No one can influence cetana. At the moment of reading this message you are sensing cetana as the object of your mind. Cetana can serve as object of mind. Cetana can be one of dhamma arammana or mind object. Cetana can be dhammarammana and it is also dhamma-ayatana. It is also a dhamma dhatu. Anyone who can see cetana clearly and understand cetana, this alone may suffice to meditate and arising of higher nana depending on own perfection. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 36969 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 0:24am Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tii... Hi again, Larry - Just a couple more words on this consciousness business: The more I ponder this, the more I realize how subtle the topic is. I *do* understand what you mean when you say that a sound is a consciousness (or, as preferred by me, an experience). In a sense there is nothing but experience. But we make too much of that, I think, when we call it "consciousness". As I see it, there is nothing but the rise and fall of phenomena. When hardness arises, so does the (experiential) presence of that hardness. And there never is (experiential) presence of hardness without there being hardness. And this is the same for other rupas, and for namas as well in their occurrences as arammana as opposed to concomitants. In every case, experiential content and experiential presence co-occur, and never occur separately. They are inseparable. But the experiential presence of a dhamma is "just that", the mere experiential presence of it, and to elevate that to the level of a knowing subject or even to an "operation of knowing" - though that latter is far "safer" - I believe is to feed our inclination to I-making. I find that when I *drop* the notion of consciousness, and no longer cling to it as a kind of anchor or haven, and just think in terms of (experiential) phenomena and their arising and ceasing, of presence and absence, there is a letting go of "me" and "mine" that is wonderful. And then it doesn't matter whether there is arising or ceasing or neither. What has any of that to do with (the nonexistent) "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) 36970 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 0:45am Subject: Kindness, Views, and Living in Hell [Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not] Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/27/04 1:51:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi again Howard, > > One addendum. When I said, "The best place to look for subjectivity here > is in the desire to formulate and communicate and be right" I was > referring to my own desires. Yours I'm not interested in ;-)) > > Larry > ========================== You're a good guy, Larry! ;-) Thank for you being considerate and worrying about the possibility of being misunderstood or giving offense. You never do give offense. :-) And, BTW, I agree that our inclination to grasp onto our views and to be "right", is a great hindrance, especially for us "thinking idiots" who never seem to learn that it is useful - at least *once* in a while! - to give all that thinking a rest!! ;-)) Whatever our areas of greatest vulnerability, the one thing we all do that keeps us in "hell" is to resist letting go! ;-)) 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) 36971 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 1:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/27/04 4:15:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > > Hi Howard &KenH, > > Whilst I'm giving links to suttas and commentary notes, you may like to > check the following with relevance to another discussion you were having > here: > > KenH: > >>As in the other (snipped) excellent quotes you have provided: the > >>meaning is that paramattha dhammas are empty of self. They lack the > >>substance of self, but they have their own substance. They are real: > >>they have their own functions and characteristics and they need > >>their own special conditions to arise. The five khandhas are not > >>mere ideas made up to serve a purpose (as teaching aids). > >> > >-------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Too bad you snipped the Phena Sutta. It is the most telling quote > >for > >expressing the insubstantiality of all dhammas. The opening lines say it > >all: > > > >>Form is like a glob of foam; > >>feeling, a bubble; > >>perception, a mirage; > >>fabrications, a banana tree; > >>consciousness, a magic trick -- > >> this has been taught > >> by the Kinsman of the Sun. > .... > S: Sutta and commentary notes in the first and BB's comments in the second > post: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13062 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27963 > > Also for Nyanaponika's notes inc. some commentary ones I believe on the > snake and worn-out skin similes: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel241.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel241.html > > Metta, > > Sarah > ================================ Thank you for the references. BTW, I'm quite "comfortable " with them. I'd also like to mention that I agree with you when you point out that dhammas, while insubstantial and not self-existent, still are distinguishable, having (or *being*) distinguishable characteristics. 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) 36972 From: connieparker Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:28am Subject: Re: 5 and 7 ties Thanks, Phil, AN VII 48 does pretty well cover it. Another friend sent the following: < ... this is what the 'Dictionary of Buddhism' by Prah Rahchawaramounii [Prayoud Payoudto [?]] says of the 'sattavidhamethunasa.myogas' [288] Methunasamyoga: bonds of sexuality; sex-bonds which cause the renting or blotching ot the life of chastity despite no actual sexual intercourse. 1. enjoyment of massage, manipulation, bathing and rubbing down by women 2. enjoyment of joking, jesting and making merry with women 3. enjoyment of gazing and staring at women eye to eye 4. enjoyment of listening to women as they laugh, talk, sing or weep beyond a wall or a fence 5. enjoyment of recalling the laughs, talks and jests one formerly had with women 6. enjoyment of seeing a householder or a householder's son indulging in sensual pleasures 7. leading a life of chastity aspiring to be reborn as a god or a deity [end definitions] > 1-7 are the same things mentioned in the Vis. I guess I was looking for something more general rather than specific examples. As for the pa~nca gu.na / 5 ties - I think they are the physical senses (and their objects)... or, paraphrasing your sutta, more like our excitement and delight therein. peace, connie ===Phil wrote: I don't know if this is to your point, but I think AN VII 48 is very interesting. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an07-048.html The warning against men being tied to masculine self-images and women to feminine self-images is quite revolutionary, I think. And I'll fight any man who says differently! ;) Metta, Phil 36973 From: connieparker Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:28am Subject: Re: Four things conducive to growth of wisdom Dear Phil, The Anguttaranikayas are fairly easy to find on www.tipitaka.org if you don't mind installing the VRI fonts . Eka, duka, tika, one, two, three, etc. up thru eka + dasaka, 11 (followed by the atthakathas and tikas, commentaries). For AN VI 107, lookthru the chakkanipatapali for 107 (it's in ch 11 Tikavaggo). Develop will be bhavetabba in this one. Sorry I can't really offer any help on the other books! I just grab a cup of coffee and look for words I think I know and pretend I'm going to learn Pali this way since I can't seem to make myself work thru a grammar. Andy Shaw's PaliWords dictionary (for PC's) is very helpful - not sure whether you have to join the yahoo Pali group to be able to get it from their files section. The other translation on the wisdom factors that Nina mentioned is in post 36869. O boy! Can't wait to hear what Santa brings you. Also hoping someone else answers your "What are the recommended bilingual collections of suttas available in book form?" Meanwhile, check out http://www.budaedu.org . They might still be offering Narada's P/E Dhammapada as well as some other books you might like. peace, connie 36974 From: matt roke Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:38am Subject: [dsg] Flip-flopping (Howard) Hi Howard, ========================== M> When there is an absence of sound it is because there is no audible object for the citta to experience. When there is an absence of light there is still an object for the citta to experience but it only experiences it for the object reality that it is, not as an