40400 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (211) Dear Howard, Thanks for your reply. You are right. Please see my reply below. With respect, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard wrote: Hi, Htoo - As I understand the following, the sort of "clarity" being dealt with pertains not to individual cittas or their arammanas, but to sequences/processes of cittas, and is a matter of how many in a process have the same "current object" as object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It is true that it depend on total number of vithi cittas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard wrote: Am I correct in my understanding. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Yes. Clarity does not lie in the object or the citta. But to the sequence yes. But the illusion that I said was from view of citta especially javana cittas. If javana cittas arise then it is called clear. If there is no javana citta then it is faint. When novithi citta it is very faint. Again when clear the arising of 2 retention consciousness make very clear. As you said this clarity does not reside in citta or object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard wrote: If I am correct or at least close to correct, then it seems to me that this notion of "clarity", as opposed, perhaps, to the clarity of clear comprehension, is a conventional property of a conventional reality, because a sequence of cittas is not a dhamma, and a characteristic of a sequence of cittas based on the "total number of vithi cittas or consciousness in procession in a given object" is also not a dhamma nor a characteristic of a dhamma. Is that not so? With metta, Howard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Yes, of course, Howard. You well penetrated. With much respect, Htoo Naing 40401 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - - To ... Hi, Suan - In a message dated 12/31/04 10:05:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, suanluzaw@b... writes: > Dear Howard, Nina, Sarah, Chris F, Mike, Andrew L, Ken O and all > > How are you? And Happy New Year! > > Howard wrote: (For context, please see Howard's original post > below.) > > "I consider this to be a cart-before-the-horse formulation, Suan. I > see the Abhidhamma as a codification of the teachings in the suttas." > > I think I was not able to clearly convey to you my message about the > primacy of abhidhamma in Gotama's Taming System that is Theravada > Buddhism. Or you missed the point I was making in my original post. > > You seemed to be thinking that abhidhamma was a later development. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I do so think. ------------------------------------- > > That type of chronologizing abhidhamma should be made only by > uninformed and speculative academics such as experts in > Hermeneutics. The expression "speculative academics" here refers to > those who are neither followers of Gotama nor practitioners of his > teachings. ------------------------------------ Howard: That is your claim. I see no justification for it. In any case, there are many "academics" who are serious and devoted followers of the Dhamma who view Abhidhamma as a later development. Also, there are many monks such as Ven Nyanaponika and Bhikkhu Bodhi also, I believe, who recognize the Abhidhamma as a later development. I think that one shouldn't rush to condemn people for taking a different position on an issue than one's own. --------------------------------- > > Traditional understanding of typecasting between Suttam and > Abhidhamma is to do with the style of presentation, not with their > contents. > > The contents of both Suttam Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the > same dhammaa - the four ultiamte realities: mind, mental associates, > matter and nibbaana. > > As Atthasaalinii put it, > > "Suttantañhi patvaa pañcakkhandhaa ekadeseneva vibhattaa, na > nippadesena; abhidhammam patvaa pana suttantabhaajaniiya > abhidhammabhaajaniiya pañhapucchakanayaanam vasena nippadesato > vibhattaa." Nidaanakathaa, Atthasaalinii. > > "When getting to Suttanta, the five aggregates are analysed only > partially, not fully. When getting to Abhidhamma, though, they are > analysed exhaustively by means of Suttanta analysis, Abhidhamma > analysis and Questioning methods." ... (Continue with other > groupings of dhammaa such as Venues (Aayatana), Elements (Dhaatu), > Truths (Saccaa) and so on...) Page 2, Introduction, Atthasaalinii. > > And, I have been proposing to regard the four ultimate realities as > units of abhidhamma wherever they are found textually - be they in > Suttanta Pitaka, or Vinaya Pitaka, or Abhidhamma Pitaka. > > In short, I have been declaring the reality units, their conditions > and relations as abhidhammaa. > > Now, Howard, how do you feel about such a proposal and such a > declaration. > ----------------------------------- Howard: I see no need for a generalized use of the term 'abhidhamma'. I think it only serves to confuse. The term 'Dhamma' is quite good enough. Parts of the Dhamma are figurative and not very detailed, and other parts are more literal and detailed. But it is all Dhamma, and all good. I see the Abhidhamma as consisting of the content of the 7 books of the Theravadin Abhidhamma Pitaka, and I see it as a brilliant attempt at codifying and enlarging upon the more literal material in the suttas in a context-independent fashion. ------------------------------------------- > > Happy New Year To All! > > With regards, > > Suan > ======================= Happy New Year to you, Suan! 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) 40402 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:48am Subject: sutta, to Phil Hi Phil, We spoke several times about meditation subjects for all occasions, and among these the recollection of the Buddha. I came across a sutta, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an11-013.html We read that Mahaanama asks the Buddha in whose way of living he should live. The Co explains that for a layman this is living with the Dhamma, not solitary life. Mahanama was a sotaapanna, and that means that he could attain access concentration with this subject. Jhana is not possible, because this subject is too deep. The Buddha said to him, that he should recollect: < 'Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy and rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard to the world, unexcelled as a trainer for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of divine & human beings, awakened, blessed.' "Mahanama, you should develop this recollection of the Sangha while you are walking, while you are standing, while you are sitting, while you are lying down, while you are busy at work, while you are resting in your home crowded with children.> I like this passage, it shows that he can apply to this meditation subject naturally, because the right condiitons are present. He had an unshakable confidence in the Buddha. Lodewijk said that because of his sutta readings he sees that they all deal with Abhidhamma, they explain seeing, hearing, etc. He also said that you should read my e book Introduction to the Buddhist Scriptures, since I mainly quote suttas there. You may find it on zolag. He instigated me to write this some years ago. Nina. 40403 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention & Infections , Vibhanga. Dear Sarah, I would like to add something. When we refer to wise attention, it is not the cetasika manasikara but the mind-door adverting consciousness that is followed by javana cittas, kusala cittas or akusala cittas. This is called javana patipada or controller of the javanas. Another citta called manasikara is the five sense-door advertinng consciousness, the controller of the sense-door process. Thus, manasikara can refer to cetasika and to two cittas. Nina. op 31-12-2004 10:49 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Of course, manasikara is a universal too which arises > with all jaatis and when it is kusala or akusala conditions the > accompanying feeling etc, 40404 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 8:28am Subject: Re: sutta, to Phil Dear Nina, In the most recent message to Phil you wrote: N: Mahanama was a sotaapanna, and that means that he could attain access concentration with this subject. Jhana is not possible, because this subject is too deep. The Buddha said to him, that he should recollect: .... .... "Mahanama, you should develop this recollection of the Sangha while you are walking, while you are standing, while you are sitting, while you are lying down, while you are busy at work, while you are resting in your home crowded with children.> I like this passage, it shows that he can apply to this meditation subject naturally, because the right condiitons are present. He had an unshakable confidence in the Buddha. T: I think I understand the above to mean that recollection is a meditation subject that can be effectively applied off the cushion, but it cannot be used to attain jhana because it (recollection) is too deep. I am not sure that my understanding is correct because a deep meditation suject should enhance jhana better than a shallow one. I also would like to observe that your referenced sutta, AN XI.13, states that recollection is to be developed after one has developed the 5 qualities (indriya) that include concentration (jhana), not the other way around. "One who is aroused to practice is one of conviction, not without conviction. One aroused to practice is one with persistence aroused, not lazy. One aroused to practice is one of established mindfulness, not muddled mindfulness. One aroused to practice is centered in concentration, not uncentered. One aroused to practice is discerning, not undiscerning. "Established in these five qualities, you should further develop six qualities..." (the six recollections). Kindest regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Hi Phil, > We spoke several times about meditation subjects for all occasions, and > among these the recollection of the Buddha. > I came across a sutta, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an11-013.html > We read that Mahaanama asks the Buddha in whose way of living he should > live. The Co explains that for a layman this is living with the Dhamma, not > solitary life. > Mahanama was a sotaapanna, and that means that he could attain access > concentration with this subject. Jhana is not possible, because this subject > is too deep. > The Buddha said to him, that he should recollect: > > < 'Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy and rightly self-awakened, consummate > in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard to the world, > unexcelled as a trainer for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of > divine & human beings, awakened, blessed.' > "Mahanama, you should develop this recollection of the Sangha while you are > walking, while you are standing, while you are sitting, while you are lying > down, while you are busy at work, while you are resting in your home crowded > with children.> > I like this passage, it shows that he can apply to this meditation subject > naturally, because the right condiitons are present. He had an unshakable > confidence in the Buddha. > > Lodewijk said that because of his sutta readings he sees that they all deal > with Abhidhamma, they explain seeing, hearing, etc. He also said that you > should read my e book Introduction to the Buddhist Scriptures, since I > mainly quote suttas there. You may find it on zolag. He instigated me to > write this some years ago. > Nina. 40405 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:35am Subject: Re: Meditation [Reply to # 40375] Thank you very much for reviewing Acariya Mun's lecture and responding to my request by giving your thoughts as follows. N: I am reticent in critizing others' articles. I want to go now straight to the Suttas. I shall repost partly what I wrote before: .... There are these eighteen elements, Ånanda: the element of eye, the element of material shape, the element of visual consciousness; ... ...I find the suttas very clear and direct. Abhidhamma is taught in the suttas, as Suan recently stressed. .... Each element (except nibbana, which is the uncondiitoned element) can only arise when there are the right conditions. We can read it, hear it, but we may not have thoroughly considered the truth. It has to go into our bones. Such firm understanding is the condition for the arising of sati sampajanna. Direct understanding eliminates doubt and confidence grows. T: The 4 basic elements as used by Acariya Mun (not as extensive as what you have discussed) are associated with kayagatasati kammatthana bhavana helps train mind to cut through the ignorance that one's own nama-rupa is a being, the 'I am' belief. Acariya Mun made it clear that with such kammatthana bhavana as a firm foundation, one can gain "direct understanding" that "eliminates doubt" about nama and rupa -- i.e. the 'correct seeing of mind-and-body' . Kindest regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep, > I read the article. > A. Mun said: The mind is bound to converge in a big way; and the instant it > converges, 40406 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard In a message dated 12/31/2004 6:58:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, all - The Sabba Sutta spells out all that there is as follows: ---------------------------------------- "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1 ] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." ---------------------------------------- I'm not so pleased with the use of the phrase 'intellect & ideas' in the foregoing translation. I believe that 'mind door & mind-door objects' would heve been better. (I don't know what the Pali is - perhaps 'mano'?) In any case, I know that Abhidhamma includes nibbana among the mind-door objects, and that is fine with me, though in a way, it seems to constrain the unconstrained or make conditioned the unconditioned. But there is another possible problem, it seems, with the idea of nibbana as mind-door object. Consider, if you will the following sutta: -------------------------------------- Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.24 TG: I think the translation is OK. To be consistent with the first 5 groups, the last should probably be "brain and mentality." But since the brain is not used or even conceded as the material foundation for mentality in the Buddha's time, I think mind would be the better choice. As far as 'mind door & mind-door objects' is concerned, I think that would be tragic. Those are clearly abhidhamma systems of thought and I have never seen any translator, even those like B. Bodhi who seem very favorable to Abhidhamma, translate them in that way. I guess I rather have a bad translation than one that was intentionally corrupting the presentation of the teachings. Pahanaya Sutta To Be Abandoned Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. "Monks, I will teach you the All as a phenomenon to be abandoned. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "And which All is a phenomenon to be abandoned? The eye is to be abandoned. [1] Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "The ear is to be abandoned. Sounds are to be abandoned... "The nose is to be abandoned. Aromas are to be abandoned... "The tongue is to be abandoned. Flavors are to be abandoned... "The body is to be abandoned. Tactile sensations are to be abandoned... "The intellect is to be abandoned. Ideas are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the intellect is to be abandoned. Contact at the intellect is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned. "This is called the All as a phenomenon to be abandoned." --------------------------------- Now, if we are to be consistent, and understand 'intellect' simply be a poor alternative for 'mind', and 'ideas' a poor alternative for 'mind-door object', and if nibbana is to be considered a mind-door object, then this talks about abandoning nibbana, an idea that might be found objectionable, for why should the one true refuge be abandoned! A couple attempt at solutions present themselves to me, as follows: 1) To abandon nibbana means to not grasp onto it; to relinquish even that, because to fully realize nibbana, our relinquishing must be complete, without remnant. 2) To abandon may mean more than just to not grasp at; it may mean literally to leave in the dust, *but* the phrase "to be abandoned" is, and Jon will love this, descriptive, and not prescriptive. Nibbana, in its full and final realization, *will* be entirely abandoned, because in the very realizing of nibbana, all is abandoned. This "solution" is reminiscent of Nagarjuna's "emptiness of emptiness" - that even ultimate emptiness is empty. I, myself, prefer the first "solution", as I see it as simpler, less metaphysical, and quite adequate. Thoughts anyone? With metta, Howard TG: That's a lot of "ifs" based on a lot of "ifs." To my knowledge, there is no Sutta support to describe Nibbana as a "mind door object." What I find interesting about this post is that the Buddha tells us -- "TO ABANDON" "The All." He does not instruct us to see these things as ultimate realities. The Buddha does teach us to be aware of states as impermanent, suffering, and not-self. And that by doing so, insight can deepen until abandonment occurs. TG 40407 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/31/04 2:42:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > TG: I think the translation is OK. To be consistent with the first 5 > groups, the last should probably be "brain and mentality." But since the > brain is > not used or even conceded as the material foundation for mentality in the > Buddha's time, I think mind would be the better choice. > > As far as 'mind door &mind-door objects' is concerned, I think that would be > > tragic. Those are clearly abhidhamma systems of thought and I have never > seen any translator, even those like B. Bodhi who seem very favorable to > Abhidhamma, translate them in that way. > I guess I rather have a bad translation than one that was intentionally > corrupting the presentation of the teachings. > ========================== I think that "mind & mind-objects" is far superior to "intellect & ideas". The choice of "intellect & ideas" is far too restrictive, The term 'intellect' refers to conceptualization and thinking, and ideas are far from all that is needed as mental portion of "the all". What about feelings and emotions? These are directly experienced through the mind, not as concepts and not by intellect. 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) 40408 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 0:36pm Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 127, correction Visuddhimagga XIV, 127 and Tiika: A correction: at the end, just before Conclusion: N: When lokuttara jhaanacittas are taken into account, cittas are counted as hundred and twentyone. When we subtract sixtytwo cittas with happy feeling, the two kinds of bodyconsciousness with bodily feelings of pain and pleasure and the two cittas rooted in dosa accompanied by unhappy feeling, there are fiftytwo types left and these are accompanied by indifferent feeling. change fiftytwo into:fiftyfive types left and these are accompanied by indifferent feeling. ****** ********** Nina. 40409 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 0:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 127 and Tiika Dear Htoo, thank you very much. I sent the correction. How can I correct? Should I repost the whole? Nina op 31-12-2004 12:40 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > In your opening of this mail the numbers are right. But later, you > said 'there are fiftytwo types left and these are accompanied by > indifferent feeling'. There are 55 upekkha cittas out of 121 total > cittas. 62 are somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 > domanassa cittas (121 - 66 = 55 cittas not 52 cittas). 40410 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 8:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana In a message dated 12/31/2004 12:16:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I think that "mind & mind-objects" is far superior to "intellect & ideas". The choice of "intellect & ideas" is far too restrictive, The term 'intellect' refers to conceptualization and thinking, and ideas are far from all that is needed as mental portion of "the all". What about feelings and emotions? These are directly experienced through the mind, not as concepts and not by intellect. With metta, Howard Hi Howard I agree with you completely here. Thanissaro Bhikkhu is one of my least favorite translators. (Not sure if he did this passage.) It seems like he is always struggling to come up with terms that no one else is using and not only does this create inconsistancies, it seems perfectly good terms are replaced by poor substitutes. Unless its a clear improvement, I think its a shame to make the mind have to struggle with figuring out yet another term to mean the same thing. Keep It Simple for us simpletons please! TG 40411 From: Egbert Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:52pm Subject: Re: Apologies to the bees Hi Sarah, (James and everyone,) May the 2005th rotation of the Earth around the Sun since the birth of a certain Palestinian wash over us without attachment. Or the short version; happy 2005! I have been following the discussion with interest ( a Dutch interest, not an English one :-) I have some speculative questions. > …. > S:All wrong views are included in the 62 speculative views mentioned here. > They are all eradicated when sakkaya –ditthi (wrong view of self) is > eradicated. > …. > >J:….For example, in my previous > > post on this thread I quoted two stanzas of the Sallekha Sutta with > > one note of commentary and you have responded in this post with six > > paragraphs of the introduction by Nyanaponika, three stanzas of the > > sutta, and 10 commentary notes! > … Do bees have self-view? By which I mean, is there the thought "Look at me I am a bee flying to my hive in 2005" :-) Or does the designation of there being a bee only come from a being with self-view, who is just ignorantly (in a nice way) projecting self-view around onto all and sundry? If bees do not have self-view, why is it considered bad to be born as a bee while there is agreement that self-view is the pits? If bees do not have self-view, there certainly is no dependent origination going on there, and "So the life of a bee is free from the misery that doth accompany the thought "I am me" :-) With due deference to Monty Python Kind Regards Herman 40412 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/31/04 4:04:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > In a message dated 12/31/2004 12:16:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > I think that "mind &mind-objects" is far superior to "intellect & > ideas". The choice of "intellect &ideas" is far too restrictive, The term > 'intellect' refers to conceptualization and thinking, and ideas are far from > > all > that is needed as mental portion of "the all". What about feelings and > emotions? > These are directly experienced through the mind, not as concepts and not by > intellect. > > With metta, > Howard > > Hi Howard > > I agree with you completely here. Thanissaro Bhikkhu is one of my least > favorite translators. (Not sure if he did this passage.) It seems like he > is > always struggling to come up with terms that no one else is using and not > only > does this create inconsistancies, it seems perfectly good terms are replaced > by > poor substitutes. Unless its a clear improvement, I think its a shame to > make > the mind have to struggle with figuring out yet another term to mean the > same > thing. > > Keep It Simple for us simpletons please! > > TG > ===================== Yay! I just *love* ending the year on a note of agreement!! :-) Happy New Year, TG! [Oh, and yes - it *is* Ven. Thanissaro's translation.] 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) 40413 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Apologies to the bees Hi, Herman - In a message dated 12/31/04 4:53:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Do bees have self-view? > > By which I mean, is there the thought > > "Look at me > I am a bee > flying to my hive > in 2005" > > :-) > > Or does the designation of there being a bee only come from a being > with self-view, who is just ignorantly (in a nice way) projecting > self-view around onto all and sundry? > > If bees do not have self-view, why is it considered bad to be born > as a bee while there is agreement that self-view is the pits? If > bees do not have self-view, there certainly is no dependent > origination going on there, and > > "So the life of a bee > is free from the misery > that doth accompany > the thought "I am me" > > :-) > > With due deference to Monty Python > > ===================== That's cute material, Herman. :-) It's actually also an interesting question. One would, based on new-agey thinking, consider a human being closer to enlightenment (or "more advanced") than a bee! And one would also, at first look, presume a bee to be free of self-view, being free presumably of *all* conceptualization, and consider that a problem in light of having wrong view being a negative. I would address those two points as follows: 1) A particular bee might very well be far closer to enlightenment than any of us! The bee was born as such due to particular kamma coming to the fore. The bee lives for brief while, and then might well be born in a high heaven realm or as a human, and what his/her accumulations are is quite unknown to us. This, in fact, is something we should keep in mind when we think it is "not so bad" to kill an insect. That insect might well be the next Buddha! 