absence of light, that happens in the mind door. H> But this asymmetry makes no sense to me. Absence of sound in the phenomenological (i.e., experiential) sense is commonly called "silence". Is it an ear-door experience or a mind-door experience? I think it is the latter, a sound-oriented mind-door experience which is not a matter of concept. ========================= There are millions of citta experiencing objects through the various sense doors. During this process some of those citta arise at the ear-door, when there is a sound to experience. Silence is when citta is not arising at the ear-door but is arising at another sense-door and so there is no experiencing by citta of an audible-object. Comprehension of silence then happens in the mind-door. If, however, silence were audible-object, then citta would experience both silence and sound as the characteristic of audible-object. It would not differentiate between the two, that would happen in the mind door. ======================== ======================== H> What do you mean by "absence of light"? It seems you mean something not experiential, but as having some physics sense, something not analogous to the experiential absence of sound. When I speak of "darkness" I am speaking of experiential absence of positive visual content in the same way as you speak of absence of sound as there being no audible object "for the citta to experience." This is visual absence known through the mind door. It seem to me that there are many "colors" of sound, but these are all different from degrees of silence. Likewise, it seems to me that there are many colors of sight - here I needn't put 'colors' in quotes - and these are all different from degrees of "darkness". The trouble is that 'darkness' is a term that is not a proper visual analog for the auditory term of 'silence'. We tend to identify 'darkness' with shades of color, the extreme of which is black. But blackness is not "visual silence". We lack a term for visual silence. But that does not mean that we lack visual silence! ;-) ======================= Sometimes, as you know too well, there are no words that adequately explain certain dhamma concepts, we just have to do the best with what we have. Personally I would rather just call it visible object and not try to explain its characteristic with words like *absence of light*. When there are conditions for visual-object to be experienced by citta through the eye-door then that is what appears. The rest of the time it's dark because citta is experiencing other objects other than visible object - maybe that is your visual silence. MattR 36975 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 9:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Nina, Glad to be able to discuss Dharma with you. I was at my local Vihara this weekend and they have quite a few copies of some of your works, including "Abhidharma and Daily Life." I've also printed out your works on the ten perfections and am keeping it ready for when I am well enough, and the time comes, I can develop tehse perfections one at a time. You say that 'one day' through satipatthana and the perfections we can reach enlightenment, that the Buddha left these perfections for us to do wholesomeness so we can continue on the spiritual path for lifetimes to come. I'd be interested to hear more about how the perfections culminate in realization of unbinding, and what correlation it has with the development of satipatthana, that is to say, how they should be developed in tandem. As I mentioned in a previous post, Ayya Khema in her bestselling book 'Being Nobody, Going Nowhere," says that we accumulate these ten virtues, as she called them, life after life, until we are able to break through and see the noble truths. How do these virtues culminate in the vision of the noble truths? What is the critical threshold? For me, renunciation is my stronghold, and I have been able to see what I believe is a precursor to the noble truths. That is, as the Buddha has said, "In this very fathom long body I do declare the world, the origin of the world, the cessation of the world, and the path of practise leading to the cessation of the world." I have seen the world. My meditation was not 'perfected' (;P) enough to see the other three, but I surmise if it were, I would have seen what is basically equivalent to the four noble truths, and been able to realize unbinding in this very life. Additionally, do we not have to go through satipatthana in a very methodical manner to get the insights knowledges to arise? I was discussing this with Phil but I think I lost the point. He was saying, as far as I can tell, by being mindful of a nama here and a rupa there insights can begin to arise, whereas from what I have read we need to acheive momentary concentration with the breath, see the true nature of phenomenon, and balance faith and suitable forms of energy for these insights to arise. In other words, Just practising satipatthana in a 'mindful walk' as I sometimes embark on is not enough, watching the breath is not enough, we need to plant the causes and conditions for insight to arise, and as you said, it's very tender, so I am more of a bent to follow this practise guide than to simply try to be mindful of elements, postures, breathing, and feelings. At least as far as the insight knowledges are concerned. I do, however, think that practising mindfulness of the four elements can result in stream-entry and reaching the end of the round of rebirths, but that's another story. So I want to again state that I feel it's important to see anatta and anicca as a condition for insight to arise. This is simple, just having a good meditation session and going outside, I can see my garbage can is changing, and not-self. > Dear AL, > op 24-09-2004 04:15 schreef Andrew Levin op andrewlevin@e...:> > > Well, I've seen the first divine messenger and I'm still in > > negligence. It doesn't have to stay like this though. I can still do > > good. > > > I will give you some ground on this because I've read in the > > Vyaggapajja Sutta, from a booklet I have entitled 'Buddhist Rules for > > the Laity,' the Buddha describes four principles to establish onesself > > in to come to success in the world beyond, and one of them, prudence, > > includes eliminating ignorance, attaining enlightenment, pondering > > over the skandhas, and viewing the world of formations as impermanent. > > (So it follows that he could prescribe the vipassana nanas for laity > > too). > N: I like this sutta very much. Yes, also laypeople can develop vipassana. If only it were so easy as he makes it out to be. You know the sutta 'On knowledge of beginnings' where it states how someone who leads a bad life in body speech in mind will go to a hell-state, someone who leads a good life to a heaven-state, someone who has mixed view and leads a mixed life to the human world, and someone who leads a restrained life by body, speech, and mind, and develops the seven requisites of enlightenment will not be reborn, or something along those lines? It makes it seem amazingly simple. So does this sutta. Is it just me or do we tend to complicate things unnecessarily when learning and practising dharma. Sometimes it can be amazingly simple, just sit and breath, sometimes you have to do this, that condition has to be met, this has to be known, its very complicated and a long deal. So those suttas just are refreshing and maybe even a little inspiring to bring simplicity to the practise, even if only symbolically. But I disgress. :) > AL: The question is, then, just how much of this right view is > > composed of insight-knowledges, and how much can be acquired through > > other means. You can't say the knowledge that there is what is given > > and what is offered or sacrificed comes about through the > > insight-knowledges, can you? > N: There are levels of right view. Intellectual correct understanding is one > level, and it is necessary as a foundation. Insight is deeper, it is direct > understanding. Yes but I cant help but feel that the Buddha prescribed a type of right view for the laity outside of the insight knowledges as well. As I've described it, knowledge that there is this world and the next, of mother and father, preists and contemplatives, what is given and what is offered. It basically seems that you shouldn't be a nihilist, and should just have an accurate view of what is happening in reality. I don't know how to acquire right view, I am not even sure if my knowledge of the next world qualifies as right view or even mixed view. Probably mixed view, the rest is just straightening one's views through some measure or another. Plainly, I just don't know how it's done, but I don't think it's all through the insight