2) While during his/her lifetime as a bee, presumably the conceptual faculties are nil or close to nil, but the deep-set anusaya to wrong view would still be present and simply not producing active outflowings at the moment. With honey-sweet 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) 40414 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 3:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention & Infections , Vibhanga. Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > I would like to add something. > When we refer to wise attention, it is not the cetasika manasikara but > the > mind-door adverting consciousness that is followed by javana cittas, > kusala > cittas or akusala cittas. .... S: Thank you for this - I remember K.Sujin talking about the different meanings of manasikara in India, but I had thought when 'wise' and 'unwise' were included that it was then always referring to the cetasika rather than the mind-door adverting. This is interesting (Dutch use!!).Thank you. (Mike,pls take note....) Metta, Sarah This is called javana patipada or controller > of > the javanas. Another citta called manasikara is the five sense-door > advertinng consciousness, the controller of the sense-door process. > Thus, > manasikara can refer to cetasika and to two cittas. > Nina. > op 31-12-2004 10:49 schreef sarah abbott op 40415 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Indroduction To Sarah You are welcome Sarah ----- Original Message ----- From: sarah abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Indroduction Hi Charles, I just wished to thank you for kindly giving the extra intro details. <....> 40416 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Dear James, Do you believe the "only" goal of the Buddha was to find the way(s) by which suffering would be brought to and end? Do you believe the Buddha found that way(s) and documented (dictated) it in his Dharma (i.e., sutras and vinya)? If so then please look at the sutras and vinya for the answer. In summary: The Buddha often mentioned gods in the sutras, and I don't recall ever reading that the Buddha thought that they were just figments of imagination; in fact, he even defined a God realm as part of semsaric existence. So, in this sense, the gods are real. Therefore, it can not be a false view (a lie) to believe in their relative, or semsaric, existence. The Buddha also declared in the sutras that the gods suffered too, that is why even they listen to his Dharma, and some are freed from it. Now, "what is that false view": The sutras often stated that one is freed from suffering by one's own efforts, and not by that of others ( to me this is the essence of the Dharma). The sutras explicitly states that sacrifices and rituals devoted to the gods will not free you from suffering. To believe so would be a contradiction, a false view. In my opinion: The Buddha pointed out the way to be freed from suffering, he called it the 8-fold path. The gods are not listed as part of this way. To believe other will only distract you from the real work (the 8-fold path). Now don't get me wrong, I am also a born again Christian; So I whole hearted believe in God; I just don't believe God is responsible for my suffering. If you need the sutra references, I will find them but it will take some time, so please remind me if I take too long. Charles D PS: This is a quick response; if I am not close to what you need to hear, please ask ... (more details can be provided). ----- Original Message ----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 11:36 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Friend Charles, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > (2) The wrong view would be to believe that these gods could free you from suffering; to believe in their existence is not a wrong view. Why? <...> 40417 From: Munawwar Siddique Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:23am Subject: 'Hello' Greetings! all, I am a practising Muslim interested in the study of comparative religion. I see a convergence in the paths of of Abidhamma and Tasawwuf. Peace! Munawwar 40418 From: Egbert Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, (James and all), My name is Herman Hofman, an on-again-off-again member of the list for 3 or 4 years now. Born in Holland, now resident in Australia. At one time I was a born-again, filled with the Spirit minister in a Pentacostal church. It is nice to make your acquiantance :-) I was especially interested to read that you were a resident of Denmark (a wonderful society of which I have the fondest memories) and that you are a born-again Christian. If I could ask you a question. When you say that you believe in God is that One God or a God? Does One God or a God do anything besides being a subject of your belief :-)? Purely out of curiousity, and because I fought with "God" and "God lost. All the best to you Herman > Now don't get me wrong, I am also a born again Christian; So I whole hearted believe in God; I just don't believe God is responsible for my suffering. > > If you need the sutra references, I will find them but it will take some time, so please remind me if I take too long. > > > Charles D > > PS: This is a quick response; if I am not close to what you need to hear, please ask ... (more details can be provided). > 40419 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Hello' Hi Munawwar, Welcome to the group. Could you expand on your comment below. The rule here is to stay on topic (Theravada Buddhadhamma). So if you tied your observations into that and didn't go too far afield, that might do. What is "Tasawwuf"? Larry ---------------------------- M: "Greetings! all, I am a practising Muslim interested in the study of comparative religion. I see a convergence in the paths of of Abidhamma and Tasawwuf. Peace! Munawwar" 40420 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 127 and Tiika Hi Nina, I've had a head cold for the last few days but this post is like a soothing medicinal tea. Well done. Larry 40421 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard and TG, B. Bodhi's notes to these two suttas indicate that the commentary doesn't include nbbana in the "all" here. Particularly in regard to the second sutta it is consciousnesses that are abandoned, not objects of consciousness. Sorry I can't type this out in more detail. Sick head :x(( Larry ps: This post was typed with sick head and healthy finger. Dependently Arising New Year Happy Happy! L. 40422 From: mnease Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 7:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention & Infections , Vibhanga. Hi Sarah and Nina, Yes, Sarah, note taken. So often these are matters of context. The distinction is often almost dimensional it seems to me. mike p.s. I've referred back to the Dispeller of Delusion (that you and Jon sent me years ago) at your suggestion. What an utterly astonishing book. Can't recommend it highly enough to anyone interested in abhidhamma. ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention & Infections , Vibhanga. > > Dear Nina, > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, > > I would like to add something. > > When we refer to wise attention, it is not the cetasika manasikara but > > the > > mind-door adverting consciousness that is followed by javana cittas, > > kusala > > cittas or akusala cittas. > .... > S: Thank you for this - I remember K.Sujin talking about the different > meanings of manasikara in India, but I had thought when 'wise' and > 'unwise' were included that it was then always referring to the cetasika > rather than the mind-door adverting. This is interesting (Dutch > use!!).Thank you. > > (Mike,pls take note....) > > Metta, > > Sarah > > This is called javana patipada or controller > > of > > the javanas. Another citta called manasikara is the five sense-door > > advertinng consciousness, the controller of the sense-door process. > > Thus, > > manasikara can refer to cetasika and to two cittas. > > Nina. 40423 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Apologies to the bees --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > : > 1) A particular bee might very well be far closer to enlightenment > than any of us! The bee was born as such due to particular kamma coming to the > fore. The bee lives for brief while, and then might well be born in a high > heaven realm or as a human, and what his/her accumulations are is quite unknown to > us. ======= Dear Howard, yes, very true. Robert 40424 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Mike and Charles, Still catching up on my DSG reading during a hectic holiday period, I see that Mike wrote: ------------------------------- > Excellent points IMHO, particularly (2). As I see it micchaadi.t.thi has a very specific meaning in the texts and does not refer simply to incorrect ideas in general. > ------------------------------- I agree: miccha-ditthi is a denial of samma-ditthi and samma-ditthi has nothing to do with the weather, kings, armies or other worldly concerns. ------------- M: > By the way, I think micchaadi.t.thi can be either paramattha dhamma or pa.n.natti. I'd welcome any comments on this idea. > ------------ I don't think we can narrow pannatti down to right or wrong. It can be the object of right or wrong understanding, but it can never have qualities of its own. When, for example, we are considering the concept, "Good deeds and bad deeds will bring their own results," there can moments of right understanding. But that sentence is neither inherently right nor inherently wrong. In short, my comment would be; miccha-ditthi is a cetasika: pannatti is, at best, a conventional method by which micchi-ditthi can be described. Ken H > > > > (2) The wrong view would be to believe that these gods could free you from > > suffering; to believe in their existence is not a wrong view. > 40425 From: mnease Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 7:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation Hi Tep, Interesting, not at all 'our' usual translation. Naama and ruupa have many different meanings dependent on context by my reading. Would like to read more, with support from the texts if possible, for the rendering of 'naamaruupapariccheda' as 'correct seeing of mind-and-body' . Thanks in advance, mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tep Sastri" To: Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 9:35 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Meditation T: The 4 basic elements as used by Acariya Mun (not as extensive as what you have discussed) are associated with kayagatasati kammatthana bhavana helps train mind to cut through the ignorance that one's own nama-rupa is a being, the 'I am' belief. Acariya Mun made it clear that with such kammatthana bhavana as a firm foundation, one can gain "direct understanding" that "eliminates doubt" about nama and rupa -- i.e. the 'correct seeing of mind-and-body' . 40426 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 8:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Apologies to the bees Hi Herman, --- Egbert wrote: > "Look at me > I am a bee > flying to my hive > in 2005" > > :-) .... S: Ah, bzz, bzzz bee... ... > "So the life of a bee > is free from the misery > that doth accompany > the thought "I am me" > > :-) ... S: No thought "I am me" Means no chance to see What lurks for poor bee Buzzing round, not free :-( .... A Hppy New year to you and your family too:-) Metta, Sarah ========= 40427 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 8:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities ... Hi, Howard Well it's nice to be able to begin the new year on a point of agreement ;-)). upasaka@a... wrote: > ... Of course moments of reasoning are moments of reality. Whatever > arises, arises. My point is that reasoning is a poor substitute for > pa~n~na. It is not a direct knowing of reality. It is at best a not > overly deceptive, indirect pointing to reality, but at worst it is a > seriously deceptive and defective charlatan, led by and embodying all > our defilements, and posing as a shedder of light. I agree with your comments here, and would only add that what we call reasoning is really just a kind of thinking and as such may be kusala or akusala, depending not on the subject-matter of the reasoning but the nature of the mental state of the moment. In that case I think we can say that reasoning per se has nothing to do with panna of the path. However, reflection on things heard or read from the teachings (whether in the guise of the teachings or in some other guise) and understood at an intellectual level is another matter altogether and is an indispensable precondition to the arising of panna of the path. Now some such useful reflection may also fall under the description of 'reasoning', but its value to the path lies in its being useful reflection rather than in its being reasoning, I would say. Happy New Year to you and to all. Jon 40428 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Hello' Hi, Munawwar Welcome to the list from me. If you are interested in finding out more about the Abhidhamma, I think you have come to the right place. As a member pointed out in a recent post, the Abhidhamma is a presentation of the teaching that is called the Dhamma. That teaching describes the way things truly are at the present moment, and the way of escape from the round of birth and death of which this present life is but one fleeting moment. Jon Munawwar Siddique wrote: >Greetings! all, > >I am a practising Muslim interested in the study of >comparative religion. I see a convergence in the paths >of of Abidhamma and Tasawwuf. > >Peace! > >Munawwar > 40429 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities ... Hi, Mike m. nease wrote: ... >>(For the enlightened being, conceptual thinking still occurs, >>but it is not mistaken for reality.) >> >> > >Yes, samaasankappa of the eightfold path, then just kiriya-- > > Yes, for the fully enlightened being all the javana cittas are kiriya cittas -- no more kusala or akusala cittas. >Incredible but true (I think) that even the views of stream entrants, >once-returners and non-returners are perverted, tainted and fettered... >Even our grail, sammaasati, until arahatta...but di.t.thi is something else. > > The javana cittas of the stream entrant of course will still be kusala or akusala, but when it comes to the holding of views those cittas will always be kusala -- all tendencies to perceive things in a way that is not not in accordance with the way things truly are have been eradicated, and remaining tendencies to other forms of akusala are (momentarily) dormant. >Those who mistake the unessential to be essential >and the essential to be unessential, >dwelling in wrong thoughts, >never arrive at the essential. (That's 'me'). > >Dhammapada 11 > > A good quote, Mike (And it's all of us!) Jon 40430 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry (and TG) - In a message dated 12/31/04 8:26:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > B. Bodhi's notes to these two suttas indicate that the commentary > doesn't include nbbana in the "all" here. Particularly in regard to the > second sutta it is consciousnesses that are abandoned, not objects of > consciousness. > --------------------------------------- Howard: If the venerable believes that nibbana is not included, then he must not consider nibbana as a possible mind-door object, and that implies that he rejects at least one Abhidhammic teaching! (Interesting.) I disagree with your statement "Particularly in regard to the second sutta it is consciousnesses that are abandoned, not objects of consciousness." Consider the following from that sutta: "And which All is a phenomenon to be abandoned? The eye is to be abandoned. [1] Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is to be abandoned." That's a lot more than consciousness, Larry. In particular, forms are included, the objects of eye consciousness. ---------------------------------------- > > Sorry I can't type this out in more detail. Sick head :x(( > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry you're not feeling well. Feel better soon! ---------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ps: This post was typed with sick head and healthy finger. Dependently > Arising New Year Happy Happy! L. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Happy New Year to you, 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) 40431 From: Date: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities ... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/31/04 11:57:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Happy New Year to you and to all. > ================== The same to you, Jon. All the best! :-) 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) 40432 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Apologies Friend Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Friend James, .... > > Sarah: All wrong views are included in the 62 speculative views > > mentioned here. They are all eradicated when sakkaya –ditthi (wrong > > view of self) is eradicated. > S: In the Brahmajala Sutta itself, given by the Buddha and the very first > sutta recited at the First Council;-). > > At the end of each section, The Buddha says: "Outside of these there is > none". They are all -inclusive.This is why it is called Brahmajala or 'The > All-embracing Net of Views'. Now we are starting to get into some very deep waters and I need some time to do some research. Though it may appear, on the surface, that you are correct in what you are saying, I have a sense that you are not correct. I still believe that the commentaries are wrong; call it my instinct if you will. I believe that this issue is far more complicated that those sixty-two false views given in the Brahmajala Sutta. I will give you some idea of where I am heading with this by quoting Bhikkhu Nanananda from "Concept and Reality": "There is, however, a widespread tendency to define the word "ditthi" in such contexts strictly to mean the traditional list of sixty-two false views (miccha-ditthi) as given in the Brahmajala Sutta (D.N.). This tendency is evident in the commentaries, which, while defining `tanha' and `mana' in a more elementary form as to be comprehensive, take great care to be more specific in the case of `ditthi'. This may be partly due to the complacent belief that the list of sixty-two comprehends all possible forms of ditthi, and partly also to a desire to safeguard `Right-view' (samma-ditthi). But it appears that this commentarial definition has created new problems. `Ditthi' has thereby lost its fundamental significance as the deep-seated proclivity in the worldling's mind to be beguiled by concepts. If by `ditthipapanca' is meant merely the sixty-two false views, then it would be possible for the disciple of the Buddha to put an end to `ditthipapanca' by virtue of the very fact that he has given up false views. But as we have shown above, it persists even in the disciple as the notion of an ego until he attains Nibbana." (pg. 40) Anyway, please be patient while I formulate a response. ;-) Metta, James 40433 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:53am Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Jon, Jon: What I meant to ask was whether, on your reading of Right Concentration of the Nobel Eightfold Path, the attainment of the first jhana was sufficient to support enlightenment. I ask this because if it is then there should be no need to also mention the other, higher jhanas. James: I am really not quite sure what you are getting at with this question, but I thought that I already answered it in a way. It isn't possible to know if the first jhana will be enough to support enlightenment or if it will take the other jhanas. Some may achieve enlightenment while in the jhanas (like the Buddha) and some use the jhanas as a supporting condition and could achieve enlightenment while not in meditation (like Ven. Ananda). What actually causes enlightenment and a sure fire way to get there are not subjects I am qualified to answer. Metta, James 40434 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 2:55am Subject: Re: with clinging to self, conceit arises Dear Icaro, While anger, which is akusala, arises, it is impossible for kusala to arise at the same time. No understanding could possibly arise when anger is present. Therefore, in your hatred of Russians you missed the chance to understand something about anatta. That was clearly shown in your second outburst against Russians, which Sarah and Jon rightfully expunged from the records. However, you also missed the chance to understand something of the nature of realities and the concepts the "mind" builds from these realities. The United States is a concept, it is not a reality, just as Russia and Russians are not realities either. Please take the time to read and contemplate the book "Realities and Concepts" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket at www.abhidhamma.org , under contents. This is a section from her excellent work called Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, but it is a wonderful explanation of the difference between realities and that which are termed concepts. with metta and karuna, Betty ------------------- >There is > nothing for "us" to attach to because there is no "us", Wrong! The U.S. exists undoubtfully! Mettaya, Ícaro 40435 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 5:52am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 89 - Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death (a) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Chapter 5 Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death Cetanå, volition, is a cetasika which arises with every citta, as we have seen. Seeing, hearing or thinking which arise now are accompanied by cetanå. Every type of cetanå performs the function of coordinating the different tasks of the accompanying dhammas, no matter whether the citta is kusala citta, akusala citta, vipåkacitta or kiriyacitta. When cetanå accompanies kusala citta or akusala citta it performs, besides the function of coordinating, another function: it “wills” kusala or akusala and it can motivate a wholesome or an unwholesome deed through body, speech or mind. Kusala cetanå and akusala cetanå, which are actually kusala kamma and akusala kamma, are capable of producing the appropriate results of the deeds they motivated. Kusala kamma and akusala kamma can produce results in the form of rebirth-consciousness in different planes of existence or in the form of vipåkacittas which arise in the course of one’s life, such as seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or the experience of tangibles through the body-sense. We experience pleasant objects and unpleasant objects through the senses and it depends on kamma whether we have a pleasant experience or an unpleasant experience through these senses. ***** [Ch.5 Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 40436 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 6:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Phil Thanks for sharing these thoughts. Philip wrote: > Hi Jon, Herman and all > >... I do notice that during the days on >which I have not been posting, there is less thinking about Dhamma >and *possibly* more bare awareness. It is still shallow awareness, >but I don't get caught up in concepts to quite the same degree. > We all have a tendency to the view that thinking of the kind described as 'getting caught up in concepts' and awareness are mutually exclusive occurrences or at the very least that the former makes the latter a lot less likely. And it is perhaps as a corollary of this kind of view that we are also likely to regard the (perceived) absence of or reduction in thinking/getting caught up in concepts as indicating the presence of more awareness. Yet I think a careful reading of the suttas shows that there can be awareness of akusala thinking just as there can be awareness of any other dhamma (kusala or akusala, nama or rupa). So perhaps the perceived lessening in levels of thinking is not as significant as we thought it to be; it may just be less of a particular kind of thinking. I do not doubt that the correlation you make here is the way it seems, but I wonder if it is useful to look for these connections. Any idea that there is more awareness when such and such is done (i.e., reading/not reading the list, following/not following a particular routine) is likely to lead us into a wrong practice of some kind as we seek to 'maximise' the chances of having more awareness. > I found this the other day, from the Devasamyutta (SN I.20) > > "Being who perceive what can be expressed > become established in what can be expressed > Not fully understanding what can be expressed > they come under the yoke of death." > > Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentarial notes say this about the above: > > "What can be expressed are the five aggregates. (snip) When >ordinary beings perceive the five aggregates, their perceptions are >affected by the ideas of permanence, pleasure and self, elsewhere >called "distortions." (vipasalla) These distorted perceptions then >provoke the defilements, on account of which beings "become >established in what can be expressed." > > I take this to mean that because of defilements, our thinking >about the aggregates can just subtly strengthen our clinging to them >if we're not aware of the danger of thinking too much. > Yes. Of course, the danger lies in the akusala nature of the thinking rather than thinking itself. But again, we need to resist the inclination to strive for 'having less (akusala) thinking' in the belief that this is the path taught by the Buddha. The fact is, if we are prone to the tendency to think a lot about things (and who isn't?), that tendency reflects deep-seated accumulations of that particular kind, so the scope for a significant change in the general tendency within the space of a single lifetime is limited. Now I know that some people find this prospect discouraging, but that I think is because they have the idea that akusala thinking and the development of awareness are antithetical to each other. To my understanding of the teachings, however, that not the case; if it was then the development of the path would be a practical impossibililty, so pervasive is akusala in our makeup. It is I think encouraging to realise that, according to the teachings, awareness can be developed regardless of the nature of the present mind-state, even if that seems a remote prospect for us personally at this moment. Confidence in the teachings will make it possible for us to resist the temptation to think there is a way of having 'more awareness sooner', or that 'if I put enough effort into it it will happen'.. > I think this >is why I was so encouraged and calmed-down by hearing that >audio clip of K Sujin, and I think this is why she always gets people >back to asking themselves about the realities of them moment. It must >be frustrating in a sense for beginners to discuss Dhamma with her >because we have all our speculative theories that we carry around >with us from reading, and want to have them confirmed, but she spares >us from that. Nina is also very helpful there. > > I couldn't agree with you more! We are very fortunate to have these good friends. Jon 40437 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Jon (and Phil) - In a message dated 1/1/05 9:09:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes, quoting Phil: > > I take this to mean that because of defilements, our thinking > >about the aggregates can just subtly strengthen our clinging to them > >if we're not aware of the danger of thinking too much. > > > > Yes. Of course, the danger lies in the akusala nature of the thinking > rather than thinking itself. But again, we need to resist the > inclination to strive for 'having less (akusala) thinking' in the belief > that this is the path taught by the Buddha. > =========================== Well, as to what the Buddha taught in this regard, there is the following: > "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk > generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not > yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, > upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful > qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates > persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful > qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, > activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, > non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities > that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." > >> -- SN XLV.8 > ========================= 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) 40438 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 7:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard, No need to torture oneself to look for solutions what to include in the all, and what not. We just have to look at the context. In one context something means this, in another one it means something else. It is the same with classifications of the Abhidhamma which are different in different contexts. The Dhamma is not rigid, classifications are not rigid, they are meant as a help for understanding. When we work this way we shall not be troubled by seemingly contradictions. Nina. op 31-12-2004 15:57 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > This is called the All as a phenomenon to be abandoned." 40439 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 7:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (212), submoments Dear Htoo, Thank you. I like your similes. man running is also in the Tiika, and then you made it clear with the warning shots, etc. I like it. When the reader hears about submoments he may have questions why. I could add something from my Thai translation to help here. Nina. op 31-12-2004 15:49 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > When rupas which can serve as arammanas or objects for attention of > cittas arise they just last 17 citta-kkhanas. These 17 citta-kkhanas > again comprise 51 anukhanas or 51 sub-moments. Among these 51 > submoments of rupa the first sub-moment is so weak that rupa cannot > still serve as an object for citta. It becomes powerful to serve as > an object starts from 2nd sub-moment till 50th sub-moment. The 51st > submoment becomes weak again because it is disappearing or aniccata > of that given rupa. 40440 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, James I'm going to jump in on this one if you don't mind... In a message dated 12/31/2004 3:19:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, dacostas@P... writes: Dear James, Do you believe the "only" goal of the Buddha was to find the way(s) by which suffering would be brought to and end? TG: First of all, the Buddha himself in several places in the Suttas declares that "the only thing" he teaches is suffering and the relief from suffering. “…formally and also now, I make known just suffering and the ending of suffering.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 938) Do you believe the Buddha found that way(s) and documented (dictated) it in his Dharma (i.e., sutras and vinya)? If so then please look at the sutras and vinya for the answer. In summary: The Buddha often mentioned gods in the sutras, and I don't recall ever reading that the Buddha thought that they were just figments of imagination; in fact, he even defined a God realm as part of semsaric existence. So, in this sense, the gods are real. Therefore, it can not be a false view (a lie) to believe in their relative, or semsaric, existence. TG: To believe in gods solely on heresay, even of the Buddha, is pure speculation. Is pure speculation a false view? I would say, that anyone who claimed gods were real because the Buddha stated such and had no other evidence, who held onto that belief as a definite actuality, does have a false view; and a mistaken approach of understanding actuality. The knowledge is unfounded...therefore its a belief that -- "one knows something" that in fact --they do not. For my money, that's a false view. On the other hand, someone who had confidence in the Buddha and heard him speak about gods, who understood that -- 'even though the Buddha may have direct knolwedge of gods, I do not.' Because such a person has high respect for the Buddha based on other types of "direct verification," this person could realize that -- 'being that I don't have direct knowledge of whether gods exist or not, but because the Buddha speaks about them, they may very well in all probablility exist, but because I don't know for sure, I will leave it "at that" until such direct knolwedge makes it something I can be sure of.' I think this type of approach would not be a false view because someone reasonably basing their knowledge on what they know and do not know. It has a foundation. The Buddha also declared in the sutras that the gods suffered too, that is why even they listen to his Dharma, and some are freed from it. Now, "what is that false view": Not 100% sure what this question is trying to ask but the response above applies. The sutras often stated that one is freed from suffering by one's own efforts, and not by that of others ( to me this is the essence of the Dharma). The sutras explicitly states that sacrifices and rituals devoted to the gods will not free you from suffering. To believe so would be a contradiction, a false view. In my opinion: The Buddha pointed out the way to be freed from suffering, he called it the 8-fold path. The gods are not listed as part of this way. To believe other will only distract you from the real work (the 8-fold path). Now don't get me wrong, I am also a born again Christian; So I whole hearted believe in God; I just don't believe God is responsible for my suffering. If you need the sutra references, I will find them but it will take some time, so please remind me if I take too long. Charles D TG Happy New Year 40441 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation, stages of insight. Hi Mike and Tep, op 02-01-2005 04:56 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: > Would like to read > more, with support from the texts if possible, for the rendering of > 'naamaruupapariccheda' as 'correct seeing of mind-and-body' . N: naama-ruupa-pariccheda ñaa.na is the first stage of insight knowledge. See Visuddhimagga. It is still tender insight, taru.na vipassana. It is very essential, we cannot forego this beginning stage. Pañña realizes directly nama as nama and rupa as rupa, through the mind-door. Then it is also known what a mind-door process is. As I said before, now it is hidden, it seems that seeing lasts, seeing sees visible object, but it is not realized that visible object is experienced through the mind-door shortly after having been experienced by cittas of the eye-door process. When we still take nama and rupa as a whole how can the arising and falling away of realities one at a time, separately, ever be realized? We can reflect on impermanence, but that is only thinking. Tep, I like to go into the Mahanama sutta later on. There are different translations and I want to check, also my Thai text. Nina. 40442 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Hello' Dear Munawwar, Welcome here, and this is really fascinating. How do you see the Abhidhamma? From which country are you? When my husband and I were living in Indonesia we had some personal contacts with Imans and we were deeply impressed by their spiritual life. Actually, when you strive after knowing yourself more, developing understanding of your life, Abhidhamma study is perfect. Nina. op 31-12-2004 20:23 schreef Munawwar Siddique op munsidus@y...: > > I am a practising Muslim interested in the study of > comparative religion. I see a convergence in the paths > of of Abidhamma and Tasawwuf. 40443 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard, I do not know much about ATI, but as I heard, John Bullit is doing a lot of work. It also seems that they keep on revising their transl, which is a good thing. Nina. op 31-12-2004 23:30 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > [Oh, and yes - it *is* Ven. Thanissaro's translation.] 40444 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 6:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/1/05 2:33:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Howard, > I do not know much about ATI, but as I heard, John Bullit is doing a lot of > work. It also seems that they keep on revising their transl, which is a good > thing. > Nina. > op 31-12-2004 23:30 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >[Oh, and yes - it *is* Ven. Thanissaro's translation.] > > ========================== I'm very grateful for the site and his dedicated work! 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) 40445 From: Larry Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry (and TG) - > > I disagree with your statement "Particularly in regard to the second > sutta it is consciousnesses that are abandoned, not objects of consciousness." Hi Howard, You're right. I misread the notes. I was referring to the line in the sutta, "The mind is abandoned, mental phenomena are to be abandoned, mind consciousness is to be abandoned..." The note to this says "mental phenomena" includes mental objects, so cessation is to be abandoned. I suppose one could interpret this the way you did, but cessation can't really be clung to in the first place so it doesn't make much sense to me to say it is to be abandoned. The note to the Sabba Sutta, which immediately precedes this one, says the "all" of this sutta is the all of the sense bases (ayatana) and this, in turn, would include nibbana, as you said. The Buddha makes one qualification though, the all of the sense bases is not all there is but only the extent of what can be known by a bhikkhu. Larry 40446 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 8:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/1/05 4:29:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > The Buddha makes one qualification though, the all of the sense bases > is not all there is but only the extent of what can be known by a > bhikkhu. ==================== Could you please clarify this. I understood the "all" of the Sabba Sutta to be truly *all*. 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) 40447 From: Egbert Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Apologies to the bees Hi Howard, RobK, Sarah (and all), Thank you for your replies. Some more buzziness below. > > Do bees have self-view? > > > > By which I mean, is there the thought > > > > "Look at me > > I am a bee > > flying to my hive > > in 2005" > > > > :-) > > > > Or does the designation of there being a bee only come from a being > > with self-view, who is just ignorantly (in a nice way) projecting > > self-view around onto all and sundry? > > > > If bees do not have self-view, why is it considered bad to be born > > as a bee while there is agreement that self-view is the pits? If > > bees do not have self-view, there certainly is no dependent > > origination going on there, and > > > > "So the life of a bee > > is free from the misery > > that doth accompany > > the thought "I am me" > > > > :-) > > > > With due deference to Monty Python > > > > > ===================== > That's cute material, Herman. :-) It's actually also an interesting > question. One would, based on new-agey thinking, consider a human being closer > to enlightenment (or "more advanced") than a bee! And one would also, at first > look, presume a bee to be free of self-view, being free presumably of *all* > conceptualization, and consider that a problem in light of having wrong view > being a negative. I would address those two points as follows: > 1) A particular bee might very well be far closer to enlightenment > than any of us! The bee was born as such due to particular kamma coming to the > fore. The bee lives for brief while, and then might well be born in a high > heaven realm or as a human, and what his/her accumulations are is quite unknown to > us. This, in fact, is something we should keep in mind when we think it is > "not so bad" to kill an insect. That insect might well be the next Buddha! ======== HH> What you say is very true and very worthwhile. And I am sure you don't mind me pointing out that these are the very true and worthwhile thoughts of a man thinking about a bee. From the point of view of the bee, presumably :-), there is no point of view. There is no bee who was born and who lives for a short while and is reborn. Neither does the bee think in terms of there being others, who s/he will sting, eat, dance with or who will possibly do this to him/her self etc etc. > 2) While during his/her lifetime as a bee, presumably the conceptual > faculties are nil or close to nil, but the deep-set anusaya to wrong view would > still be present and simply not producing active outflowings at the moment. HH >You have very clearly written what I should have written when attempting to express my dissatisfaction with terms like sotapanna, anagamin etc etc. All these designations of spiritual attainment are described in terms of and limited by time. A sotapanna is someone who does not revert to certain views, forever. When is someone a sotapanna? Well, only time will tell. If it seems that there was a hopeful candidate but who somewhere in his sixth rebirth after entering the stream reverts to self-view for a micro-second, it'll just mean s/he wasn't a sotapanna. Who is going to use the term? Only someone to whom the meaning of the term doesn't apply. Are they likely to know what it means? I wouldn't think so. ?As was previously pointed out, Nibbana and time are mutually exclusive. Spiritual achievement defined in terms of time rather than in terms of Nibbana misses the target, let alone the bullseye. Are these spiritual designations therefore useful? Back to the bee. A bee does not live in time, and being free from self-conceit generates no kamma. As to the deep-set anusaya, as you say, nobody knows if and when those will surface. In closing, a little ditty I'd rather be a bee It 'd sure beat being me As a worldling I can see That it would be so heavenly To buzz around unreflexively But for the bee There would not be even any dimensionality It is a human fantasy that projects self-hood outwardly If there is an I than that is why everything else is seen anthropomorhically You have all been very forbearing :-) Kind Regards Herman 40448 From: Larry Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 2:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 1/1/05 4:29:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... > writes: > > > The Buddha makes one qualification though, the all of the sense bases > > is not all there is but only the extent of what can be known by a > > bhikkhu. > ==================== > Could you please clarify this. I understood the "all" of the Sabba > Sutta to be truly *all*. > Hi Howard, I'm referring to this line from the sutta: "If anyone, bhikkus, should speak thus: 'Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all'--that would be a mere empty boast on his part. If he were questioned he would not be able to reply and, further, he would meet with vexation. For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, that would not be within his domain." Notice the Buddha doesn't say 'because this all is all there is'. Plus I believe in another sutta the Buddha compares what he knows and what he has taught to the difference between a forest and a leaf, or something like that. B. Bodhi's note to the Sabba Sutta reads: "Spk: The all (sabba) is fourfold: (i) the all-inclusive all (sabbasabba), i.e., everything knowable, all of which comes into range of the Buddha's knowledge of omniscience; (ii) the all of the sense bases (aayatanasabba), i.e., the phenomena of the four planes; (iii) the all of personal identity (sakkaayasabba), i.e., the phenomena of the three planes; and (iv) the partial all (padesasabba), i.e., the five physical sense objects. Each of these, from (i) to (iv), has a successively narrower range than its predecessor. In this sutta the all of the sense bases is intended." Larry 40449 From: Egbert Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 2:10pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi Jon, (Phil and all), Sorry for butting in here. With regards to kusala and akusala thinking, kusala means different things in different contexts. Kusala thinking at a mundane level will only lead to more kusala thinking at a mundane level. These ruminations are the seeds of perpetuation, just more happy thoughts in all sorts of pleasant realms. I do not believe that the Suttas bear out a goal of eternal happiness. They do, IMHO, bear out a goal of total deliverance and extinction. In this context, a kusala thought is a thought that leads to extinguishing. A kusala thought is one that leads to the end of thinking, amongst other things. Kind Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Phil > > Thanks for sharing these thoughts. > > Philip wrote: > > > Hi Jon, Herman and all > > > >... I do notice that during the days on > >which I have not been posting, there is less thinking about Dhamma > >and *possibly* more bare awareness. It is still shallow awareness, > >but I don't get caught up in concepts to quite the same degree. > > > > We all have a tendency to the view that thinking of the kind described > as 'getting caught up in concepts' and awareness are mutually exclusive > occurrences or at the very least that the former makes the latter a lot > less likely. > > And it is perhaps as a corollary of this kind of view that we are also > likely to regard the (perceived) absence of or reduction in > thinking/getting caught up in concepts as indicating the presence of > more awareness. > > Yet I think a careful reading of the suttas shows that there can be > awareness of akusala thinking just as there can be awareness of any > other dhamma (kusala or akusala, nama or rupa). So perhaps the > perceived lessening in levels of thinking is not as significant as we > thought it to be; it may just be less of a particular kind of thinking. > > I do not doubt that the correlation you make here is the way it seems, > but I wonder if it is useful to look for these connections. Any idea > that there is more awareness when such and such is done (i.e., > reading/not reading the list, following/not following a particular > routine) is likely to lead us into a wrong practice of some kind as we > seek to 'maximise' the chances of having more awareness. > > > I found this the other day, from the Devasamyutta (SN I.20) > > > > "Being who perceive what can be expressed > > become established in what can be expressed > > Not fully understanding what can be expressed > > they come under the yoke of death." > > > > Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentarial notes say this about the above: > > > > "What can be expressed are the five aggregates. (snip) When > >ordinary beings perceive the five aggregates, their perceptions are > >affected by the ideas of permanence, pleasure and self, elsewhere > >called "distortions." (vipasalla) These distorted perceptions then > >provoke the defilements, on account of which beings "become > >established in what can be expressed." > > > > I take this to mean that because of defilements, our thinking > >about the aggregates can just subtly strengthen our clinging to them > >if we're not aware of the danger of thinking too much. > > > > Yes. Of course, the danger lies in the akusala nature of the thinking > rather than thinking itself. But again, we need to resist the > inclination to strive for 'having less (akusala) thinking' in the belief > that this is the path taught by the Buddha. The fact is, if we are > prone to the tendency to think a lot about things (and who isn't?), that > tendency reflects deep-seated accumulations of that particular kind, so > the scope for a significant change in the general tendency within the > space of a single lifetime is limited. > > Now I know that some people find this prospect discouraging, but that I > think is because they have the idea that akusala thinking and the > development of awareness are antithetical to each other. To my > understanding of the teachings, however, that not the case; if it was > then the development of the path would be a practical impossibililty, so > pervasive is akusala in our makeup. > > It is I think encouraging to realise that, according to the teachings, > awareness can be developed regardless of the nature of the present > mind-state, even if that seems a remote prospect for us personally at > this moment. Confidence in the teachings will make it possible for us > to resist the temptation to think there is a way of having 'more > awareness sooner', or that 'if I put enough effort into it it will happen'.. > > > I think this > >is why I was so encouraged and calmed-down by hearing that > >audio clip of K Sujin, and I think this is why she always gets people > >back to asking themselves about the realities of them moment. It must > >be frustrating in a sense for beginners to discuss Dhamma with her > >because we have all our speculative theories that we carry around > >with us from reading, and want to have them confirmed, but she spares > >us from that. Nina is also very helpful there. > > > > > > I couldn't agree with you more! We are very fortunate to have these > good friends. > > Jon 40450 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 9:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana In a message dated 1/1/2005 2:42:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 1/1/05 4:29:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... > writes: > > > The Buddha makes one qualification though, the all of the sense bases > > is not all there is but only the extent of what can be known by a > > bhikkhu. > ==================== > Could you please clarify this. I understood the "all" of the Sabba > Sutta to be truly *all*. > Hi Howard, I'm referring to this line from the sutta: "If anyone, bhikkus, should speak thus: 'Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all'--that would be a mere empty boast on his part. If he were questioned he would not be able to reply and, further, he would meet with vexation. For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, that would not be within his domain." Notice the Buddha doesn't say 'because this all is all there is'. Hi Larry and Howard Just my 2 cents worth... I interpret "the all" to mean everything that would be posible to experience because "there is nothing else to experience." When the Buddha says that "it would not be in his domain" I think that's all it means. I don't think there is an insinuation intended that there is "some other" domain. TG 40451 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 10:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/1/05 5:42:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Could you please clarify this. I understood the "all" of the > Sabba > >Sutta to be truly *all*. > > > > Hi Howard, > > I'm referring to this line from the sutta: > > "If anyone, bhikkus, should speak thus: 'Having rejected this all, I > shall make known another all'--that would be a mere empty boast on > his part. If he were questioned he would not be able to reply and, > further, he would meet with vexation. For what reason? Because, > bhikkhus, that would not be within his domain." > > Notice the Buddha doesn't say 'because this all is all there is'. > ====================== It's never been quite clear to me how to interpret this, until now! Note that the Buddha said "If ANYONE [emphasis mine], bhikkus, should speak thus: 'Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all'--that would be a mere empty boast on his part." Now, is the Buddha including himself or other arahants within the "anyone"??? If so, then what does she mean? That there may be yet more than this "all", but it is beyond even him? If not, why didn't he say "any worldling", or "anyone except the Tathagatha"? I suspect that the Buddha is saying either that 1) this "all" is truly all or, 2) as a good phenomenalist, that there is nothing in-principle knowable except as falls within experience. The clause "that would not be within his domain" fits in *very* well with this second reading! Thus, I conclude this is an instance of what I and others see as the Buddha's phenomenalism, a phenomenalism expressed also in the Bahiya Sutta. And if one puts the Buddha's phenomenalism together with his pragmatism, one ends up with the "all" that the Buddha taught being effectively and pragmatically the only "all" of any concern, to anyone, anywhere. 