knowledges. > AL: So there has to be another way to > > acquire this right view. I won't say I know how to do it, but the > > same goes for view of mother and father, possibly that of there being > > this world and the next world. It seems there should be some kind of > > direct understanding or vision of things as they are. Possibly > > through dana we can get to our views and they would be more malleable, > > I don't really know. I just don't think it can all come about through > > the insight knowledges, and I don't want wrong view. > N: Dana with right understanding of the citta at that moment, thus, > accompanied by right understanding is a helpful condition. And, as said, > intellectual correct understanding. > (snipped) > AL: I would say I have some kind of a mixed view right now. Knowledge of > > there being this world and the next, being sufficient to motivate me > > to do some acts of good. > N: Even a person who does good out of fear and aversion towards an unhappy > birth has kusala citta, but conditioned by akusala citta. Not at the same > time. We learn in the patthana that also akusala can condition kusala by way > of natural strong dependence-condiiton. We can check this!... (snipped) > AL: Ahh but how do we come to the view that there is mother and father? > > Bare attention to the present moment? (I'm not discarding this > > possibility) And are you suggesting that insight into kamma and > > vipaka gives us knowledge and vision of spontaneously reborn beings? > > Because if not, we still have an open question of how to resolve this > > basic wrong view. > N: See above: through insight there will be a deeper understanding. The text > about mother and father I do not understand well. I think it may be that the > person who denies it does not believe in causes which bring results. That is the right view the Buddha described to the laity as part of righteous mental conduct. Wrong view, IMO, can be just lack of right view, so a person just has to know, to see what is reality. I don't think we're getting very far with this so maybe we should just leave it at what it is. > >> N: My remark pertains to purification that can come about through > > rites and > >> rituals.. If this is present the other wrong views will not be > > eradicated, > >> no hope. We do not have to try to know all kinds of wrong view. > > > AL: Nina Ive got to disagree here, what youre saying implies that a great > > majority of the followers of the Buddha who were given directions on > > how to reach a heavenly rebirth had to be stream-enterers to acheive > > it. It can't be like that. There *were* some people the Buddha > > instructed to acheive a heavenly rebirth without making attainments on > > the path. > N: True, but they still had the latent tendency of wrong view. But they had to develop right view, this is key. How did they go about doing this? That is the question. He said 'knowledge, undistorted vision, thus: there is this world and the next world, mother and father... etc' So it's just having a right view of reality. Doesn't have to come from insights. > A:He called it a 'heavenly abode'. And I even know, I have > > not eradicated wrong view of purification of rites and rituals, yet I > > know (through my own vision) there is the next world. > A: This does not mean that the latent tendency of wrong view is eradicated. > > Abhidhamma and the third foundation of mindfulness. > ===================================== > AL: My view, coming into this, was that knowledge of Abhidharma > > constitutes the third foundation of mindfulness, mindfulness of mind, > > that is, knowledge of the different types of consciousness that can > > arise and their concomittants. That is, all 89 of them. And > > recognizing wrong view when present. > > > > You are now saying that some degree of panna is necessary to see wrong > > views. This is fine, because I have seen at least one wrong view. > > But other than that I am not seeing what direction Abhidharma goes in > > if not to fit as the third foundation of mindfulness. Maybe you could > > give me an idea? > N: The Abhidhamma helps us to understand all kinds of dhammas in daily life, > also rupa. Thus, it helps with all four foundations of mindfulness. It helps > you to understand your life right now, that is what matters. We do not have > to think of names and words like foundations of mindfulness. > Well I have realized that your 'Abhidharma in Daily Life' applies to just that, daily life. The way I sometimes practise the four foundations of mindfulness is to establish myself in what I can of them, and make *that* daily life. So it's a total practise, I just need to fill in the missing parts. That's where I think Abhidharma can help. I'm not so keen on trying to live a normal average joe daily life with a little bit of mindfulness. I want to realize that life is practise. > Conditions for sati. > ============> > > So if I have this straight, kusala conditions the arising of such > > beneficial qualities as sati, correct? This is more complex. There is sati > with each kusala citta, it does not waste the opportunity for kusala. But as > to sati of satipatthana which is aware of nama and rupa, this needs as > condition correct understanding of the practice. > > > Can you elucidate on how this understanding is developed? Intellectual.., or what? Cause I am often very slow with understanding, this is a rather big obstacle in the road for me the vast majority of the time. > Abstaining from idle chatter: > =================== > A: I'm of the view that we can abstain outright from it, which the Buddha > > said is in itself wholesome. > N: But it depends on conditions. One day we may abstain, another day we > cannot, because it is not self who abstains, but a citta that is conditioned > by many factors, some of which are from the past. > Nina. Eh we can take the traditional 'make merit in your youth' stand and abstain completely but perhaps you have something with trying to understand what is conditioning it and what lies underneath it, if not to reduce the underlying defilements and tendencies towards unwholesomeness, to gain some understanding in the least. Good discussing dharma with you, Andrew Levin 36976 From: ericlonline Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 9:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation ? Nori > When the water is calm, then you can see your own reflection clearly in the water. And the water's great depth or its shallowness. PEACE E 36977 From: dighanakha Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 9:52am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello Sarah. > Ok, I think it would be useful to look at a literal translation of the > three lies you refer to in the Kunala sutta with the Pali-Eng. It is actually one deception and then two overt lies. The first overt lie is explicitly denoted as such by the narrator: "so musaa abhaasi". First he deceives Saccatapavi. There is the sound of festival music coming from Benares and he pretends not to know what it is: Bhagini, ki.m nu kho ajja Baaraa.nasiya.m mahaagiitavaaditasaddo ti "Sister, pray what is this great sound of singing and music in Benares today?" Then he continues with the deception: Ayya, tumhe na jaanaatha, nagare cha.no ghu.t.tho, tattha kii.lantaana.m esa saddo ti Saccatapavi: "Master, don't you know that a festival has been proclaimed in the city, and this is the sound of those amusing themselves there?" Ettha naameso saddo"ti ajaananto viya Bodhisatta: "Oh, so that's what the sound is," [he replied] as if he did not know. Then he lies directly: Bhagini, kati bhattaani atikkamesii ti pucchi. "Sister, how many meals do you skip?" he asked. Cattaari, ayya, tumhe pana kati atikkamethaa ti? "Four, master. How many do you skip?" Satta bhaginii ti. Ida.m so musaa abhaasi, devasika.m hesa ratti.m bhu–jati "Seven, sister," but it was a falsehood that he spoke, for he ate day and night. Then he lies about how long he has been an ascetic: Kati te bhagini vassaani pabbajitaayaa ti "Sister, how many rainy seasons is it since you went forth?" Dvaadasa vassaanii ti vatva tumhaaka.m kati vassaanii ti. "Twelve rainy seasons," she said, "and how many for you?" Ida.m me cha.t.tha.m vassan ti aaha. "This is my sixth year," he replied. I will try to reply to Robert's post and your other one tomorrow. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ The view of those ascetics and brahmins who are of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me' is close to non-attachment, close to non-bondage, close to non-delighting, close to non-cleaving, close to non-grasping. (Dighanakha Sutta) 36978 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:00am Subject: Re: Empty Phenomena. Present or Not [Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.] Hello Phil and Howard, op 27-09-2004 01:58 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: quoting Howard, < I've recently come > to the > realization that when we soften our notion of 'consciousness' from one of > "cognizing thing or function" to mere "experiential presence", the idea of > self is > weakened tremendously! I've also discovered that in doing this - in thinking > in > terms merely of phenomena becoming present and ceasing to be present, > without > any "knower", there is gained an enormous and truly wonderful sense of > freedom!> N: Good to be reminded that there is no knower, Howard. I also agree with Phil where he writes: < In my case, it seems that this cognizing function is just one of many functions that are indispensable in the processes, that for me, solidify my sense of freedom through abhidhamma.> N: Yes, this has helped me always very much, citta just performing functions. Now about choice of words. It was useful for me to reflect on: accumulations in or with citta, to realize that a lot of explanation is necessary as to words we use. Connie's mail is very helpful. Howard feels unconfortable with the expression absolute reality, like substantialism, or reification. I understand. Others dislike paramattha dhammas. This morning I heard on MP3: We should understand characteristics. What are characteristics of dhamma? When they present themselves they can be directly experienced, without naming them. Their characteristics cannot be changed, even when we change the name. Seeing is always seeing, hardness has the characteristic of hardness. The characteristic of anger cannot be changed into the characteristic of metta. This is the meaning of paramattha dhammas, or ultimate realities. The conditioned dhammas arise and fall away, no danger of reification. They are also translated as absolute realities, but that does not matter, so long as we understand what is meant. I agree with Howard that we should try to find the best possible term, but on the other hand, we should not cling too much to words. Then we end up with reasoning all the time, instead of beginning to be aware of characteristics that present themselves now. I also heard that someone asked what the difference is between hardness of the body and hardness outside (rupa out there!). Kh Sujin just answered; also the rupa that does not appear arises and falls away. This is the law of Dhamma nobody can change, not even the Buddha. Nina. 36979 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] "The same" in Buddhism Ha Herman, op 27-09-2004 02:48 schreef Egbert op hhofman@t...: I have been doing some study on the concept of sameness in Buddhism > and have only found it expressed in a negative form ie not other > (anna - ananna). Are there any other terms that are used for > sameness/otherness? What is the Pali term used where the question is > asked if it is the same being (I think it was) that is born as the > one that dies? N: sama: equal, level, the same. sadisa: similar. Añña: other. The text is in Visuddhimagga, I cannot trace it now. As you say: anañña: not another. Nina. 36980 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Intro Vis. XIV, 102 , nama and rupa. Hi Larry,(and Connie), op 26-09-2004 17:33 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: >> N:I think you mean the experience of smell, etc. , not the smell > itself. > > Larry: Hmmm. Well here we have a problem. I would say sight, sound, > smell, taste, and touch are all consciousnesses. In fact, I think I > am coming over to Howard's camp and will say that derived matter is > consciousness and touch is derived matter. Derived matter is > consciousness that is dependent on specific base sensitivities. N: I would like to go first to your last remark: L: I realize this throws a spanner in the nama rupa distinction, but in > the spirit of abhidhamma in daily life I think we have to call them > as we see them. N: We all know that we have not eradicated ignorance of dhammas. Often we are carried away by illusions, and I think we fare safely with the Abhidhamma, although we cannot directly realize what has been taught. But when considering it we may find it reasonable, or not, depending on the person. We fare safely with the Visuddhimagga. You could have brought up this matter when we were at rupakkhandha, but it does not hurt to bring it up now! Any time. I know some people who dare not pick flowers, the plant will cry. Or if you beat a table, will it cry? Colour does not know that it is seen, sound does not know that it is heard. Rupa does not know or experience anything, it is as dead as a doornail. In the Vis. some figurative language was used to explain what different rupas were *doing*. Like eyesense seeing, derived rupas attending to eyesense, etc. But it was very obvious that it was figurative language. See this one for figurative language: You said before that seven rupas appear all the time: the three that are tangible object, and colour, sound, odour and flavour. They are experienced through their relevant sense-doors. I want to requote Connie:< Don't worry, it stays confusing with all the ins and outs of the various explanations viewing things from different angles. Even rupas don't have/aren't physical/material in the way I normally think of that... just another matter of where the focus is and not paying attention to my mixing up all the degrees of hardness with what is seen, etc. as well as how memory plays a big part in how I perceive things. The citta/cetasika mirror analogy comes to mind and how true is it that how I experience anything reflects my own state of being?> Connie gives me food for thought, I too have pictorial ideas, or some set ideas about the material, when I think of rupa. We are likely to have phantasies how we imagine things to be. But Abhidhamma and vipassana can correct such ideas. That is, in the long run. > Larry: I'm not saying that unhappy feeling accompanies taste, for > example; rather I would say pleasant or unpleasant feeling > accompanies taste and I would call it a bodily feeling because it is > dependent on conditions of the tongue base sensitivity. I would call > bodily feeling any feeling that arises with material consciousness. N: If the tongue gets burned by hot liquid, it is not tongue sense but bodysense that is the rupa that is doorway. The bodysense experiences heat, one of the four great elements, and the feeling is bodily painful feeling. Bodysense is all over the body, but we have to distinguish it from tongue sense or tastingsense, the rupa that is ready for the impingement of flavour, only flavour. You dislike orange flavour, thus, after the tasting-consciousness there is unhappy feeling accompanying aversion. But at the moment of tasting-consciousness there is indifferent feeling. I agree, hard to distinguish so long as insight has not been developed. L: However, this insistence on neutral feeling with taste might give us > a glimpse of an arahant's experience. Apparently food neither tastes > good nor bad for an arahant. N: The arahat can still receive pleasant or unpleasant objects, but no defilements. L:I see this as being like the touch of a > feather. The touch of a feather can be either pleasant or unpleasant > dependent on bodily sensitivity; if a feather touches the eye it can > be unpleasant. So tongue sensitivity must change with a path moment. N: Dhammas do not change at all, but pañña develops, until all defilements are eradicated. Remember: no matter whether a Buddha arises in the world or not, dhammas arise and fall away according to conditions. Dhammas have certain characteristics which are inalterable. Not even a Buddha can change them. Nina. P.S. Please, would you also post Vis. 104, they have both short Tiikas and I would like to take them together. 36981 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:34am Subject: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 09 ) by Htoo Continue-: Page 35 is perfect. Page 36. 1. In this page, Rob M explains 'Maana'. What is good is he includes the commentaries' view here. Mana and ditthi never coexist. This is right. But commentaries said there cannot be 2 lions in a cave. This makes clear what mana and ditthi are behaving. Here, my thought or my view is that both ditthi and mana are manifestation of lobha. When ditthi is a form, mana is just an alternative form. 2. Another good point of Rob M expression is here. Mana arise in all sitautions of 'better than' 'equal to' and 'inferior to'. 3. This is not a critic. But my question for clarification. Dear Rob M, please respond. In the page 36 at the bottom, you include a table. Lobha | Ditthi | Mana Mine | Me | I Could you please explain more on this table? Page 37. 