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) 40452 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 10:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/1/05 5:55:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Larry and Howard > > Just my 2 cents worth... I interpret "the all" to mean everything that would > > be posible to experience because "there is nothing else to experience." > When > the Buddha says that "it would not be in his domain" I think that's all it > means. I don't think there is an insinuation intended that there is "some > other" > domain. > > TG > ======================== I think that what you say here may be close or even identical with my take on it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 40453 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 10:21am Subject: Typo Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, all - In a message dated 1/1/05 6:17:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Now, is the Buddha including himself > or other arahants within the "anyone"??? If so, then what does she mean? > ===================== Obviously, I meant to write "he", and not "she". ;-) 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) 40454 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Do me a favor and translate the pali. Some of the words I can't find in my 4 dictionaries. Charles D ----- Original Message ----- From: m. nease To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:05 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, Excellent points IMHO, particularly (2). As I see it micchaadi.t.thi has a very specific meaning in the texts and does not refer simply to incorrect ideas in general. By the way, I think micchaadi.t.thi can be either paramattha dhamma or pa.n.natti. I'd welcome any comments on this idea. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles DaCosta" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:07 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. > (1) Indian mythology was used by most teachers in India, even by those > that did not believe the gods were real, to explain history and the facts > of life. Every culture in the world has taken this approach, especially > when it comes to teaching children. Myths often use symbolism and allegory > as nice stories and fables to educate. > > (2) The wrong view would be to believe that these gods could free you from > suffering; to believe in their existence is not a wrong view. 40455 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 2:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana This is all relative, but worth discussing. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: upasaka@a... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 11:30 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/31/04 4:04:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > In a message dated 12/31/2004 12:16:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > I think that "mind &mind-objects" is far superior to "intellect & > ideas". The choice of "intellect &ideas" is far too restrictive, The term > 'intellect' refers to conceptualization and thinking, and ideas are far from > > all > that is needed as mental portion of "the all". What about feelings and > emotions? > These are directly experienced through the mind, not as concepts and not by > intellect. > > With metta, > Howard > > Hi Howard > > I agree with you completely here. Thanissaro Bhikkhu is one of my least > favorite translators. (Not sure if he did this passage.) It seems like he > is > always struggling to come up with terms that no one else is using and not > only > does this create inconsistancies, it seems perfectly good terms are replaced > by > poor substitutes. Unless its a clear improvement, I think its a shame to > make > the mind have to struggle with figuring out yet another term to mean the > same > thing. > > Keep It Simple for us simpletons please! > > TG > ===================== Yay! I just *love* ending the year on a note of agreement!! :-) Happy New Year, TG! [Oh, and yes - it *is* Ven. Thanissaro's translation.] With metta, Howard 40456 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 1:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Dear Herman, A God is my friend, and like most friends, we share and do things for each other. Now it is true that some would say I share with, and do for, myself and those around me. However, this is all a question of "View." As far as God being more than a subject of my belief, this is also a question of View. It is a view that I am quite comfortable with and it doesn't cause me to suffer. In a nut-shell my view is just another view of Ultimate Truth. But this truth is existence. Charles DaCosta ----- Original Message ----- From: Egbert To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 1:33 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, (James and all), My name is Herman Hofman, an on-again-off-again member of the list for 3 or 4 years now. Born in Holland, now resident in Australia. At one time I was a born-again, filled with the Spirit minister in a Pentacostal church. It is nice to make your acquiantance :-) I was especially interested to read that you were a resident of Denmark (a wonderful society of which I have the fondest memories) and that you are a born-again Christian. If I could ask you a question. When you say that you believe in God is that One God or a God? Does One God or a God do anything besides being a subject of your belief :-)? Purely out of curiousity, and because I fought with "God" and "God lost. All the best to you Herman 40457 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 3:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi TG, You stated, "........... To believe in gods solely on heresay, even of the Buddha, is pure speculation. Is pure speculation a false view? I would say, that anyone who claimed gods were real because the Buddha stated such and had no other evidence, who held onto that belief as a definite actuality, does have a false view; and a mistaken approach of understanding actuality. The knowledge is unfounded...therefore its a belief that -- "one knows something" that in fact --they do not. For my money, that's a false view." My point about the false view is not whether the idea is right or wrong. We were talking about a view that contradicts the Right View (of the 8-fold path). In this since, a false view is a view that contradicts the 4-noble truths. To hold a view that Gods exist, and they are not connected to ones suffering is not a false view in that sense because there is no contradiction. But to believe those Gods have control over (to cause and to free one from) suffering is a false view. To argue that the belief in Gods is a false view would also mean the wheel of life teaches a false view. It teaches that there is a God realm. There are also many sutras where the Buddha talks about Gods, as if they are real -- this would also mean that the Buddha teaches a false view. To believe the 4-noble truths because you herd the Buddha taught it (not because you realized it for your self) is not a false view either. I can't remember the references but many have heard the Buddha's teachings and had accepted them as truth, only to realize that truth later. Charles DaCosta ----- Original Message ----- From: TGrand458@a... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 7:27 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, James I'm going to jump in on this one if you don't mind... In a message dated 12/31/2004 3:19:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, dacostas@P... writes: Dear James, Do you believe the "only" goal of the Buddha was to find the way(s) by which suffering would be brought to and end? TG: First of all, the Buddha himself in several places in the Suttas declares that "the only thing" he teaches is suffering and the relief from suffering. “…formally and also now, I make known just suffering and the ending of suffering.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 938) Do you believe the Buddha found that way(s) and documented (dictated) it in his Dharma (i.e., sutras and vinya)? If so then please look at the sutras and vinya for the answer. In summary: The Buddha often mentioned gods in the sutras, and I don't recall ever reading that the Buddha thought that they were just figments of imagination; in fact, he even defined a God realm as part of semsaric existence. So, in this sense, the gods are real. Therefore, it can not be a false view (a lie) to believe in their relative, or semsaric, existence. TG: To believe in gods solely on heresay, even of the Buddha, is pure speculation. Is pure speculation a false view? I would say, that anyone who claimed gods were real because the Buddha stated such and had no other evidence, who held onto that belief as a definite actuality, does have a false view; and a mistaken approach of understanding actuality. <.....> 40458 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 4:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > Good to be discussing the Dhamma with you again! I don't share the same sentiments. I am not certain that I an extended period of discussion on the Dharma is what I need at the moment. The direction my life is going in and the shape it will take may be without persistent discussion - IE, I set myself up with the fundamentals, understand the details, and work from there, whether this takes 7 months or 7 years. I have tried asking pertinent questions on E-Sangha for example while practising Dharma on a Friday (coming home from a meditation center or practising Joe Goldstein's "One Dharma") during my time as a patient at a day hospital program, and by Monday my question was not satisfactorily answered. There was just a disconnect between practise and anything I was trying to accomplish. So I may try to set myself up to practise rightly and see what different stages I'm at and be active here at certain times, but I don't know that I'm here to stay yet, I don't even have a good feel for Abhidharma yet. Time will tell. > > > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > <….> > > Some of you may take it to be one nama or rupa at a time, but I see > > the material in the chapter on compendium of consciousness to be > > known as it appears in reality, as part of my practise, specifically > > related to the section of the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta regarding > > contemplation on consciousness. > …. > S: It's a good idea to compare the contents of the Abhidammattha Sangaha > (as we are reading it in CMA) with the Satipatthana Sutta and to relate it > to practice. > > So in the first text, after the introduction, we read that: > > "The things contained in the Abhidhamma, spoken of therein, are altogether > fourfold from the standpoint of ultimate reality: consciousness, mental > factors, matter, and Nibbana." > > These are the only dhammas that can ever be understood or realized. > > Consciousness (citta) is included in cittaanupassanaa and also in > dhammaanupassanaa, the third and fourth foundations of mindfulness. > > Mental factors (cetasikas) are included in vedanaanupassanaa, > cittaanupassanaa and also in dhammaanupassanaa > > Matter (rupas) are included in kaayaanupassanaa and also in > dhammaanupassanaa > Yes. Abhidharma is found in all four foundations of mindfulness, but not all foundations of mindfulness use exclusively Abhidharma knowledge. I certainly wish to know the realities underlying various foundations of mindfulness in terms of nama and rupa, throughout all four categories of contemplation, but it appears to me that since citta and cetasika are two of the fundamental units described in Abhidharma, the contemplation on consciousness most especially would benefit from a thorough knowledges of consciousness and its associated states. And in this case knowing the exact factor of energy that is described in ACM o A seems better to me than knowing "I need to cultivate energy" (although this happens to be contemplations on dhammas, the same principle would apply to consciousness and the nature of all its associated states). > (Nibbana is not included in these four foundations because the development > of satipatthana as described in the sutta is concerned with the > development of mundane awareness and wisdom.) Contemplation on the repulsive nature of the body, of contemplation of the body in the body, is said to be able to lead one to the realization of Truth (3rd Noble Truth), and the end of clinging is described in another. Is this not too the deliverance of mind? Doesn't that the Buddha said "Whoever practises these four foundations of mindfulness [for XYZ periods of time] can experience [arahantship or the state of non-return] say something about *supramundane* awareness? Maybe it doesn't, if I'm not in the know, please tell me. > > So these are all the same namas and rupas being described which can only > be known when they are experienced. For example, the first kind of > consciousness mentioned in the sutta is `the consciousness with lust'. > This can only be known when it arises, though we can read and > theoretically understand more details about it anytime. Is there > attachment now? If so, there can be awareness of it immediately without > any special concentration or attention. This is how satipatthana can be > understood. I see your view is more 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life'ish where mine is 'Four Foundations of Mindfulness are life'ish. When mindfulness is thoroughly established, reality after reality instantaneously can be observed, so fast that you might say the person is being mindful of all things going on in the body at once. In fact this makes me wonder, can there not be two cittas arising at the same time? Eg one for body-consciousness one for hearing-consciousness? And where is consciousness of the different sense doors located in the mind-body complex? > > From the sub-commentery to the Satipatthana Sutta: > > "In the consciousness with lust, lust occurs as a mental concomitant > arising and passing away along with a conscious state and sharing with > that conscious state the object and basis of consciousness." > > In other words, we're used to thinking of ourselves or others as being > greedy or having attachment, but we learn in both the Abhidhamma and the > suttas that there are just these cittas and cetasikas arising and passing > away and that it's quite possible for awareness to be aware of these > states from time to time. Or all the time. This is possible, isn't it? > .... > <...> > >...I immediately remembered a > > suggestion by the Buddha to his monks that on guarding the sense > > doors, one can go to heaven, or by neglecting to guard the sense > > doors, one can go to hell, so I began guarding my sense doors. > …. > S: And the meaning of guarding the sense doors is the understanding and > development of satipatthana when objects or dhammas impinge on these sense > doors. First of all there has to be the understanding of what the dhammas > (realities) in our life are so that they can be known, rather than being > swept away by trains of thinking about concepts which are purely imagined. > > Like you say later `if no one is there to have a problem, there is no > problem.' In other words, the problems in life are those problems > conceptualized and imagined. Even lust or hatred are not problems in the > sense that they can be known. They can be the objects of awareness when > they arise and are seen as merely conditioned elements, not a person. Right but you missed the point. I was using that example to show that this psycho-physical organism acted as a whole to guard the sense doors. I am just not sure here how to reconcile the idea 'don't be attached to concept of self' with 'Whoever practises these four foundations of mindfulness'. Can you see? > > There is a verse in Dhammapada about the nature of ignorance, and > > even telling you to 'free yourself from it.' > …. > S: We can say `free yourself from ignorance', but in truth it is the > development of the eightfold path with right understanding as leader which > does the freeing. So we have to distinguish our convenrional use of > language from the strict understanding of the real meaning behind the > words which we read about in the Abhidhamma. Most importantly, we have to > remember there's no self ever. Again, the approach I would take here would be to point out that we are practising for the supramundane paths, and at the attainment of stream-entry the notion of a personal self will be done away for forever. *That's* what should be more in mind when we practise, or at least as a goal to practise for. Also, I was doing a pretty good job when I had some good mindfulness going one day after reading "The Seven Stages of Purification and the Insight Knowledges" and ignorance, as I've heard it described as a veil, started to melt away. And there was no practise of the Noble Eightfold Path. > As you say, `our goal is to extinguish our defilements and attain the > supramundane paths', but this will only ever happen by the patient > development of satipatthana. You asked whether my goal `of experiencing > namas and rupas one way at a time is aimed towards this same goal'. The > answer is 'yes' as I've tried to explain above. > > Satipatthana is the experiencing and awareness of namas and rupas one at a > time. Only one is ever the object of the cittas when awareness and > understanding can arise. If it's a citta with attachment or lust, it's not > the time to be aware of anger. If it is hardness being experienced as one > types, it's not the time to be aware of feeling or attachment. Right, but if I'm walking down the streets and there's my entire body made up of the four elements, I can try to be mindful of as much of those four elements as possible, right? The different organs, the interaction of material form with the outside world? The many different types of bodily feeling that occur so close together in time that it's almost all at once? > > If my understanding of practice makes my life more complicated or > difficult, I question the understanding. It's not about having another > kind of experience, but of understanding what is being experienced now > very naturally, whether out in the street or sitting in the waiting room > as you describe. Ehh I would hesitate to lose my mindfulness down to one or two nama or rupa (in the conventional sense) when coming back indoors for study or formal practise or work. > > As Nina wrote to another friend yesterday: > > "Each element (except nibana, which is the unconditioned element) can only > arise when there are the right conditions. We can read it, hear it, but > we many not have thoroughly considered the truth. It has to go into our > bones. Such firm understanding is the condition for the arising of sati > sampaja~n~na [which we read about in the Satipatthana Sutta]. Direct > understanding eliminates doubt and confidence grows." > > Look forward to your feedback. Maybe we can quote little bits from CMA as > we go along and as you suggest in effect, look at ways of narrowing our > different understandings of what we read. > > Metta and Best Wishes for the New Year. > > Sarah > ========> Maybe, Ive got a lot left to read and I'm going through what I've read already to make sure I really get it, so we'll see what happens. 