4. ''Dosa arises regarding events in the future. This is fear.'' Good. Page 38. 5. Issa 'want to be praised' 'are dissatified ' 'want her attention ' The first and last are a bit like lobha. The middle is right, it is dosa. Dissatification is dosa and it manifests as issa here. Dear Rob M could you please explain on the 1st and the 3rd expression? 6. Kukkucca 'Repentance is considered as a virtue. But kukkucca is not wholesome.' This is another good point. Page 39 is OK. Page 40. 7. This table in the page 40 is excellent. I like the line 'Greed' Sotapana | Sakadagam | Anagam | Arahats Greeding .. .. .. .. May these criticisms be beneficial. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36982 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 9:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact /Phassa(g) Hi Sarah A couple of questions below if you will indulge..... In a message dated 9/27/2004 1:20:02 AM Pacific Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.1, Contact (Phassa)contd] * **** Seeing is a nama which arises because of the concurrence of different factors and it cannot stay, it has to fall away again. We cannot force it to arise nor can we force it to stay. TG: #1 Could you explain why "it has to fall away"? I'm hoping to get actual reasons, not a statement along the lines of...."all things are impermanent" or that "cittas are extremely short lived." Actual reasons, and if you don't know that's fine too. #2 If I turn on and off a light switch, am I not forcing visual consciousness to arise? (given that an organisim is present that can experience visual contact.) when hardness presents itself, phassa performs its function so that citta can experience the object. TG: This statement to me reads like this....That there is an entity "phassa" that performs a function so that the entity "citta" can experience an object. It certainly makes citta look like an experiencer of objects. The Buddha taught that feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness were in reality not "separable." He explained that he only separated them for purposes of analysis. And yet in the Suttas, that separation never lends itself to any sense of "entitiness" or "actor" behind the mere fact of experience or occurrance. But when put in the above forms, it sure comes across that way to me. TG 36983 From: plnao Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] â?~Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact /Phassa(g) Hi TG > Seeing is a nama which arises because of the > concurrence of different factors and it cannot stay, it has to fall away > again. We cannot force it to arise nor can we force it to stay. > > TG: #1 Could you explain why "it has to fall away"? I'm hoping to get > actual reasons, not a statement along the lines of...."all things are impermanent" > or that "cittas are extremely short lived." Ph: If you don't understand that "all things are impermanent" that's one thing, but if you don't want to accept it that's another. The best way to answer this question is to rely on yourself. Looking at your own experience. Can you force cittas to stay? > when hardness presents itself, phassa performs its function so that > citta can experience the object. > The Buddha taught that feeling, perception, mental formations, and > consciousness were in reality not "separable." He explained that he only separated them > for purposes of analysis. Ph:. We all have different accumulations. So people respond to abhidhamma, and some don't. There's nothing wrong with that. As Howard said yesterday, there are different truths for different people at different times. (A very rough paraphrasing.) This book, "Cetasikas", is based on principles found in abhidhamma. If it seems to you that realities cannot be experienced in a separable way, that suggests that abhidhamma is not for for you, and you won't come to respond to it by trying to reason your way through. That's the way I see it. I'm not meaning to suggest that your understanding is limited, just that for whatever reason abhidhamma is not the way for everyone. I say that because it feels so obvious to me that realities are separable, and can be experienced in that way, and that they can't be controlled by self, and are impermanent. Thus, abhidhamma is right for me now. If it's not for you now, don't fight it. There are some many other ways of Dhamma. The Buddha is so versatile and unlimited in His teaching. Of course I hope that people can come to respond to abhidhamma through these kind of discussions, but I don't think that's the case. It has something to do with accumulations, to something that is beyond control of self and the reasoning mind. Just my opinion. Metta, Phil p.s I took the liberty of answering your question which was asked to Sarah because she is just posting the passages. It's a group study corner. 36984 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 4:43pm Subject: Vism.XIV,104 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 104. III. i. C. And as that of the fine-material sphere [was like the profitable of that sphere] so that of the 'immaterial sphere' (62)-(65) is of four kinds like the profitable too (14)-(17). And its occurrence is classed in the same way as that of the fine-material sphere. 36985 From: plnao Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] OK, Abhidharma Hi Andrew Please allow me to butt in again. >I've also printed out your > works on the ten perfections and am keeping it ready for when I am > well enough, and the time comes, Ph: "When the time comes." I think that shows good understanding of the way conditions work Maybe I can be a condition that encourages you to read it now! ;) Life is short and it's a great book. Also, I think that rather than just concentrating on one chapter of Abhidhamma in Daily Life at a time, in detail, you can read Perfections easily, a chapter at a time, and it'll help the gist of abhidhamma to appear before your mind in a way that you can respond to. The whole package. And to be honest, I think engaging Nina in long e-mails when you haven't really *got* the gist of her teaching (well, the Buddha's teaching, through K Sujin, through Nina) it is demanding for her, time-wise, without really being rewarding for you. >I can develop tehse perfections one > at a time. Ph: When you read the book you'll learn that we don't choose to develop the perfections one at at time, they arise due to (guess what?) conditions. We have to develop all of them, but how and when this occurs is not so controllable, and takes - you got it- a long, long time. Nina has said this several times, you know. I can relate to what you said about not retaining what you read in books, but retaining what you read in books and retaining what a teacher like Nina says to you directly in e-mails should be different. Please reread each of her e-mails several times. As you said before, we are very fortunate to have her here, teaching us directly, but to tell the truth it seems to me sometimes that you're not *really* listening. The following bit provides an example: > Well I have realized that your 'Abhidharma in Daily Life' applies to > just that, daily life. The way I sometimes practise the four > foundations of mindfulness is to establish myself in what I can of > them, and make *that* daily life. So it's a total practise, I just > need to fill in the missing parts. That's where I think Abhidharma > can help. I'm not so keen on trying to live a normal average joe > daily life with a little bit of mindfulness. I want to realize that > life is practise. Ph: Life is practise, yes, absolutely, but "a little bit of mindfulness" is what abhidhamma is all about. K Sujin (through Nina) reminds us again and again that we cannot expect a lot of mindfulness (sati). We cannot control if and when it arises. It arises due to conditions. In fact, another one of her students, Allan Driver (I forget his ordained name) said "one moment of sati in a lifetime? Wealthy man!" or words to that effect. So it will take many lifetimes. Is it possible that this kind of teaching is not right for you at this time? I was saying that to TG in another thread. Maybe there are accumulations that make certain teachings right for different people at different times. There are other teachers who allow for maintaining sati in a more continuous way. For example, Ajahn Chah said something like "30 minutes without sati means 30 minutes crazy" or words to that effect. Maybe those teachers are more suitable for you now. I am thinking of your well-being, and Nina's. I think she will urge patience again and again and again, and you will insist on a more ambitious practise again and again and again. In any case, please read Perfections. It's not heavy going and will really give you a nice feeling for the gist of abihdhamma, in my opinion. Sorry for sticking my nose in again. Peace to you, Andrew. You're an interesting fellow, and even when I don't agree with your ambitious approach it encourages me to look at a possible lack of ambition on my part. Thanks for that. Metta, Phil 36986 From: robmoult Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:29pm Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 09 ) by Htoo Hi Htoo, I am swamped these days and I am behind on a couple of threads. Nevertheless, I always read your comments on my book as soon as they are posted. I am extremely grateful and I am incorporating almost all of your suggestions. Interestingly enough, Phil also gave detailed feedback (which I am also incorporating), yet you and Phil raise completely different issues (both equally valid and both very valuable input). In this message, you asked some questions... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > 3. This is not a critic. But my question for clarification. > > Dear Rob M, please respond. In the page 36 at the bottom, you include > a table. > > Lobha | Ditthi | Mana > Mine | Me | I > Could you please explain more on this table? ===== Lobha tends to lead to thoughts of "what is MINE and what is not MINE" Ditthi tends to lead to the self view of "ME" Mana tends to lead to a view of "I" that this segregates the world into "NOT I". Htoo, I think that I will delete this from the text as it could lead to confusion. ===== > > Page 37. > > 4. ''Dosa arises regarding events in the future. This is fear.'' > > Good. > > Page 38. > > 5. Issa > > 'want to be praised' > 'are dissatified ' > 'want her attention ' > > The first and last are a bit like lobha. The middle is right, it is > dosa. Dissatification is dosa and it manifests as issa here. > > Dear Rob M could you please explain on the 1st and the 3rd expression? ===== I will delete the 1st and 3rd bullets. ===== > May these criticisms be beneficial. > ===== These criticisms are extremely beneficial. Much thanks. Metta, Rob M :-) 36987 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 1:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] â?~Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact / Phassa(g) In a message dated 9/27/2004 4:03:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: > TG: #1 Could you explain why "it has to fall away"? I'm hoping to get > actual reasons, not a statement along the lines of...."all things are impermanent" > or that "cittas are extremely short lived." Ph: If you don't understand that "all things are impermanent" that's one thing, but if you don't want to accept it that's another. The best way to answer this question is to rely on yourself. Looking at your own experience. Can you force cittas to stay? Metta, Phil p.s I took the liberty of answering your question which was asked to Sarah because she is just posting the passages. It's a group study corner. Hi Phil My question was not -- "Are things impermanent?" The question was -- "Why are things impermanent?" In other words....What is the cause of impermanence? Thanks for the comments. TG 36988 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:44pm Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.nama/rupa Dear Larry and Nina, From my understanding, getting this nama/rupa thing sorted out in 'one's own head' seems to be a basis for right understanding to grow stronger. > > N:I think you mean the experience of smell, etc. , not the smell > itself. > > Larry: Hmmm. Well here we have a problem. I would say sight, sound, > smell, taste, and touch are all consciousnesses. In fact, I think I > am coming over to Howard's camp and will say that derived matter is > consciousness and touch is derived matter. Derived matter is > consciousness that is dependent on specific base sensitivities. A: I was thinking the other day, about this color, sound etc impinging on eye-sense, ear-sense etc and being 'experienced' by citta [consciousness]. Seemingly, we have 3 things - color, eye- sense, citta [the experience, the consciousness]. Now, I know that's not quite what you are saying here, Larry and to me, your statement is confusing. I think for right understanding of realities to develop we first have to distinguish bet. nama and rupa. My understanding is that derived matter is rupa and that consciousness is nama - nama can experience things, rupa can't - it can't know anything - it arises and falls away, very quickly. > > L: The bitter taste of medicine, the smell of a corpse, > > > or the sound of fingernails scraping a blackboard seem to me to > be very > > > unpleasant. > > N: Agreed. > > L:This is a direct sensation of unpleasantness that precedes > > > aversion. > > N: The vipaakacitta that experiences an unpleasant object through > ears, for > > example, is not accompanied by unhappy feeling. Impossible, because > unhappy > > feeling only accompanies akusala citta with aversion. It is > accompanied by > > inferior indifferent feeling which is a kind of affliction, but > passive, > > like a weak man that cannot strike back when a strong man afflicts > him. > > There is no unhappy feeling together with the unpleasant sensation, > but in > > reality unhappy feeling arises very soon afterwards and then it > seems that > > it is together with the akusala vipaakacitta. We think like that > because of > > ignorance. > > Nina. > > Larry: I'm not saying that unhappy feeling accompanies taste, for > example; rather I would say pleasant or unpleasant feeling > accompanies taste and I would call it a bodily feeling because it is > dependent on conditions of the tongue base sensitivity. A: I understand taste, as in the taste of something, the flavour, to be derived rupa, and the experience of it - to be nama, the citta which experiences the taste. That citta is accompanied by indifferent feeling which is also nama. Now if the thing being tasted was too hot or too cold, this would be rupa- one of the 4 great elements- the fire element, and that would be bodily experience, nama, accompanied by unpleasant bodily feeling. I would call > bodily feeling any feeling that arises with material consciousness. > > However, this insistence on neutral feeling with taste might give us > a glimpse of an arahant's experience. A: I don;t think we have tobe arahants to experience this, I believe this is happening now, and if we can start with theoretical right understanding of the distinction bet. nama and rupa we might just see the truth in it. Apparently food neither tastes > good nor bad for an arahant. I see this as being like the touch of a > feather. The touch of a feather can be either pleasant or unpleasant > dependent on bodily sensitivity; if a feather touches the eye it can > be unpleasant. So tongue sensitivity must change with a path moment. > > I realize this throws a spanner in the nama rupa distinction, but in > the spirit of abhidhamma in daily life I think we have to call them > as we see them. > > Larry A: I enjoy your posts, Larry. May we all have lots of patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36989 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:08pm Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner19- question.sarah Dear Sarah, I realize you are ahead of this one but I have a query - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. > In the planes of existence where there are nama and > rupa, cittas have a physical base or place of origin, the vatthu (1). The > vatthu is rupa. In the case of the 'panca-vinnanas' (seeing, hearing, > etc.) the vatthus are the 'pasada-rupas' (the rupas which are capable of > receiving visible object, sound, etc.). ln the case of the panca- vinnanas > the pasada-rupa functions as both vatthu and doorway, 'dvara'. > > For example, the rupa which is eye-sense (cakkhuppasada-rupa) is both > doorway and vatthu for seeing-consciousness. Although it is one and the > same rupa, the function of dvara and vatthu are different. The dvara is > the means through which citta experiences an object, A: this sentence puzzles me. The fact that the citta needs a physical base in the nama/rupa realms is clear to me, but this dvara is a mystery! and the vatthu is the > physical base for the citta. Only for the panca-vinnanas are the dvara and > the vatthu one and the same rupa. > > For the other cittas of the sense-door process the dvara and the vatthu > are different rupas; they have as their vatthu another kind of rupa which > is in the commentaries called the 'heart-base' (hadaya-vatthu) (2). The > cittas which arise in the mind-door process also have as their vatthu the > 'heart-base'. A: ...so what is/are their dvara? I guess I don't know what dvara is? 36990 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:33pm Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact /Phassa(g) Dear Sarah and others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. > Is there contact now? There is the experience of an object right now > and thus there has to be contact as well. There are seeing, hearing or > thinking occurring time and again. We think that it is 'I' who sees, hears > or thinks, but in reality there are different cittas conditioned by > different factors. Knowing more about the different factors through which > realities are conditioned will help us to understand that there is no self > who experiences an object ......snip.... > When we study cetasikas we should not forget that cetasikas never > arise alone; they have to arise together with citta. They arise with the > cittas of our daily Iife, they are not abstract categories. Since citta > and cetasikas which arise together condition one another, the cetasikas > and thus also phassa have different qualities when they arise with > different types of citta. Phassa which arises with akusala citta is also > akusala; phassa which arises with kusala citta is also kusala. When phassa > arises with lokuttara citta phassa is also lokuttara: at that moment it > 'contacts' nibbana, the object of the lokuttara citta. > ***** > [Contact (Phassa) to be contd] > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== A: while reading this, the thought came to me "why on earth do I believe all this c....? I've never experienced it, and it sounds ludicrous!!!" That thought was quickly followed by "bec it feels so...right" I'm sure understanding grows so slowly but surely, that there must come a time when there is little reason for doubt to arise. Just a few azita musings!!! Patience, courage and good cheer. Azita 36991 From: nori Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:39pm Subject: On how to attend to the breath hi friends, A while ago Christine Forsyth referred me to the writings of Patrick Kearney where he spoke on how to attend to the breath (... thanks Christine). In case anyone missed it, I thought it would be a good idea to post an excerpt from it here which includes the ancient commentaries to the Maha Satipathana Sutta. --- Ancient commentaries explanation: --- "Here is the commentary's explanation of this section: Samudayadhammànupassã và kàyasmiü viharati = "He lives contemplating origination-things in the body." Just as the air moves back and forth depending on the smith's bellows' skin, the bellows' spout, and appropriate effort, so, depending on the coarse body, nasal aperture, and the mind of the bhikkhu, the respiration-body moves back and forth. The things beginning with the (coarse) body are origination (kàyàdayo dhammà samudayo). The person who sees thus, is he who lives contemplating origination-things in the body. Vayadhammànupassã và kàyasmiü viharati = "Or he lives contemplating dissolution-things in the body." In whatever way, the air does not proceed when the bellows' skin is taken off, the bellows' spout is broken, and the appropriate exertion is absent, even in that same way, when the body breaks up, the nasal aperture is destroyed, and the mind has ceased to function, the respiration-body does not go on. Thus through the ending of the coarse body, the nasal aperture and the mind there comes to be the ending of the respiration (kàyàdi- nirodhà assàsa-passàsanirodho). The person who sees in this way, is he who lives contemplating dissolution-things in the body. (Soma: 52)" ... then he explains, "However, the explanation here seems unduly forced for a meditator. How many meditators spontaneously have this thought when they practice attention to breathing? This seems more like a medieval scholar's academic illustration of the conditionality of the (breath)- body, rather than a practitioner's experience. Certainly Sãlànanda seems somewhat discomforted by this explanation, although as an adherent of the orthodoxy he will not oppose it. Applying this explanation to the actual practice, he says: When you are practicing meditation on the breath, sometimes the thought may come to you, "because there is a body, because there is a nasal aperture, and there is a mind, there is this breath." When you are contemplating this, you are said to contemplate on the "origination factors of your breath." (34) However, he later admits that meditators are more likely to see the arising and ceasing of the breath itself, rather than the factors that condition its arising, and adds Mahàsi Sayàdaw's explanation to that of the commentary: "He said that the observing of the arising and disappearing of the breath is also meant in this passage. The Pàli word for "origination factors" is samudaya dhammas. It can mean "factors by which something arises," but it can also mean "the state or nature of arising" or just "arising." ... Therefore, in the Venerable's opinion, meditators who closely observe the arising of breath, bit by bit, at every moment and at any place (such as the breath touching the tip of the nose) are said to be contemplating the samudaya dhammas of the breath or the arising of the breath. Also, meditators who closely observe the disappearance, bit by bit, at every moment and at any place (such as the breath touching the tip of the nose) can be said to be contemplating the vaya dhammas of the breath or the dissolution of the breath. (34-35) --- Nhat Hanh, from outside the tradition, gives this translation: "This is how a practitioner observes the body in the body. He observes the inside of the body or the outside of the body, or both the inside and the outside of the body. He observes the process of coming-to-be in the body or the process of dissolution in the body or both the process of coming-to-be and the process of dissolution. Or he is mindful of the fact, `There is a body here,' until understanding and full awareness come about. He maintains the observation, free, not caught up in any worldly consideration. That is how to practice observation of the body in the body, O bhikkhus. [5] Nhat Hanh favours our first reading, seeing this passage as essentially about seeing impermanence within the body - anywhere within the body. And he links impermanence with selflessness, and interdependent origination, seeing these as the three fundamental insights of Buddhism." ---- http://www.meditation.asn.au/teachings.html from: Evam Me Suttam -> 5. Satipatthana Sutta, Part 1 ---- metta, nori 36992 From: Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.nama/rupa Hi Azita, Long time no chat. I can't find any fault with your explanation of nama and rupa. I was just looking at things from a slightly different perspective, one which may or may not be helpful. Looking at experience as it arises, red is experience and desire is experience. Desire doesn't really experience something else any more than red does. They are just what they are, consciousness. The relationship of desire with object of desire is a conceptual one; that is also an experience in addition to red and desire. It would be unusual but the relationship could even be reversed: redding (colouring) desire instead of desiring red. As for a bad taste and not liking the bad taste, I can see a difference between the two. Take whiskey for example. If you have never tasted whiskey and you take a little sip, you probably will think it tastes bad, but you still might like it. Abhidhamma seems to say there is no such thing as a bad taste; there is only flavour and secondarily liking it or not. At this point, I'm skeptical. cheerio, Larry 36993 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 9:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 and 7 ties Hi Connie, op 27-09-2004 02:24 schreef connieparker op connieparker@i...: > ps to Macsters, does the double quote as in sa"ngahito look funny to you > and if so, what should I use? N: No, it is as I learnt from Jim. 36994 From: plnao Date: Tue Sep 28, 2004 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] â?~Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact / Phassa(g) Hi TG > My question was not -- "Are things impermanent?" The question was -- "Why > are things impermanent?" In other words....What is the cause of impermanence? > Sorry. I misunderstood. I got the feeling you were asking Sarah to prove that cittas are impermanent. That's what we have Dhamma for, and knowing the answer directly (rather than in the superficial way I was referring to) will take many lifetimes in all likelihood. As for why cittas are impermanent, the cause of impermanence, I wonder if that wouldn't fall under the unconjencturables "that would bring madness and vexation to anyone who conjectured about them." One of these four is "conjecture about (the origin etc of) the world," according to the Thanissaro Bhikhu translation. Sorry if I've misunderstood your question again. Certainly the above answer is the only one I would give. One thing I read recently from someone here - probably Nina - that made an impression on me was a recommendation to remember that the most direct cause of a citta arising is the previous one falling away. We can get caught up in conjecture about the working out of kamma, but the most direct cause is right there. Different topic. Sorry. Metta, Phil 36995 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] â?~Cetasikas' study corner21-Contact / Phassa(g) Hallo TG TG: #1 Could you explain why "it has to fall away"? I'm hoping to get actual reasons, not a statement along the lines of...."all things are impermanent" or that "cittas are extremely short lived." Actual reasons, and if you don't know that's fine too. Joop: You asked "actual" reasons. I don't know how much you read about the philosophy of knowledge but all that's possible is: what is the best theory or what are the best theories to explain why all phenomena fall away. I'm not sure but I can give some theories: (1) All phenomena are not stable like a uranium-atom is not stable: it's a kind of law of nature, we don't know why but after some time it's splits in two or more smaller atoms. (2) Phenomena don't exist at all, only short time in our brains we got the impression (the illusion) that they exist. And that impression had to be refreshed every millionth (or shorter) of a second like the RAM-memory of a computer. (3) We don't know and we are not interested on a ontological level. Rising and falling away and all other statements about phenomena is all at a phenomenological level. It's like quantum-mechanic scholars tell us: don't try to understand what's "really happening", just try to understand the mathematical formulae about the processes. The last theory is most Abhidhamma, I think. It's up to you, which theory you like the most Metta Joop 36996 From: plnao Date: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 102 and Tiika.nama/rupa Hi Larry I think we've never had a chance to chat. I've been neglecting my Vis studies, and you spend most of your time in that. I'm sensing that it's time to study Vis, so I might be sticking my nose in more often. I'm "rupa challenged" as I put it. It's something I rarely think about. I think you have a lot of interest in rupa, so I hope you can help me. > As for a bad taste and not liking the bad taste, I can see a difference > between the two. Take whiskey for example. If you have never tasted > whiskey and you take a little sip, you probably will think it tastes > bad, but you still might like it. Ph: Wouldn't the liking it come from pleasant body feeling? The bad taste would still have tasted bad. Over and done with and nothing to do with liking that nice bodily feeling. BTW, this reminded me of a question you asked a few weeks back. I forgot to check the answer. If I recall correctly, you wondered why pleasant bodily feeling is always associated with kusala citta. Is that right? You said it sounded awfully decadent, or a similar word. I had wondered about that too. I thought of alcohol. Surely there is pleasant bodily feeling, but surely it is not kusala. (I wonder if I have this right. Is pleasant bodily feeling always associated with kusala cittas? Or what it only mental feeling?) I wonder what answer you got. >Abhidhamma seems to say there is no > such thing as a bad taste; there is only flavour and secondarily liking > it or not. At this point, I'm skeptical. You know, to tell the truth, when we get into the way the senses work, I see some undeniable differences between what science tells us and what abhidhamma tells us. As far as I know, abhidhamma says that the sense processes are the same, whether it's seeing, say, or hearing, or smell. But we know from science and we can confirm from our own experience that the olfactory sense follows a different path in the brain than other senses. I don't know the details, but it tracks first to the more primitive brain, the primal brain, the brain that primates need to surive in the wild through sense of smell. This is why smells have such a strong emotive effect, apparently. (To give an example, for me, the smell of freshly mowed grass has such an emotive impact, but the sight of it goes much less directly to a response.) Well, my point is that I think we can find gaps between science and abhidhamma. Obviously. But in my opinion we can let go of that aspect of doubt and just follow the abhidhamma's teaching. Blindly? Yes, for me there is an element of blind faith and letting go of the need to have a perfectly consistent system of truths here and now. All in the interest of a deeper truth to come. Metta, Phil 36997 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:32am Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 09 ) by Htoo Dear Rob M, I think it is a god idea to edit the book at the end of all discussion. Mine, Me , I are good. But just add its explanation. Bullet 1 and 3 explain some thing. There is something related to lobha initially. Do not delete them. Instead explain on them. I think it will be more beneficial. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: >Hi Htoo, >I am swamped these days and I am behind on a couple of threads. > Nevertheless, I always read your comments on my book as soon as they are posted. I am ..snip.. > ===== > > Lobha tends to lead to thoughts of "what is MINE and what is not > MINE" > > Ditthi tends to lead to the self view of "ME" > > Mana tends to lead to a view of "I" that this segregates the world > into "NOT I". Htoo, I think that I will delete this from the text as it could lead to confusion. ===== > Page 37. 5. Issa > 'want to be praised' > 'are dissatified ' > 'want her attention ' > The first and last are a bit like lobha. The middle is right, it is dosa. Dissatification is dosa and it manifests as issa here. > Dear Rob M could you please explain on the 1st and the 3rd expression? ===== > I will delete the 1st and 3rd bullets. > > ===== > > > May these criticisms be beneficial. > > > ===== > > These criticisms are extremely beneficial. Much thanks. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 36998 From: plnao Date: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:55am Subject: Deeds of Merit: sam and vip in bhaavaana Hello all, More from "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, available at http://www.dhammastudy.com/merits.html and zolag.co.uk S. : Both samatha and vipassanaa are included in the meritorious action of bhaavanaa because they eliminate akusala dhammas which are not as strong as to condition evil actions through body and speech. For example, when you are glad because you have won from someone else and you find yourselves important, there is akusala citta. When the citta is unhappy or slightly annoyed, it is akusala citta, even though the akusala does not appear to others. When one sees the disadvantage of all akusala dhammas which, even if they are not of the degree to condition bad actions through body or speech, still cause the citta to be impure, one will apply oneself to mental development. One will do so with the purpose of eliminating all akusala dhammas, of weakening their strength, until they are completely eradicated. (end quote) Ph: Mildly surprised to read that samatha "eliminates" kusala. I'm used to reading that it "temporarily suppresses it." Maybe I'm confusing "eliminate" and "eradicate." Metta, Phil 36999 From: matt roke Date: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:36am Subject: [dsg] Flip-flopping (Herman) Hi Herman, ================== ================== H > Does the object exist independent of the citta or the eye door? Does the eye door exist independent of the citta or the object? Is there only ever one eye door? (I am just wondering why it is rendered "the eye door" as opposed to "an eye door" or "the eye doors") ============== As I understand it, visible object is neither a citta nor is it eye-sense but it is a condition for citta to arise at the eye-door and for the eye-sense to function as eye-door. Eye-door is a concept for where seeing takes place; where citta arises and experiences the visible object. I think there is only one eye-door. It is in concept and not in the eye-door that there are two eyes. ================ ================ M > That object has characteristics, which the citta then experiences. H > Characteristics is a plural rendition. I would be happy to accept this as your personal experience, but if you are quoting theory, doesn't the theory stipulate otherwise? Neither personal experience nor a quote from theory, just poor grammar. I shall use characteristic in future. MattR