40459 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 5:08pm Subject: Book recommendations Well as I have stated here on a prior occasion, I have acquired Bhikku Bodhi's excellent manual on abhidhamma, "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidharma," and begun to study it. I was going very quickly and I could see it was the good, the wholesome (studying good dhamma books), and so I have been so rejuvinated that I could keep on going for miles. Now I will be practising the four foundations of mindfulness, either intensively itself or a little at a time as outlined in a practise guide, but either way, I need to know citta and cetasika, and how I can work with acting on beautiful cittas or motivation and avoid acting on the cittas rooted in moha, lobha, and dosa. Can anyone suggest some good dhamma books, in the same vein, maybe Nina's Abhidhamma In Daily Life or other, similar books? If you need more specifics I have posted what I am looking for at E-sangha (lioncity.net) at the following address: http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showtopic=10532&st=0&p=140420& thanks in advance andrew 40460 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 5:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard and TG, I think it's useful to know that there is more to reality than the internal and external sense bases. What this means is that understanding these bases doesn't necessarily answer all questions (about kamma for example), so we don't need to try to answer these questions. These answers are beyond our "domain". More importantly they are not germaine to the path leading to cessation of dukkha. Larry 40461 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 3:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana In a message dated 1/1/2005 5:52:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi Howard and TG, I think it's useful to know that there is more to reality than the internal and external sense bases. What this means is that understanding these bases doesn't necessarily answer all questions (about kamma for example), so we don't need to try to answer these questions. These answers are beyond our "domain". More importantly they are not germaine to the path leading to cessation of dukkha. Larry Hi Larry Your first sentence seems to contradict the very Sutta we are discussing. I don't think that kamma is "outside" of "the all," just a complex aspect of it. Who knows, maybe you'll be the next Buddha and the entire workings of kamma will not be something unknown to you. I think the Buddha's teaching on "the all" isn't so much about what we don't know right now...but what we have no "potential" to know because there is simply no conditional support for it. TG 40462 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 8:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Meditation Hi Mike (and Niana) - Thank you very much, Mike, for expressing a common interest in this fascinating subject of 'naamaruupapariccheda' as 'correct seeing of mind-and-body'. Yes, I will write more about this stuff with as much sutta support as I can find and, of course, with the kind help of Nina. It has been several years now that I have been trying to learn both principal and practical aspects of this first door of wisdom that opens to the higher planes of insight knowledge (as expounded by Ven. Buddhaghosa and by Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw in his "Progress of Insight"). Unfortunately, I have not found even one discourse (sutta) that directly addresses this issue. I truly appreciate Nina's energetic investigation into the Mahanama sutta and other related materials on this subject matter. I personally believe that this endeavor will, in time, not only reveal more subtle relationships between the Abhidahmma and the Sutta Pitaka, but also make clearer the citta behaviors during the process of insight development. For example, we might be able to understand how the citta realizes "the arising and falling away" of the five aggregates, one at a time, as Nina puts it : N: "When we still take nama and rupa as a whole how can the arising and falling away of realities one at a time, separately, ever be realized? We can reflect on impermanence, but that is only thinking". Mike, the followings (from her message # 40267) are Nina's extremely- interesting explanations of this insight knowledge, that cuts through the nama-rupa. I would like to propose that we use them as building blocks for developing our clearer understanding of yatha-bhuta-nana- dassana vipassana. N: N: It is asked what all? The eye, objects, etc. Herein is the clue, the preparation you asked for. Mindfulness and understanding has to be developed of all objects appearing one at a time through the six doors. We have to know the difference between concept and reality, only realities are objects of satipatthana. The khandhas, the elements, the aayatanas. Or in short: dhammas, paramattha dhammas. Kindest regards, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mnease" wrote: > Hi Tep, > > Interesting, not at all 'our' usual translation. Naama and ruupa have many > different meanings dependent on context by my reading. Would like to read > more, with support from the texts if possible, for the rendering of > 'naamaruupapariccheda' as 'correct seeing of mind-and-body' . > > Thanks in advance, > > mike > 40463 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 9:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re:sense-door, mind-door. [Reply to message # 40267] Dear Nina - T: > What are the supporting conditions for panna so that it can work its way > until the first ray of insight knowledge appears? Is contemplating nama- > rupa as " not mine, not 'I', not my 'self' " both necessary and sufficient? N: That is the end result, not the beginning. Insight knowledge is not satipatthana. Satipatthana is developed any time there is mindfulness and a degree of understanding of whatever nama or rupa appears. It can develop, it can grow. Insight knowledge, even the first stage, is a result, a fruit, of the development of satipatthana. Insight knowledge consists of several moments of clearly realizing the nama and rupa that appear. T: I am in total agreement with you about satipatthana as a supporting condition for developing right concentration and right understanding (samma-nana). On the other hand, it seems to me that the theme 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself' in a sutta such as SN XXII.59, Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, was also recommended by the Buddha as a tool for developing the parinna that supports arising of the insight knowledge, 'subba dhamma anatta'. "Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' Bhikkhus, feeling is not-self... "So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' Any kind of feeling whatever... [endquote] Kindest regards, Tep =========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Tep, > .... > T: I am interested in the interval between the state in which "the mind- door > > process is concealed by the sense-door process" and the state "when > > the time is ripe for the first stage of insight knowledge, it knows nama > > and rupa through the mind-door". You have hinted that "it is only panna > > itself that works its way". 40464 From: Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana TG: "Your first sentence seems to contradict the very Sutta we are discussing." Hi TG, You're right. No point in speculating on whether there is more to reality than the six sense bases. Not within my domain, plus it's vexing to attempt to conceive of the inconceivable or perceive the imperceivable. It occured to me that this sutta might be directed toward Vedanta. I believe Vedanta maintains that the six sense bases are illusion (maya) and Self is reality. The sutta talks of rejecting this all and making known another all. Vedanta could be interpreted as doing somethng like that. Larry 40465 From: Egbert Date: Sat Jan 1, 2005 10:58pm Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Hi Charles, Thanks for explaining further. Not like I am the chief censor, or anything, but I see nothing in your statements which is contradictory. I am sure we all have much to learn from each other. Thanks again and kind regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > A God is my friend, and like most friends, we share and do things for each other. Now it is true that some would say I share with, and do for, myself and those around me. However, this is all a question of "View." > > As far as God being more than a subject of my belief, this is also a question of View. It is a view that I am quite comfortable with and it doesn't cause me to suffer. In a nut-shell my view is just another view of Ultimate Truth. But this truth is existence. > > Charles DaCosta > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Egbert > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 1:33 AM > Subject: [dsg] Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. > > > > > Hi Charles, (James and all), > > > My name is Herman Hofman, an on-again-off-again member of the list > for 3 or 4 years now. Born in Holland, now resident in Australia. At > one time I was a born-again, filled with the Spirit minister in a > Pentacostal church. > > It is nice to make your acquiantance :-) > > I was especially interested to read that you were a resident of > Denmark (a wonderful society of which I have the fondest memories) > and that you are a born-again Christian. > > If I could ask you a question. > > When you say that you believe in God is that One God or a God? > > Does One God or a God do anything besides being a subject of your > belief :-)? > > Purely out of curiousity, and because I fought with "God" and "God > lost. > > All the best to you > > Herman 40466 From: Philip Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:07am Subject: Re: sutta, to Phil Hello Nina, and all I feel very happy to be able to write to you. Our computer wouldn't turn on for three days and I assumed it was dead, but it came back to life today. Myseterious. And it was nice because I found that I wasn't perturbed at all by it. Dhamma is getting deeply rooted - no doubt about that. I could survive some months without my Dhamma friends. > We spoke several times about meditation subjects for all occasions, and > among these the recollection of the Buddha. > I came across a sutta, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an11-013.html > We read that Mahaanama asks the Buddha in whose way of living he should > live. The Co explains that for a layman this is living with the Dhamma, not > solitary life. I remember I read something about "dwell in Dhamma" and it had to do with those of us who study but don't dwell in Dhamma, or discuss, but don't dwell in Dhamma, or other things which I can't recall, but don't dwell in Dhamma. I remember the first time I was cut off from this group for technical reasons I thought at one point something like "hey, what's the point of this Dhamma stuff if I can't tell anyone about my great insights!" (haha) I wasn't dwelling in Dhamma. The last few days, there was nothing like that. > Mahanama was a sotaapanna, and that means that he could attain access > concentration with this subject. Jhana is not possible, because this subject > is too deep. > The Buddha said to him, that he should recollect: > < 'Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy and rightly self-awakened, consummate > in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard to the world, > unexcelled as a trainer for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of > divine & human beings, awakened, blessed.' > "Mahanama, you should develop this recollection of the Sangha while you are > walking, while you are standing, while you are sitting, while you are lying > down, while you are busy at work, while you are resting in your home crowded > with children.> I must say that I love the last part, about how and when we should develop this recollection, but personally, the recollection of the Buddha as worthy and rightly self-awakened and such is personally not so helpful for me. I find these days the way I reflect on the Buddha is by reflecting on the Noble Truth of Suffering, really soak in it, and from that arises such gratitude to the Buddha who shows us the way to liberation. The last few days I've been so inspired by the simple teaching, with which we're all familiar, that is *is* possible to abandon the unwholesome and cultivate the wholesome that He wouldn't have taught us so if it weren't! My practice seems to be simplified these days, reflecting on the hetus. Again, I want to thank Antony for linking us to that great book "The Roots of Good and Evil." It has helped me to settle into something very uncomplicated. And it's making everything else less complicated. Continuing to study Abhidhamma while receiving guidance from straightforward suttas, and thanks to Abhidhamma always being reminded that the suttas I'm studying are *not* in fact quite as straightforward as they seem! If the computer weren't wonky, I would start posting passages from that book, but I can't promise to do that now. I'm also getting a lot of clear direction from the chapters on the hetus in ADL. It's really not complicated for me these days. I wonder how long it will stay that way! :) > I like this passage, it shows that he can apply to this meditation subject > naturally, because the right condiitons are present. He had an unshakable > confidence in the Buddha. I was thinking the other day, Nina, wondering about the way you say that meditations can be used in this way in busy daily life. I certainly reflect on things in daily life, ponder them, but I had had trouble seeing this as "meditation" because of clinging to certain views. The sutta above helps me to understand this better. There isn't a day that goes by without remembering your description of having dinner at a nice restaurant with Lodewijk, as the waiters bustled about, and there was recollection of foulness, or death, I forget which. I loved that. No question that you weren't having an absolutely delightful time together, but there was also right recollection of the realities and ultimate fate of conditioned dhammas even as you still had this lovely time in the bustling restaurant. I think that's probably my favourite post at this group. > Lodewijk said that because of his sutta readings he sees that they all deal > with Abhidhamma, they explain seeing, hearing, etc. I wouldn't say that *all* do - but I certainly haven't come across many that don't. It seems to me that Samyutta Nikaya in particular lends itself to study in conjunction with Abhidhamma. I think it would be a bit perverse to insist on studying suttas without making an effort to understand Abhidhamma. And once one made a sincere effort, and conditions permitted, there would be no going back. >He also said that you > should read my e book Introduction to the Buddhist Scriptures, since I > mainly quote suttas there. You may find it on zolag. He instigated me to > write this some years ago. Wow! That reminds me that this is one of the many things I printed out and put in binders but that I forgot to read it. I hope I can find it! All these binders are so disorganized. Please thank Lodewijk and all the best to both of you and your father in 2005. I hope the birthday party went well! Metta, Phil p.s I was reading through my little pocket notebooks and found this from a few months ago: " 'With regard to internal factors, I do not envision any other single factor so helpful as appropriate attention. WIth regard to external factors, I do not envision any other single factor liek friendship with admirable people.' I was encouraged when I dreamt of Nina last night, her Dhamma achievement, something to do with abandoning." Just in case my computer crashes for good, I would like to tell you about that dream which was surely a confirmation of my faith in your as a very good Dhamma friend! :) p.p.s I've become aware that I am forgetting how to write some pretty basic Japanese characters and that all the Japanese I learned some years ago is in danger of slipping away into a void, so I'm feeling resolved about studying Nihongo a little harder this year. I expect I'll be coming by here only on Sundays and my day off on Wednesday, but we'll see about that! 40467 From: Philip Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:19am Subject: Re: Book recommendations Hi Andrew Nice to see you're back! > how I can work with acting on beautiful cittas or motivation and avoid > acting on the cittas rooted in moha, lobha, and dosa. Can anyone > suggest some good dhamma books, in the same vein, maybe Nina's > Abhidhamma In Daily Life or other, similar books? Maybe you've already read it, but I am very keen on "THe Roots of Good and Evil" by Nanamoli Thera which you can find online in various editions if you Google it. Fantastic, and I think it's just what you're looking for. As I just wrote to Nina, it has really simplified things for me, got me focussed on various approaches to working on beginning to loosen to hold of the akusala roots. Typically, my expecations are modest, but the book is making me feel a bit more ambitious, I must say. If you haven't read it, please do! If you read the version posted at geocities, beware of some misleading typos, and enjoy the funny ones. ("Mink" instead of "monk" and "The Lard" instead of "The Lord" are two examples.) Metta, Phil p.s What's with the "suicidal one" user name? If that is one of those proverbial "cries for help" let it be known that I feel concerned and hope you're feeling ok these days. I won't be able to read through all your posts as it is time to get off the computer. 40468 From: Philip Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:45am Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi Jon, and all > > Phil... I do notice that during the days on > >which I have not been posting, there is less thinking about Dhamma > >and *possibly* more bare awareness. It is still shallow awareness, > >but I don't get caught up in concepts to quite the same degree. > > > Jon > We all have a tendency to the view that thinking of the kind described > as 'getting caught up in concepts' and awareness are mutually exclusive > occurrences or at the very least that the former makes the latter a lot > less likely. I would like to reword what I wrote above, since I've just had a few days away and have more insight into it. It's not that there is any less thinking about Dhamma - it still goes on most of the time for me. But the thinking is far less caught up in self-image. Since I'm a beginner, and this group has been so helpful for me, there is far too much of the "hey, I said something very wise" or "Nina will like" that" and that kind of thing. Or regrets that I didn't say something in a different way. Or mentally drafting posts to come. Surely there is *some* benefit from that kind of thing. But the last few days, when I thought our computer was dead for good there was no consideration of DSG whatsoever, no thoughts about posting, and the Dhamma reflections were somehow much purer. This is *my* accumulation we're talking about - nobody elses. To be honest, Naomi and I don't have friends to speak of here and DSG has become a social outlet for me, and that aspect gets involved in my Dhamma reflections related to DSG. Worldly concerns. Wanting to be liked and embraced by the group. Nothing wrong with that, but Dhamma reflections that are conditioned by that sort of thing are obviously not as free of worldly wrong view. So this doesn't relate to thinking about Dhamma in general - it's my accumulations, my circumstances. Everyone has different ones that will condition the way the thinking goes on. > And it is perhaps as a corollary of this kind of view that we are also > likely to regard the (perceived) absence of or reduction in > thinking/getting caught up in concepts as indicating the presence of > more awareness. I remember a post in which you reminded me that concepts in themselves are nothing to be concerned about. They are essential to get around in life. And no doubt that thinking the absence or reduction of conceptual thinking necessarily implies the presence of more awareness is a mistake. I can see that now. Awareness, if and when it arises, arises due to conditions. Thinking otherwise is an easy mistake to make. > Any idea > that there is more awareness when such and such is done (i.e., > reading/not reading the list, following/not following a particular > routine) is likely to lead us into a wrong practice of some kind as we seek to 'maximise' the chances of having more awareness. Yes, that " seek to maximize the chances of having more awareness" sounds like something that has gone on in my head a lot. I think this phrase will be one of those that sticks with me as a helpful reminder of what to be aware of. Thanks! All the best to you and Sarah in 2005. (And in passing, to everyone in the group.) Metta, Phil 40469 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 7:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Apologies Friend Sarah, I have been giving the Brahajala Sutta some study and I don't think it includes *ALL* types of wrong views. It only includes wrong views which are `fixed' and of an ontological order. Not only that, these various views were from the Buddha's time period and don't necessarily apply to all time periods (for example, from my reading, it doesn't include the modern wrong views of Existentialism and Objectivism). From the Brahajala Sutta: "There are, monks, some ascetics and Brahmins who are speculators about the past, having fixed views about the past, and who put forward various speculative theories about the past, in eighteen different ways. On what basis, on what grounds do they do so?"… "This, monks, the Tathágata understands : These viewpoints thus grasped and adhered to will lead to such-and-such destinations in another world."… "Whatever ascetics and Brahmins who are speculators about the past or the future or both, having fixed views on the matter and put forth speculative views about it, these are all trapped in the net with its sixty-two divisions, and wherever they emerge and try to get out, they are caught and held in this net. Just as a skilled fisherman or his apprentice might cover a small piece of water with a fine-meshed net, thinking : `Whatever larger creatures there may be in this water, they are all trapped in the net, caught, and held in the net', so it is with all these : they are trapped and caught in this net." Metta, James 40470 From: Larry Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 9:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi again Howard and TG, An interesting message arises when we combine these two suttas: don't reject this all but abandon it. Would either of you like to comment on that. Alternately, I've spotted some problems with this all. Where does eye consciousness fit in? Eye consciousness is not eye or visible object so it must be part of mind and have a mental object. If so, is this mental object the exact same thing as the external visible object? I would say not. Abhidhamma seems to say otherwise but doesn't explain how that could be. If they are different, where does that leave the physical life-force? Physical life-force is nominally a mental object, but if it really arises externally in the world of rupa then it is not included in the sense bases. There are many other rupas in the same predicament. Larry 40471 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 9:22am Subject: Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - - To ... Hi Suan and Howard - Your discussion, or rather a debate, on the Abhidhamma versus the Sutta Pitaka, is quite interesting [messages # 40396 and 40401]. Since the two views are opposite, I think this debate may never reach a compromising conclusion. On the second thought, maybe a conclusion, compromised or not, is not necessary. But, if we never reach a conclusion, will the debate be useful? Suan's main points: 1. Any Suttam can be shown to be abhidhamma in disguise. 2. The contents of both Suttam Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the same dhammaa - the four ultimate realities: mind, mental associates, matter and nibbaana. The reality units, their conditions and relations are the abhidhammaa. Howard's main points: 1. The Abhidhamma is a codification of the teachings in the suttas. The Abhidhamma is just the detailed part of the whole Dhamma; there is no need to generalize it. 2. The Abhidhamma was a later development after the teachings in the suttas. Ven Nyanaponika and Bhikkhu Bodhi also recognized the Abhidhamma as a later development. Warm regards, Tep ========= --- [Message # 40401] In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Suan - > > In a message dated 12/31/04 10:05:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, > suanluzaw@b... writes: > > > Dear Howard, Nina, Sarah, Chris F, Mike, Andrew L, Ken O and all > > 40472 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/2/05 12:05:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi again Howard and TG, > > An interesting message arises when we combine these two suttas: don't > reject this all but abandon it. Would either of you like to comment > on that. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I see two possible readings: 1) Go to a final nibbana that involves no consciousness of any objects whatsoever, or 2) Uproot all upadana. I accept the second as the intended meaning. ----------------------------------------- > > Alternately, I've spotted some problems with this all. Where does eye > consciousness fit in? Eye consciousness is not eye or visible object > so it must be part of mind and have a mental object. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Eye consciousness is nama, but its object is not. It's object is rupa (in two senses: visible form, and material phenomenon). --------------------------------------- If so, is this > > mental object the exact same thing as the external visible object? I > would say not. Abhidhamma seems to say otherwise but doesn't explain > how that could be. If they are different, where does that leave the > physical life-force? Physical life-force is nominally a mental > object, but if it really arises externally in the world of rupa then > it is not included in the sense bases. There are many other rupas in > the same predicament. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I have no comment on physical life-force (not that you asked *me! ;-). Should I ever knowingly encounter such a beast, I'll consider saying something then. ------------------------------------------ > > 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) 40473 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... Hi, Tep (and Suan) - In a message dated 1/2/05 12:23:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepyawa@m... writes: > Hi Suan and Howard - > > Your discussion, or rather a debate, on the Abhidhamma versus the > Sutta Pitaka, is quite interesting [messages # 40396 and 40401]. Since > the two views are opposite, I think this debate may never reach a > compromising conclusion. > ----------------------------------- Howard: Quite possibly not. ----------------------------------- On the second thought, maybe a > > conclusion, compromised or not, is not necessary. > --------------------------------- Howard: Necessary for what? ;-) -------------------------------- But, if we never > > reach a conclusion, will the debate be useful? > ---------------------------------- Howard: Of course. It is useful for others to see both sides. It is also useful for each of the "debaters" to see the other's position, for this plants a seed in the mind enabling consideration of that other position and comparison with one's own. It is always useful to hear and to consider. A guarantee of final resolution isn't given nor is it necessary. It isn't necessary, because a great value in hearing a different view lies in that hearing serving as support for not clinging to a view. Not clinging to views is as important as having right views, because relinquishment lies at the core of the Dhamma. ====================== 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) 40474 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Larry In a message dated 1/2/2005 9:05:11 AM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi again Howard and TG, An interesting message arises when we combine these two suttas: don't reject this all but abandon it. Would either of you like to comment on that. TG: I would say that "rejecting" is sort of the 'middle stage process' that insight developments spurs on. Then "abandoning" is nearer the final stage of that same process. But these might be two different translations of the same term anyway? Alternately, I've spotted some problems with this all. Where does eye consciousness fit in? Eye consciousness is not eye or visible object so it must be part of mind and have a mental object. If so, is this mental object the exact same thing as the external visible object? I would say not. Abhidhamma seems to say otherwise but doesn't explain how that could be. If they are different, where does that leave the physical life-force? Physical life-force is nominally a mental object, but if it really arises externally in the world of rupa then it is not included in the sense bases. There are many other rupas in the same predicament. TG: I believe both body and mind are systems and that both are inter-dependent systems with each other and the environment I believe the Four Great Elements supply the dynamic forces necessary for systems to operate. I look at physical or mental "life-forces" in that way. I don't believe this "vision" is directly taught in the Tipitaka, but I believe it is "extractable" from the Tipitaka. At any rate... they are changing, impermanent, afflicting, and not-self. Larry TG 40475 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard and Larry In a message dated 1/2/2005 9:48:14 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/2/05 12:05:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi again Howard and TG, > > An interesting message arises when we combine these two suttas: don't > reject this all but abandon it. Would either of you like to comment > on that. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I see two possible readings: 1) Go to a final nibbana that involves no consciousness of any objects whatsoever, or 2) Uproot all upadana. I accept the second as the intended meaning. ----------------------------------------- TG: I think both are correct and have many Sutta quotes where the Buddha directly describes the goal as the end of consciousness. I posted most a couple of weeks ago but if you want to see them I can post them again. TG [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 40476 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 6:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG (and Larry) - In a message dated 1/2/05 1:41:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I see two possible readings: 1) Go to a final nibbana that involves no > consciousness of any objects whatsoever, or 2) Uproot all upadana. I accept > the second as the intended meaning. > ----------------------------------------- > > TG: I think both are correct and have many Sutta quotes where the Buddha > directly describes the goal as the end of consciousness. I posted most a > couple > of weeks ago but if you want to see them I can post them again. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not questioning here whether final nibbana involves the end of experience. That may well be so. There is no self to begin with, and cessation of objects and cessation of experiential presence of objects (i.e., consciousness) would be co-occurring. When no-self is fully realized at arahant fruition, there will longer be any clinging to or craving for either experiencing or experiences. Since such clinging and craving is the motive force for experience, it makes sense, then, that experience may cease upon the death of an arahant. A living arahant would neither crave experience nor its cessation. What I was saying was merely that I take the "abandoning" in that sutta to mean "releasing one's hold on" or "letting go of" or "relinquishing". Cessation of experience will occur (or not) on its own as a consequence of full relinquishment. It is that abandoning that is of primary importance. Once one is free from clinging and neither grasps onto nor pushes away anything whatsoever, one no longer cares whether experience continues or not. Another issue, though, and this is a distinction point between Theravada and Mahayana, is whether it is possible that the mahakaruna of an arahant, or at least of a Buddha, can enable him to continue to experience for the purpose of being of help to sentient beings. It doesn't seem implausible to me that such be possible - that is, that compassion at the level of a Buddha may be a motive force for continuation of experience as great as craving/clinging. ======================= 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) 40477 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation Dear Tep, Thank you for your posts to Mike and me. For now, I keep them until later. Yes, very helpful if you write more. I shall look into the Path of Discrimination. I wrote about this subject what I understood intellectually, understanding based on listening, study and considering, but the direct realization of the truth is quite a different matter. It cannot occur without the right conditions. Nina. op 02-01-2005 05:39 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > I will write more about this stuff with as much sutta > support as I can find 40478 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sutta, to Phil Hello Philip, Thank you for your good wishes also to Lodewijk, and we also wish you a year fruitful with Dhamma. The birthday part went fine, music included. But my father was overtired when we celebrated Christmas and New Year's Eve. He could hardly eat and everything was really difficult. But understandable for a 104 year old. I had to laugh that you dreamt of me. op 02-01-2005 11:07 schreef Philip op plnao@j...: personally, the recollection of the > Buddha as worthy and rightly self-awakened and such is personally not > so helpful for me. I find these days the way I reflect on the Buddha > is by reflecting on the Noble Truth of Suffering, really soak in it, > and from that arises such gratitude to the Buddha who shows us the > way to liberation. N: Meditation can be a short recollection. When you find that subjects of Abhidhamma like akusala cittas can be verified in life, you can remember that the Buddha taught all this. Where would you be without his teaching? Nina. 40479 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... Hi, Howard - Tep: On the second thought, maybe a > conclusion, compromised or not, is not necessary. > --------------------------------- Howard: Necessary for what? ;-) If you just want to chat with a friend, just to get together, or to kill time, then nobody care about reaching a conclusion (they are too busy talking!). So a conclusion is not necessary for finding an answer to a problem, or discovering a hidden truth, etc. But here, I assume, we generally have a well-defined purpose in every discussion, so it is necessary for us to try to reach a conclusion. Howard: A guarantee of final resolution isn't given nor is it necessary. It isn't necessary, because a great value in hearing a different view lies in that hearing serving as support for not clinging to a view. Not clinging to views is as important as having right views, because relinquishment lies at the core of the Dhamma. Tep: Theoretically, you said it very well ! Practically, it is not easy for discussers to know from the beginning if they are free from clinging to their own views or not (people who are, do not debate). And as the debate goes on, and the temperature gets warmer, they may find it hard to let go. On the other side of the coin, it is very easy for other people (not involved in the debate) to see who is clinging or not clinging. Warm regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep (and Suan) - > > Howard: > Of course. It is useful for others to see both sides. It is also > useful for each of the "debaters" to see the other's position, for this plants a > seed in the mind enabling consideration of that other position and comparison > with one's own. It is always useful to hear and to consider. A guarantee of > final resolution isn't given nor is it necessary. It isn't necessary, because a > great value in hearing a different view lies in that hearing serving as support > for not clinging to a view. Not clinging to views is as important as having > right views, because relinquishment lies at the core of the Dhamma. > ====================== 40480 From: mlnease Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 0:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Larry, Just a couple of thoughts off the top, hope you don't mind my butting in: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > Where does eye > consciousness fit in? Eye consciousness is not eye or visible object > so it must be part of mind Cakkhuvi~n~naa.na is 'mind', 'citta', isn't it? How do you mean 'part of mind'? > and have a mental object. Of course as citta it must have an object, visible form--physical (ruupa) object, not mental (naama) I think. > If so, is this > mental object the exact same thing as the external visible object? I > would say not. Abhidhamma seems to say otherwise but doesn't explain > how that could be. If they are different, where does that leave the > physical life-force? Do you mean jiivitindriya? I know this as a condition, a paccaya, and as a universal cetasika. Is there a 'life-force' ruupa I'm not aware of? > Physical life-force is nominally a mental > object, but if it really arises externally in the world of rupa then > it is not included in the sense bases. I don't understand why you would say that it 'arises externally in the world of rupa'-- > There are many other rupas in > the same predicament. I don't see the predicament--if I've misunderstood the above, I'd be grateful for any further clarification. mike 40481 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 0:51pm Subject: Re: Book recommendations Thanks for the recommendations, Phil, I will look into them. To address the following statement. > p.s What's with the "suicidal one" user name? If that is one of > those proverbial "cries for help" let it be known that I feel > concerned and hope you're feeling ok these days. I won't be able to > read through all your posts as it is time to get off the computer. It is not a cry for help, I have just had a history of suicidal ideation and have been hospitalized on those grounds. I have these thoughts or images coming to me on an infrequent basis, but I have never acted on them or threatened to act on them, I know it is not for my well-being which is something I do care for, but this is apparently enough to have people consider me 'suicidal' and I was greeted by the phrase (minus the year) of my yahoo user id on an irc channel i frequent so i picked it up. Not meant to cause harm or ideas others. If more people are concerned about it in the future I might change the nick. Thanks, AL 40482 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 1:11pm Subject: Availability of three suttas for repulsiveness of body meditation Hello, As you may have noticed from my posts late last year, I have been interested in preparing for the repulsive nature of the body meditation. This method is said to lead to the realization of Truth: 'Bhikkus, when one thing is developed, repeatedly practised, it leads to a supreme sense of urgency, to supreme benefit, to supreme surcease of bondage, to supreme mindfulness and full awareness, to acquisition of knowledge and vision, to a happy life here and now, to realization of the fruit of clear vision and deliverance. What is that one thing? It is mindfulness occupied with the body.' Now the book I'm reading from on preparation for this notes, as part of the Tenfold Skill of Paying Attention, that three suttas are necessary for this contemplation. So it states in Vissudhimagga. They are: Anguttara Nikaya i.256-258 (looking over concentration, exertion, and equanimity evenly) Anguttara Nikaya iii.435 Six things to acheive coolness: restraint, energy, interest, equanimity, striving for the superior state, delight in nibbana Samyutta Nikaya v.113 When to develop the factors of enlightenment. Now the Vissudhimmaga (VIII, 61, 73) also says the three suttas are necessary, but actually goes into a little more detail about their contents in the section dealing with them, saying "this is how they are to be understood:," and for the last sutta (dealing with the factors of enlightenment), it even refers one to an earlier chapter in the book itself. Now it looks to me that this is not quite complete, that it would be best to actually go through the suttas instead of just the comments on them. The only thing is, I have not been able to find these suttas online. One reason may be because the sutta numbers are dealing with the Pali Text Society's edition, not the numbering system in the more modern copies like those from Wisdom Publications. I have also searched for the subject matter of the suttas and come up dry. Does anyone know for sure, where these suttas are available, ie, if it's in the Pali Text Society's edition, or renumbered such and such in another publication, or if they are really not necessary at all? I imagine they may be in the aforementioned volumes in which case I might be able to find them in the library of my local Vihara, but I certainly haven't been able to find them in any online collection. Thanks in advance for any help. -alevin 40483 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 8:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana In a message dated 1/2/2005 11:24:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: I'm not questioning here whether final nibbana involves the end of experience. That may well be so. There is no self to begin with, and cessation of objects and cessation of experiential presence of objects (i.e., consciousness) would be co-occurring. When no-self is fully realized at arahant fruition, there will longer be any clinging to or craving for either experiencing or experiences. Since such clinging and craving is the motive force for experience, it makes sense, then, that experience may cease upon the death of an arahant. A living arahant would neither crave experience nor its cessation. What I was saying was merely that I take the "abandoning" in that sutta to mean "releasing one's hold on" or "letting go of" or "relinquishing". Cessation of experience will occur (or not) on its own as a consequence of full relinquishment. It is that abandoning that is of primary importance. Once one is free from clinging and neither grasps onto nor pushes away anything whatsoever, one no longer cares whether experience continues or not. Another issue, though, and this is a distinction point between Theravada and Mahayana, is whether it is possible that the mahakaruna of an arahant, or at least of a Buddha, can enable him to continue to experience for the purpose of being of help to sentient beings. It doesn't seem implausible to me that such be possible - that is, that compassion at the level of a Buddha may be a motive force for continuation of experience as great as craving/clinging. ======================= With metta, Howard Hi Howard I really like the way you stated this up until the last paragraph ... which was of course just a speculative side-line. But to indulge... I think its the "holding onto" that sustains "continuance." Pure compassion wouldn't have that force associated with it...I would think. Those types of aspects in Mahayana, or other teachings, are developed IMO by those still looking to "save the self" in one subtle way or another. ;-) TG 40484 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... Hi, Tep - In a message dated 1/2/05 2:50:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepyawa@m... writes: > Howard: > > A guarantee of final resolution isn't given nor is it necessary. It isn't > necessary, because a great value in hearing a different view lies in that > hearing serving as support for not clinging to a view. Not clinging to > views is as important as having right views, because relinquishment > lies at the core of the Dhamma. > > Tep: > > Theoretically, you said it very well ! Practically, it is not easy for > discussers to know from the beginning if they are free from clinging to > their own views or not (people who are, do not debate). And as the > debate goes on, and the temperature gets warmer, they may find it > hard to let go. On the other side of the coin, it is very easy for other > people (not involved in the debate) to see who is clinging or not > clinging. > ===================== It is hard for us to stop clinging to everything! And the more "intellectual" we are, the more we cling to views. And I certainly still do cling to views. But I have found that my views on Abhidhamma, for example, have modified, gradually and often subliminally, as a result of conversations here, and I have found a growing pleasure in the developing attitude that my beliefs are *only* beliefs and are tentative, and that positions that currently seem absurd to me might well be more correct than my current views. A Dhammic slogan much loved by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu that ranks highly in importance for me is "Cling to nothing as me or mine". Similar is the statement by, I believe, the Korean Son master, Seung Sahn: "Only don't know." Beliefs are things we take to be "mine" and that we often cling to tenaciously. It is such a relief to loosen our grip on them and say "Maybe not." 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) 40485 From: jwromeijn Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 1:58pm Subject: Re: Book recommendations Hallo Andrew You're talking about the (Maha)Satipatthana Sutta, Digha Nikaya 22 There are three books I studied and liked about it; there are many more but I studied them less: 1. Nyanaponika Thera - The Heart of Buddhist Meditation. Scholarly good and many texts usefull to contemplate. 2. Matthew Flickstein - Swallowing the River Ganges. Not so much about the Sutta but about Insight-meditation that is based on it. 3. Thich Nhat Hanh - Transformation and healing. Exercises based on the Pali version and two Chinsed version of the Sutta/Sutra: only for brave buddhists who are not afraid to read an inspiring book of a mahayanist. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" wrote: > > Well as I have stated here on a prior occasion, I have acquired Bhikku > Bodhi's excellent manual on abhidhamma, "A Comprehensive Manual of > Abhidharma," and begun to study it. I was going very quickly and I > could see it was the good, the wholesome (studying good dhamma books), > and so I have been so rejuvinated that I could keep on going for > miles. Now I will be practising the four foundations of mindfulness, > either intensively itself or a little at a time as outlined in a > practise guide, but either way, I need to know citta and cetasika, and > how I can work with acting on beautiful cittas or motivation and avoid > acting on the cittas rooted in moha, lobha, and dosa. Can anyone > suggest some good dhamma books, in the same vein, maybe Nina's > Abhidhamma In Daily Life or other, similar books? > > If you need more specifics I have posted what I am looking for at > E-sangha (lioncity.net) at the following address: > > http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php? showtopic=10532&st=0&p=140420& > > thanks in advance > andrew 40486 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 9:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/2/05 4:34:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > I really like the way you stated this up until the last paragraph ... which > was of course just a speculative side-line. -------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. A speculative side issue. -------------------------------------- But to indulge...> > > I think its the "holding onto" that sustains "continuance." Pure compassion > > wouldn't have that force associated with it...I would think. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps not. I don't know. (A living Buddha can selflessly will, and certainly the mind of a Buddha is a powerful thing. I'm not prepared to accept or dismiss the proposition. In any case, it is what it is! ;-) -------------------------------------- Those types of > > aspects in Mahayana, or other teachings, are developed IMO by those still > looking to "save the self" in one subtle way or another. ;-) > ------------------------------------ Howard: I don't know. Certainly such beliefs could serve as a lifebuoy for "tender minded" Mahayanists to cling to, but I don't know that such is true for the developers of the Mahayana Bodhisattva ideal, and I also believe there are plenty of "tough minded" Mahayanists to be found who would not cling to this notion "to save the self". What is more, there are plenty of "tender minded" Theravadins around as well! ;-) ----------------------------------- > > TG > ================= 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) 40487 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:19pm Subject: Re: Book recommendations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > Hallo Andrew > > You're talking about the (Maha)Satipatthana Sutta, Digha Nikaya 22 > There are three books I studied and liked about it; there are many > more but I studied them less: > > 1. Nyanaponika Thera - The Heart of Buddhist Meditation. Scholarly > good and many texts usefull to contemplate. > 2. Matthew Flickstein - Swallowing the River Ganges. Not so much > about the Sutta but about Insight-meditation that is based on it. > 3. Thich Nhat Hanh - Transformation and healing. Exercises based on > the Pali version and two Chinsed version of the Sutta/Sutra: only for > brave buddhists who are not afraid to read an inspiring book of a > mahayanist. > > Metta > joop, do you have any more recommendations in line with swallowing the river ganges? i own that one and have even thought of buying more copies of it. thanks, a.l. 40488 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What the mind does Hi, Herman I think you see the holy life and the household life as being antithetical to each other (which I would not argue with), and from this you say that since the holy life is lived for the sake of enlightenment then the household life must be antithetical to that goal. In particular, you see social discourse as a real hindrance to the development of the path because of the effect it has of inducing discursive thought, which makes difficult the removal of clinging. To my reading of the suttas and texts, the message taught by the Buddha is a somewhat different one. He did not extol silence or a life of physical seclusion for their own sake, or as being necessary for the development of the path, or even as being necesarily conducive to the development of the path for all persons. He did of course on numerous occasions (but not to every follower) extol the monks' life, but he did so with the qualification that it was the monks. life that was 'well lived' to which her referred. We need to understand the significance of this qualification which, as I see it, has the effect of putting the monk's life beyond the capability of most people. What the Buddha in fact lays down as the necessary conditions for the development of the path are, in comparison to the ideal of a reclusive lifestyle spent in meditative contemplation, relatively mundane-sounding. In numerous suttas, including suttas directed to audiences that include laypeople, the Buddha talks about knowing the presently arising dhammas such as seeing consciousness and visible object and so on through the six senses, or the five khandhas, or the elements. On many occasions those listening to the discourse became enlightened then and there or a short time later. We should not ignore the obvious message this carries for us. That message as I see it is that there is the potential for development of the path at this very moment, regardless of lifestyle or current situation. It is a matter of understanding at an intellectual level first the significance of dhammas such as seeing and visible object. There are dhammas arising now, which may be the object of awareness given the right conditions (as set out in the texts). Jon Egbert wrote: >H > The major issue I have with the possible implications of the >above (there is no suggestion that you have implied them) is that >the mind is posited as a thing with its own nature. I accept that it >is very difficult or impossible to make very precise statements that >are also short. I would just like to make some brief counterpoints. > >Thinking (reflexive mind) is unique to humans. > >Thinking is conditioned. > >Language is a condition for thinking. > >Language is conditioned. > >Society is a condition for language as language is a condition for >society. This is borne out by the fact that people not exposed to or >removed from society loose their capacity for speech/thinking. > >The holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of total >Unbinding through lack of clinging. > >Secular society is a mass of clinging that teaches/learns clinging >by way of discursive thinking. > >The holy life of the Blessed One is the antithesis of secular >society. This is of necessity, because discursive thinking militates >against the most basic development of mind. > >The fruits of the holy life are not harvested in thinking >conditioned by a social setting. > >My discursive thoughts only, now back to some silence > > >Kind Regards > > > >Herman > > 40489 From: seisen_au Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:56pm Subject: Re: Availability of three suttas for repulsiveness of body meditation Hi Alevin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" wrote: > Anguttara Nikaya i.256-258 > (looking over concentration, exertion, and equanimity evenly) > Anguttara Nikaya iii.435 > Six things to acheive coolness: restraint, energy, interest, > equanimity, striving for the superior state, delight in nibbana > Samyutta Nikaya v.113 > When to develop the factors of enlightenment. Does anyone know for sure, where these suttas are available, ----------- Here are the suttas you were looking for: >Anguttara Nikaya i.256-258(looking over concentration, exertion, and >equanimity evenly) 10. Pamsudhovakasuttam - Washing impurities. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara1/3-tikanipata/010-lonaphalavaggo-e.htm --- >Anguttara Nikaya iii.435 >Six things to acheive coolness: restraint, energy, interest, >equanimity, striving for the superior state, delight in nibbana Anguttara Nikaya VI.85 Siti Sutta, Cooled http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an06-085.html ------------ >Samyutta Nikaya v.113 >When to develop the factors of enlightenment. I couldn't find a translation of this sutta on the net but it is: Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga, Bojjhangasamyutta, Fire Sutta (Aggisuttam), p.1605 in Bhikkhu Bodhis translation. -------- Take care Steve 40490 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 3:20pm Subject: Re: Availability of three suttas for repulsiveness of body meditation --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > > Hi Alevin > > Here are the suttas you were looking for: > > >Anguttara Nikaya i.256-258(looking over concentration, exertion, and > >equanimity evenly) > > 10. Pamsudhovakasuttam - Washing impurities. > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- > Nikaya/Anguttara1/3-tikanipata/010-lonaphalavaggo-e.htm > > --- > >Anguttara Nikaya iii.435 > >Six things to acheive coolness: restraint, energy, interest, > >equanimity, striving for the superior state, delight in nibbana > > Anguttara Nikaya VI.85 > Siti Sutta, Cooled > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an06-085.html > > ------------ > > >Samyutta Nikaya v.113 > >When to develop the factors of enlightenment. > > I couldn't find a translation of this sutta on the net but it is: > > Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga, Bojjhangasamyutta, Fire Sutta > (Aggisuttam), p.1605 in Bhikkhu Bodhis translation. > -------- > > Take care > Steve Steve, thanks for your work in finding these suttas. However, from looking at them, it looks to me like the heart of them /is/ present in the excerpts in the Vissudhimagga, and are a translation that is clearer than those in the suttas you linked me to. I thought the suttas themselves would be more complex or entail more effort but this is not the case. So I will rest with the Vissudhimagga versions for now. peace, a.l. 40491 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:06pm Subject: Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep - > > But I have found that my views on Abhidhamma, for example, have > modified, gradually and often subliminally, > as a result of conversations here, and I > have found a growing pleasure in the developing > attitude that my beliefs are > *only* beliefs and are tentative, and that positions that > currently seem absurd > to me might well be more correct than my current views. > A Dhammic slogan much loved by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu that ranks highly in > importance for me is "Cling to nothing as me or mine". Similar is the > statement by, I believe, the Korean Son master, Seung Sahn: "Only don't know." > Beliefs are things we take to be "mine" and that we often cling to tenaciously. It > is such a relief to loosen our grip on them and say "Maybe not." > Hi, Howard - I really like the attitude that takes our current beliefs as tentative, which means that they should be readily changed for better views. It combines both anicca and anatta into one bullet for shooting through the personality views. The Korean wise man's "Only don't know" tells me that I don't have to be upset when somebody tells me that I am wrong. Thank you for all this, Howard. By the way, have you ever been to Thailand? How did you get to know and love Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's teachings? Kindest regards, Tep ======== 40492 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard and TG, You guys missed my question. How do we abandon without rejecting? Howard, put your hand on your chest. That thump thump thump is a _sign_ of the physical life force. You know it is there the same way you know there is visible object, because the Buddha said so. Larry 40493 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 11:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... Hi, Tep - In a message dated 1/2/05 7:07:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepyawa@m... writes: > By the way, have you ever been to Thailand? -------------------------------------- Howard: No I haven't, even though a Thai Monk know at a U.S. wat near me once offered to "serve as a guide" for me were I to go there with him when he goes! :-) ------------------------------------- How did you get to know > > and love Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's teachings? > ------------------------------------ Howard: Unfortunately only by reading three of his books. (I also have the Suan Mokkh web site bookmarked.) ===================== 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) 40494 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Mike, M: "Cakkhuvi~n~naa.na is 'mind', 'citta', isn't it? How do you mean 'part of mind'?" L: Part of the mind category of the sense base formula. M: "Of course as citta it must have an object, visible form--physical (ruupa) object, not mental (naama) I think." L: The formula says mind and mental object. Plus we shouldn't forget the 5-door process arises in the mind-door. I am interpreting this a little differently from traditional abhidhamma. M: "Do you mean jiivitindriya? I know this as a condition, a paccaya, and as a universal cetasika. Is there a 'life-force' ruupa I'm not aware of?" L: Yes, jiivitindriya (life-force) is a rupa, a cetasika, and a condition. M: "I don't understand why you would say that it 'arises externally in the world of rupa'--" L: External to the mind base. What is physically alive is the body. Does the body live in the mind? The same argument goes for all the rupas that can only be cognized through the mind door. They are not included in the sense base formula. Larry 40495 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 4:57pm Subject: Vism.XIV,128 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 128. Herein, 'pleasure' has the characteristic of experiencing a desirable tangible datum. Its function is to intensify associated states. It is manifested as bodily enjoyment. Its proximate cause is the body faculty. 'Pain' has the characteristic of experiencing an undesirable tangible datum. It function is to wither associated states. It is manifested as bodily affliction. Its proximate cause is the body faculty. 'Joy' has the characteristic of experiencing a desirable object. Its function is to exploit55 in one way or another the desirable aspect. It is manifested as mental enjoyment. Its proximate cause is tranquility. 'Grief' has the characteristic of experiencing an undesirable object. Its function is to exploit in one way or another the undesirable aspect. It is manifested as affliction. Its proximate cause is invariably the heart-basis. 'Equanimity' has the characteristic of being felt as neutral. Its function is not to intensify or wither associated states much. It is manifested as peacefulness. Its proximate cause is consciousness without happiness.56 This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the feeling aggregate. ---------------------------- Note 55. Sambhoga--'exploiting': not in this sense in P.T.S. Dict. (see also Ch. XVII,51). Note 56. 'Pleasure and pain respectively gratify and afflict by acting in one way on the body and in another way on the mind, but not so equanimity, which is why the latter is described as of one class. 'Just as, when a man places a piece of cottonwool on an anvil and strikes it with an iron hammer, and his hammer goes right through the cotton and hits the anvil, the violence of the blow is great, so too because the violence of the impact's blow is great, body-consciousness is accompanied by pleasure when the object is a desirable or desirable-neutral one, and by pain when the object is an undesirable or undesirable-neutral one. [It is the impact of the primary matter (tangible object) on the primaries of the body.] 'Herein, though profitable-resultant and unprofitable-resultant consciousness discriminated according to the desirable and undesirable might logically be associated with pleasure and pain, nevertheless the eight kinds of consciousness that have the eye, etc., as their support (34)-(37) and (50)-(53) are invariably associated only with equanimity, because of the gentleness of the impact's blow in the case of two instances of derived matter, like that of two pieces of cotton wool' (Pm.482). For simile see DhsA. 263. 40496 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 6:19pm Subject: Apology for my previous post (re:abhidhamma and Andrew L) Please excuse me for that post was done in an insensitive and mischeivous fashion. I have read some good dhamma talks tonight that are keeping me elated and I realize I have done wrong in posting that as I did. Carry on then. Sarah, I would still like if you could reply to the main points about how my practise will unfold, even if the post itself was questionable. Anything that didn't satisfy you just ask me about and I'll re-work it. Happy Holidays, Andrew L. 40497 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 2:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry (and TG) -- In a message dated 1/2/05 7:42:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > You guys missed my question. How do we abandon without rejecting? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, as I said, I understand "to abandon" as meaning "to not cling to" or "to not be attached to". That doesn't mean to push away - it doesn't mean to meet with aversion. ----------------------------------------- > > Howard, put your hand on your chest. That thump thump thump is a _sign_ > of the physical life force. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I don't deny the beating of the heart, Larry. And the electrochemical basis for it is well known. There are millions of conditions that cooperate to maintain a functioning organism, many of which are known to modern biology and medicine. Physical life force is not one that is known. Might there be such a thing? Well, maybe. But I doubt it. ----------------------------------------- You know it is there the same way you know> > there is visible object, because the Buddha said so. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Really!! The Buddha also spoke of Mount Sumeru, but I don't believe in that either. In any case, I do believe the Buddha's Dhamma, and, in particular, I believe the correctness of the Buddha's teaching in the Kalama Sutta to not accept merely on the basis of authority. I certainly do not know something "because the Buddha said so"! That reminds me of the Bumper sticker that reads "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it!" I hold this life force matter in abeyance, but my current belief is that there is no such thing. Might I be wrong? Well, sure! ------------------------------------------------ > > 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) 40498 From: Ai Le Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 7:09pm Subject: groups.yahoo.com/group/life-atmosphere/message/656 This is a repost of the writing of my present answer -- Message # 655 -- in a different font, so that the word 'Ill' is readable, not looking like three letter l's or the roman numeral 3: My present answer is six things: 1. parable of the saw / metta 2. anatta 3. four aryan truths (also the 'four noble truths') [this is Ill, Arising of Ill, Cessation of Ill, and the path leading to the cessation of Ill] 4. anicca, dukkha, anatta 5. somethings I get from the 'Happy' chapter of the 'Dhammapada' 6. Majjhima Nikaya 19 The difference between my # 2 listing and my # 4 listing is that 'anatta' ("not-self") "is a kind of view that goes with metta ( parable of the saw/metta are the # 1 listing, first thing in my mind). I think in the past it went like this or something like this: when I completed my parable of the saw meditation (# 1 listing), I would then let go further (?) with anatta". The # 4 listing -- anicca, dukkha, anatta -- was what was called the 'paramita' ('paramita' the term for one of the ten 'perfections' of a bodhisattva?) of 'wisdom' (panna'?), in the book 'The Buddha and His Teachings' or titled something like that, by Narada (Maha Thera? Maha Thera = Great Elder?). Here's something like my way or my way on "anicca, dukkha, anatta": what is impermanent (anicca), that is ill (dukkha); what is ill, that is not-self (anatta); what is not-self, one should regard as 'this is not mine, this am not I, this is not my self'. Majjhima Nikaya 19 (# 6 listing) is, ACCORDING TO ME, the teaching on the three right thoughts of renunciation, non-ill will, and (right) thoughts imbued with harmlessness, as opposed to the (three) thoughts of sense desires, ill will, and thoughts imbued with harmfulness. Ai SOURCE: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/life-atmosphere/message/656 40499 From: Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 10:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi Howard, I don't think we are arguing the same point but I'll try one last volley. I said you know there is something, somewhere called life which is not included in the sense bases the same way you know there is a visible object, as a matter of faith or reason. You have said many times, as a phenomenologist, there is no such a phenomenon as a directly verifiable visible object separate and distinct from consciousness. The Buddha said there truely is such a phenomenon, but I don't thnk he said it was directly verifiable. So, reason must be an acceptable means of knowledge. Given that we have to reason about sense object, why can't we reason about other rupa which are not incuded in the sense bases? I could give you the list but I suspect you would reject most of them. How about nutriment? Will that do? If not, I think we've reached an impass. Larry 40500 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 10:20pm Subject: Re: clinging to self with conceit, Pali.. Friend Charles, Charles: Do you believe the "only" goal of the Buddha was to find the way(s) by which suffering would be brought to and end? James: Yes. Charles: Do you believe the Buddha found that way(s) and documented (dictated) it in hisDharma (i.e., sutras and vinya)? James: Yes. Charles: If so then please look at the sutras and vinya for the answer. James: The answer to what? Charles: The Buddha often mentioned gods in the sutras, and I don't recall ever reading that the Buddha thought that they were just figments of imagination; in fact, he even defined a God realm as part of semsaric existence. So, in this sense, the gods are real. Therefore, it can not be a false view (a lie) to believe in their relative, or semsaric, existence. James: This is a different matter. You are speaking of the god/deva realms of the 32 planes of existence; I was speaking of the cosmology that was in existence in India before the time of the Buddha. Remember, this was 2,500 years ago and the Indian population believed, for the most part, that gods made the sun and moon move across the sky and they made it rain. According to this cosmology, these were fixed gods and did not die nor were they born. Actually, what the Buddha taught, about the god realms (and other ascetics were knowledgeable about) he knew through concentration meditation which had developed psychic powers. Not all of the Indian population believed in these realms because the Buddha taught that beings were spontaneously reborn there and that they die- even Brahma, the highest and supposedly creator god…(who it appears you worship, btw). So, these are two different sets of views. Charles: The Buddha also declared in the sutras that the gods suffered too, that is why even they listen to his Dharma, and some are freed from it. Now, "what is that false view": James: No, but again this is a different belief. Charles: In my opinion: The Buddha pointed out the way to be freed from suffering, he called it the 8-fold path. The gods are not listed as part of this way. To believe other will only distract you from the real work (the 8-fold path). James: I don't understand your point here. Charles: Now don't get me wrong, I am also a born again Christian; So I whole hearted believe in God; I just don't believe God is responsible for my suffering. James: Interesting. The "suffering" of Buddhism is inherent to life so a creator God would of course be responsible. Also, I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but the Buddha taught that belief in a creator God is wrong view (DN 1). Metta, James 40501 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 10:44pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 90 - Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death (b) 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.5 Volition(cetanaa]in the Cycle of Birth and Death contd] ***** Cetanå or kamma which motivates a good deed or a bad deed falls away immediately together with the citta, but since each citta is succeeded by the next one, kamma is accumulated and thus it can produce its result later on, even in a next life. How do we know whether there is a next life? We will understand more about the next life if we understand our life right now. By the term ‘human life’ in conventional language we mean the duration of time we are in this human plane of existence. However, in order to know the truth we should know realities, not merely conventional terms. In fact, our life consists of innumerable moments of citta which arise and fall away, succeeding one another. There is birth and death of citta at each moment and thus life lasts as long as one moment of citta. ***** [Ch.5 Volition in the cycle of Birth and Death to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 40502 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 2, 2005 11:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Dear Larry, Howard, TG & Mike, I'm following your threads and wish to add a little on ayatanas (bases/sense fields). As is apparent in the heading, ‘Salayatana’, it is the internal and external ayatanas being referred to in the suttas such as the Sabba Sutta in Salayatanasamyutta, SN, which you're discussing. Let me just add a short recap mostly taken from an earlier post I wrote. (there's much more under ‘Sabba Sutta’ and ‘Ayatana’ in Useful Posts) Ayatana (bases, sense fields) ******* a) 6 internal bases 1. eye-base/sense (cakkhu pasada rupa = cakkhayatana etc) 2. ear-base 3. nose-base 4. tongue-base 5. body-sense base 6. mind-base/consciousness (manaayatana) (refers to all cittas) ...... b) 6 external bases 1. visible object (rupayatana etc) 2. sound 3. odour 4. taste 5. tactile object - cohesion, temperature, solidity 6. mind-object (dhammayatana)* ....... *Note: Dhammayatana (mind-objects) Includes: 1. All cetasikas 2. subtle rupas (sukhuma rupas) 3. nibbana ....... Note: Ayatanas refer ONLY to ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) and NOT to concepts. ================================================= So, Larry, in the classification above, cetana (kamma) is included in dhammayatana (mind-objects) and so is jivitindriya (life-force which is a cetasika) and all other cetasikas. Jivitindriya the rupa is a subtle rupa and is therefore also included in the same group. Eye consciousness is included in manaayatana (mind-base) here. Understanding the ayatanas is an understanding of the ‘all’, but not just by theory of course! But at least we can see there is NOT ‘more to reality than the internal and external sense bases.’ With regard to the terms you’re discussing TG and Howard, I wrote the following before as well: >Confusions arise from translated terms of dhamma, dhammarammana, mano, manayatana, dhammayatana etc . Furthemore, sometimes, dhammarammana refers to dhammayatana and we have to look at the context and commentary notes. ..... Note: dhamma can refer to paramattha dhammas only or to dhammarammana inc pannatti and has to be understood in context. Under ‘Salayatana’, only paramattha dhammas are being referred to as hown in the definitions above. ..... A rough guide to Bodhi and Thanissaro translations here: B.Bodhi:- ayatana -base mano (manayatana)- mind, mental dhamma (dhammayatana), dhammarammana- mental phenomenon, mental object, mind object B.Thanissaro:- mano (manayatana) - intellect dhamma (dhammayatana) - ideas ..... Under Salayatanasamyutta, we have looked at translations of the Sabba Sutta before. The Comy notes make it clear that the all (sabba) refers to everything knowable, the all of the sense bases (aayatanasabba), the 12 ayatana. ..... Note: intellect and ideas as used by Thanissaro Bhikkhu below, refer to manayatana and dhammayatana as classified above: i.e cittas, cetasikas, subtle rupas and nibbana. (I believe the notes he gives after the sutta (see link) are therefore incorrect). These are not easy aspects to comprehend, but I hope these notes may help clarify a little other discussions about sutta passages being discussed where there is some controversy about whether paramattha dhammas or pannatti are being referred to by translation terms, such as mind, mind objects, intellect or ideas. Of course any comments are welcome. For more details on ayatanas, see posts under ‘ayatana’ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts ***** Metta, Sarah ======= 40503 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi Andrew L, Your messages have all been fine and packed with deep reflections. Just don’t mind if I or anyone else here is slow to respond anytime. This is incredibly fast for me;-). --- Andrew Levin wrote: >…but it appears to me that since > citta and cetasika are two of the fundamental units described in > Abhidharma, the contemplation on consciousness most especially would > benefit from a thorough knowledges of consciousness and its associated > states. And in this case knowing the exact factor of energy that is > described in ACM o A seems better to me than knowing "I need to > cultivate energy" (although this happens to be contemplations on > dhammas, the same principle would apply to consciousness and the > nature of all its associated states). …. S: Yes, good points. By consciousness under cittanupassana is meant the citta and accompanying cetasikas. These also are all included in dhammanupassana, for example under the khandhas (aggregates). Viriya (energy) accompanies almost all of those cittas (not seeing consciousness, hearing etc and one or two more. So it is included with consciousness and dhammas. The same as you say for other associated states. It helps a lot to understand viriya as a mental state that is conditioned to arise with almost every citta regardless of whether one is flat on one’s back or jumping up and down, reading a Dhamma text or watching TV. No self involved. …. > Contemplation on the repulsive nature of the body, of contemplation of > the body in the body, is said to be able to lead one to the > realization of Truth (3rd Noble Truth), and the end of clinging is > described in another. Is this not too the deliverance of mind? > Doesn't that the Buddha said "Whoever practises these four foundations > of mindfulness [for XYZ periods of time] can experience [arahantship > or the state of non-return] say something about *supramundane* > awareness? Maybe it doesn't, if I'm not in the know, please tell me. … S: You’re correct, but this is the result of the development of satipatthana. The development of satipatthana is the understanding of the various dhammas which will eventually lead to the full realization of the 4 Noble Truths. As it develops, there is less doubt and less concern about when and how this will happen as I see it. …. > I see your view is more 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life'ish where mine is > 'Four Foundations of Mindfulness are life'ish. When mindfulness is > thoroughly established, reality after reality instantaneously can be > observed, so fast that you might say the person is being mindful of > all things going on in the body at once. …. S: ;-). I’d like to think my view is both Abhidhammaish and Satipatthanaish as there isn’t any distinction for me. You say ‘when mindfulness is thoroughly established’, but again I think you’re looking at the end result or the ariyan knowledge rather than the development now. Even so, only a Buddha has the kind of omniscient knowledge you might be referring to. Even arahants without any defilements remainng can only be aware of one reality appearing at a time and then not with every citta. Impossible, as panna (wisdom) can only arise with javana cittas rooted in wisdom. So there’s never going to be a mindfulness of ‘all things going on in the body at once’, but I’ll be glad to see any reference. …. > In fact this makes me wonder, can there not be two cittas arising at > the same time? Eg one for body-consciousness one for > hearing-consciousness? … S: No. You’ll find in CMA that processes of cittas follow each other by various conditions. Only ever one citta at a time. It may seem that we can hear and experience through the body sense at the same time, but it’s impossible. Also, after each series of cittas through the ear door or body door, there has to be at least one process of cittas through the mind door(usually many, many), before another sense door series arises. … >And where is consciousness of the different > sense doors located in the mind-body complex? …. S: Would you elaborate on your question please. Seeing consciousness (if that’s an example of what you’re referring to) depends on eye-base (a rupa in the eye)to experience visible object, but we cannot say the seeing consciousness itself is anywhere. Thinking consciousness depends on heart-base, but similarly is not located anywhere. … S:> > away and that it's quite possible for awareness to be aware of these > > states from time to time. > A:> Or all the time. This is possible, isn't it? … S: No, not even for an arahant as I mentioned before. For example, moments of seeing and hearing are only accompanied by the 7 universal cetasikas. They are vipaka cittas (result of kamma). There cannot be awareness with vipaka cittas. …. S:> > sense that they can be known. They can be the objects of awareness > when > > they arise and are seen as merely conditioned elements, not a person. > A:> Right but you missed the point. I was using that example to show that > this psycho-physical organism acted as a whole to guard the sense > doors. I am just not sure here how to reconcile the idea 'don't be > attached to concept of self' with 'Whoever practises these four > foundations of mindfulness'. Can you see? …. S: When we talk about ‘this psycho-physical organism acted as a whole’, it is a concept, an illusion. There never is a ‘whole’ except conventionally speaking. (The same applies when we speak about people and Gods as in another thread;-)). I see your point, but when it is said ‘whoever practises’, it is mere conventional usage. We have to read all the suttas in the light of anatta. Really, like the chariot, ‘whoever’ only consists of cittas, cetasikas and rupas conditioned in different combinations and ways. It is sati-sampajanna (sati and panna) which practises these four foundations of mindfulness’. Satipatthana Sutta sub-cmy: “ ‘Necessary in all Circumstances’ = Everywhere in the state of becoming, in every sluggish and unbalanced state of mind, it is desirable…….Here, contemplation takes place by means of wisdom that is assisted by mindfulness.” …. S:> > the time to be aware of anger. If it is hardness being experienced > as one > > types, it's not the time to be aware of feeling or attachment. > A:> Right, but if I'm walking down the streets and there's my entire body > made up of the four elements, I can try to be mindful of as much of > those four elements as possible, right? The different organs, the > interaction of material form with the outside world? The many > different types of bodily feeling that occur so close together in time > that it's almost all at once? …. S: This is thinking about concepts of elements, organs and so on. Most precious at such times is awareness of thinking – another conditioned dhamma (cittanupassana). The ideas or concepts cannot be known, but the thinking can. …. > Ehh I would hesitate to lose my mindfulness down to one or two nama or > rupa (in the conventional sense) when coming back indoors for study or > formal practise or work. …. S: Everything is lost at every moment. Mindfulness can only arise for an instant and then gone. Don’t cling to it or expect it or try to make it last!! As we’re comparing the way we both see practice, I’d say that I see such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the future as being a very big impediment to such practice. Keep posting your reflections (no need for apologies if any ‘mischief’ slips in – we’re all pretty understanding here of mixed mental states;-)). In addition to the other book suggestions, it would be helpful if you could purchase or download and bind copies of ‘Cetasikas’ and Nina’s ‘ADL’.They are really very helpful reference texts to have handy. Also her ‘Conditions’ and ‘Rupas’ (not published). My other suggestion would be to listen to the audio recordings of our discussions with A.Sujin recently in India and let me know how you find them. Scroll to the bottom of this page: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Metta, Sarah p.s I support Phil's concern when you use the other name tag and I think it's better avoided, but of course let us know anytime you're in trouble and we can help. ======= 40504 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 0:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention & Infections , Vibhanga. Dear Nina, As I said I was curious about what you wrote here (and perhaps I misunderstand you too, in which case I'd be glad for any clarification): --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > When we refer to wise attention, it is not the cetasika manasikara but > the > mind-door adverting consciousness that is followed by javana cittas, > kusala > cittas or akusala cittas. This is called javana patipada or controller > of > the javanas. Another citta called manasikara is the five sense-door > advertinng consciousness, the controller of the sense-door process. > Thus, > manasikara can refer to cetasika and to two cittas. … S: You seem to be saying that references to wise and unwise attention refer to mind-door adverting consciousness only rather than the manasikara which accompanies the kusala and akusala javana cittas. Whilst I realize manasikara itself can refer to the two cittas as you mention, when I look in the texts, when ‘yoniso’ and ‘ayoniso’ are used, it seems that it is the (wise and unwise) attention accompanying the javana cittas that are being referred to instead. I’ve looked in the Atthasalini, the Vibhanga and the Netti, as well as references in a couple of commentary notes (eg to the Sabbasava Sutta), and they all suggest to me that yoniso and ayoniso are not being used to refer to the mind-door adverting consciousness and it doesn’t seem to me that it is this citta which is being referred to as the condition for other wholesome states. The Atth. (p385)even says of kiriya cittas (of course inc mind-door adverting), that 'owing to the absence of moral and immoral causes of wise and unwise attention, it is said to be neither moral nor immoral.' I’d be glad if you’d give any further comments. Also, this is what we read in your ADL which I quoted previously and understand to be correct: “When the cittas of the sense-door process have fallen away the object is experienced through the mind-door. The mano-dvaravajjana-citta adverts to the object through the mind-door and is then followed by akusala cittas or kusala cittas. There is 'unwise attention' (ayoniso manasikara) to the object which is experienced if akusala cittas arise, and there is 'wise attention' (yoniso manasikara) to the object if kusala cittas arise. For example, when we see insects there may be dosa-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in aversion). Thus, there is ayoniso manasikara (unwise attention).” …. S: Here there seems no suggestion that yoniso and ayoniso are referring to any other manasikara other than that which accompanies the kusala and akusala cittas. (Also in ‘Cetasikas’ p 226). In the Netti (p170) it gives the lists of the ‘corrupting’ and ‘cleansing’ factors and these seem to refer to various mental factors too, inc yoniso and ayoniso manasikara. I also looked at the Vighanga transl definition p483 and I read it the same. Am I missing something? Grateful for any further clarification. Metta, Sarah ======= 40505 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 0:52am Subject: Re: Book recommendations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" wrote: > joop, do you have any more recommendations in line with swallowing the > river ganges? i own that one and have even thought of buying more > copies of it. > > thanks, > a.l. Andrew Buying more copies doesn't work Sit in (half) lotus, close your eyes, stop thinking and pay attention to your breath Metta Joop 40506 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 0:49am Subject: Hello : new member I found this group as I was browsing for information about paramis. I was born and raised in Burma. My family moved to America back in 91. Currently, I'm a graduate student at UC Berkeley in Electrical Engineering. I grew up with Theravada teachings so I do have some common knowledge. Unfortunately I didn't start meditating seriously until two summers ago despite my childhood exposure. For the past year, I also have been taking introductory Abhidhamma course at a Burmese monastery. I noticed this group is very technical and precise in the materials posted. Just hoping to learn and trade information from the discussions here. - Kel 40507 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 1:04am Subject: Re: Book recommendations < abhidhamma, "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidharma," > and begun to study it. I have much respect for anyone who can study Abhidhamma on their own and understand it. I found it quite dense to absorb everything. http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_m.htm I would say that is fairly good coverage of different traditions and approaches for your own practice. A few popular teachers from Burma are listed there also. I would recommend for more veteran meditators, http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf If possible I would recommend learning at a center. I found http://www.dhamma.org/ centers to be most convenient whenever I can't go to Burma. - Kel 40508 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Suravira: Problems in My Understanding: Sarah Hi TG, --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > Issue #1 Sarah: -- Yes I am saying that ‘Stream > Entry eliminates false views permanently ("for good") ‘. …. I know I didn’t respond to all your posts on this, but I think Nina responded to any points I missed. Please let me know if there’s anything outstanding. …. > Issue #2 Sarah: > Are you > saying that > it is wrong to suggest these clarifications are the Buddha’s teaching? > > TG: Yes, I think it is wrong to say so… …. S: I wouldn’t say (and haven’t said)that the Buddha taught the commentaries, but yes, I would say the content, like the Abhidhamma and ancient Pali commentaries, is in accordance with the Buddha’s Teachings and can therefore be considered as the ‘Buddha’s Word’. Pls see these past messages of mine on this topic: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29637 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35687 … > Once its being said that the Abhidhammamatthasangaha or Visuddhdimagga > or > Vimuttimagga are what the Buddha taught, I don't see how anyone can take > the > position that the Lotus Sutra, or Heart Sutra or Diamond Sutra are not > what the > Buddha taught. Where do you draw the line? … S: I draw the line at what has been accepted by the Theravada Councils. So I wouldn’t include the Vimuttimagga or the Mahayana Sutras, no matter how many gems they might contain if they were not in conformity with what we read in the Pali Tipitaka and commentaries;-). … > My guess would be that Buddhaghosa would be the first one to say that > only > the Sutta, Vinaya, and maybe Abhidhamma quotes in the Visuddhimagga are > the > Buddha's teachings. The rest is analysis. Pretty damn good analysis in > my view. …. S: In the introductory discourse in the Atthasalini, Buddhaghosa goes to lengths to show that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s teaching even though he only gave the outline to Sariputta. Also, all the suttas, including those given by or elaborated on by his disciples are all attributed to being ‘the word of the Buddha’ since he gave his approval for this. Even when it comes to the Kathavatthu, we read in the same discourse: “…the Buddha laid down the table of contents….In doing so he foresaw that two hundred and eighteen years after his death, Tissa, Moggali’s son, seated in the midst of one thousand bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathavatthu ….And Tissa, Moggali’s son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the Teacher. Hence the entire book became the word of the Buddha….” Also from Dhammapala’s comy to the Netti-ppakara.na’m, he writes that ‘any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Prinicipal Appeals to Authority is the criterion. And the ‘Guide-Treatise’ has. Like the Pe.takopadesa come down (to us) by way of the unimpeachable succession of teachers (see DA introduction).” > But probably not flawless. Even Buddhaghosa ends the Visuddhimagga by > suggesting that it probably contains a few errors. He knows or suspects > its not > flawless! He knows it has a lot of analysis. … S: I believe his work was based on the early commentaries and I don’t believe he takes any credit for any of it being his own ideas or analysis. He was a compiler and so it may contain a few errors as he suggests. The Dhamma is our teacher. Of course, it’s a matter for wisdom to really determne what the Dhamma really is. I’d like to sign off and leave you with a quote from I.B.Horner which I’ve given before but which pretty well expresses my take on the subject. As you said, our other discussion was far more important for understanding and practice, but this may help to explain my use of the ‘the Buddha taught…..’ when referring to paramattha dhammas or other commentary and Abhidhamma terminology which I believe is also referring to exactly what the Buddha taught in the Suttanta too. Metta, Sarah >Often in the suttas too, we read many references to the Buddha’s..... Miss Horner also wrote in her preface to the the same text, ‘Clarifier of Sweet Meaning: “The prime object of every Commentary is to make the meanings of the words and phrases in the canonical passages it is elucidating abudantly clear, definite, definitive even, ‘heuristic’ in E.Hardy’s words, and virtually beyond all doubt and argument. This is to preserve the Teaching of the Buddha as nearly as possible in the sense intended, and as conveyed by the succession of teachers, aacariyaparamparaa. Always there were detractors, always there were and still are ‘improvers’ ready with their own notions. Through enemies and friends alike deleterious change and deterioration in the word of the Buddha might intervene for an indefinite length of time. The ctys are the armour and protection against such an eventuality. Asmthey hold a unique position as preservers and interpreters of true dhamma, it is essential not only to understand them but to follow them carefully and adopt the meaning they ascribe to a word or phrase each time they comment on it. They are as “closed” now as is the Pali canon. No additions to their corpus or subtractions from it are to be contemplated, and no cty written in later days could be included in it.”< ===================== 40509 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 1:14:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I don't think we are arguing the same point but I'll try one last > volley. I said you know there is something, somewhere called life which > is not included in the sense bases the same way you know there is a > visible object, as a matter of faith or reason. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think they are similar. Visual content is my direct experience. Life force is not. Some infer it, but I do not. --------------------------------------------- You have said many> > times, as a phenomenologist, there is no such a phenomenon as a directly > verifiable visible object separate and distinct from consciousness. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I say they co-occur and are mutually dependent. From my perspective, 'object' means "object of consciousness". Visual object and experience of such (i.e., its experiential presence) are distinguishable but inseparable. Neither arises without the other. In any case, life force is not something I experience. (Perhaps if I were an arahant, it would be, but this I do not know.) --------------------------------------- The> > Buddha said there truely is such a phenomenon, but I don't thnk he said > it was directly verifiable. --------------------------------------- Howard: In the suttas the Buddha spoke of many things in a conventional manner. He spoke of persons for example. This doesn't necessarily imply ontological commitment. In any case, if something is not directly verifiable by a Buddha, how could he truly know of its existence? --------------------------------------- So, reason must be an acceptable means of> > knowledge. -------------------------------------- Howard: It can be a useful tool, but on its own it is not an adequate means of knowledge. In that regard, see what the Buddha said about it in the Kalama Sutta. In any case, from what we directly know, there is no inescapable deductive conclusion of the existence of life force. There are loads of good "reasoners" in the fields of biology and medicine, basically *all* of them, who do not draw such a conclusion. -------------------------------------- Given that we have to reason about sense object, why can't we> > reason about other rupa which are not incuded in the sense bases? I > could give you the list but I suspect you would reject most of them. How > about nutriment? Will that do? If not, I think we've reached an impass. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I certainly do accept logically valid (i.e., deductively inescapable) conclusions from directly verifiable premisses. I don't see any evidence of that here.So, perhaps it is an impass. [Again, this does not mean that I assert that there are no such things as life force and nutriment in more than the conventional senses. Perhaps there are. I just have no reason for believing so at present.] ------------------------------------- > > 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) 40510 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 8:24am Subject: Re: Hello : new member Hello Kelvin - Welcome to the DSG forum! As an electrical engineer you might find it easier to understand the citta vithi (process of consciousness) and the 24 modes of conditionality (paccaya). How do you view the Abhidhamma in the perspective of electrical engineering? Warm regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > > I found this group as I was browsing for information about > paramis. I was born and raised in Burma. My family moved to > America back in 91. Currently, I'm a graduate student at UC > Berkeley in Electrical Engineering. > 40511 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 8:58am Subject: Buddhadasa Bhikkhu Dear Howard - Exceptional Dhamma teachers are very good at explaining difficult concepts and theories. However, the real skill of great teachers, I think, is seen in their ability to clearly define the basics like sati and sampajanna. Below are Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's definitions of these two terms. Do you think he passed the test? Sati: "Sati (mindfulness, reflective awareness, recollection) is the quick awareness and recall of the things which must be recalled. It must be as quick as an arrow. We also can describe sati as a vehicle or transport mechanism of the fastest kind. This most rapid transport doesn't carry material things, it carries wisdom and knowledge. Sati delivers panna (wisdom) in time to meet our needs. Through the practice of mindfulness with breathing, sati is trained fully". Sampajanna: "The second dhamma is sampajanna. Sampajanna is wisdom as it meets up with and immediately confronts a problem, as it deals with and wipes out that problem -- this is wisdom-in-action. It is only that wisdom specifically related and applied to a particular situation or event. Nonetheless, you may have come across a variety of translations for 'sampajanna,' which can be rather confusing. We recommend that you remember it as 'wisdom-in-action'. Even better, learn the Pali word about which there is no doubt. The word 'wisdom' encompasses many meanings and understandings, we can't even begin to estimate its content. However, the word 'sampajanna' is far more limited in its meaning. It is exactly that wisdom directly needed for the problem that confronts us. Active wisdom isn't general, it is a matter of particulars". Buddha-Dhamma Buddhadasa Archives II. THE USE OF DHAMMA: YOUR PRACTICE OF DHAMMA (February 6, 1986) -------------------------------------------- Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 1/2/05 7:07:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepyawa@m... > writes: > > ------------------------------------- > How did you get to know > > > and love Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's teachings? > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Unfortunately only by reading three of his books. (I also have the > Suan Mokkh web site bookmarked.) > ===================== > With metta, > Howard 40512 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 4:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhadasa Bhikkhu Hi, Tep - In a message dated 1/3/05 11:59:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, tepyawa@m... writes: > Dear Howard - > > Exceptional Dhamma teachers are very good at explaining difficult > concepts and theories. However, the real skill of great teachers, I think, > is seen in their ability to clearly define the basics like sati and > sampajanna. Below are Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's definitions of these > two terms. Do you think he passed the test? --------------------------------- Howard: Well. I'm not so sure who the "heck" I'm supposed to be to be testing the likes of him! ;-) But in any case, I'l give my perspective on these definitions below. -------------------------------- > > Sati: > > "Sati (mindfulness, reflective awareness, recollection) is the quick > awareness and recall of the things which must be recalled. It must be > as quick as an arrow. We also can describe sati as a vehicle or > transport mechanism of the fastest kind. This most rapid transport > doesn't carry material things, it carries wisdom and knowledge. Sati > delivers panna (wisdom) in time to meet our needs. Through the > practice of mindfulness with breathing, sati is trained fully". > > Sampajanna: > > "The second dhamma is sampajanna. Sampajanna is wisdom as it > meets up with and immediately confronts a problem, as it deals with > and wipes out that problem -- this is wisdom-in-action. It is only that > wisdom specifically related and applied to a particular situation or > event. Nonetheless, you may have come across a variety of > translations for 'sampajanna,' which can be rather confusing. We > recommend that you remember it as 'wisdom-in-action'. Even better, > learn the Pali word about which there is no doubt. The word 'wisdom' > encompasses many meanings and understandings, we can't even > begin to estimate its content. However, the word 'sampajanna' is far > more limited in its meaning. It is exactly that wisdom directly needed for > the problem that confronts us. Active wisdom isn't general, it is a matter > of particulars". > ======================== As I see it, the 2nd definition is pretty much okay, but I have some problems with the first. First of all, sati need not "carry wisdom". It is one requisite condition for the (eventual) arising of wisdom. I do not see sati as a "delivery agent". Now, as to exactly what sati is I'm not sure. What I *think* it may be is the recalling or keeping in mind to maintain attention to whatever is arising in the moment. It performs a monitoring function, as I see it. When that remembering to attend is strong, then, subject to other conditions, attention also will be strong, and this may lead to arising of clear comprehension. 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) 40513 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 10:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi Steve and Andrew L, What a coincidence. Just today I discussed with Lodewijk the Fire Sutta! It is in Wheel 318/321. Any of you folks know how to get to wheel on line? It is wonderful. I read the Thai Co. also. It states that sati is most important, valuable in all circumstances. It is like the seasoning salt. Looking at the Ch on the bojjhangas, I found that I should make a study of it. I have a special sutta notebook. I like to discuss this chapter with you, Andrew. The subject is deep, not easy to understand, I find. (S V. 94) Restraint and Hindrances: when one intently listens to the Dhamma, considers it, there are no hindrances and the seven limbs of wisdom by cultivation go to fulfilment. We see here the value of listening and study. I have the PTS but would like to know whether there is a metta edition on line. op 02-01-2005 23:56 schreef seisen_au op seisen_@h...: > Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga, Bojjhangasamyutta, Fire Sutta > (Aggisuttam), p.1605 in Bhikkhu Bodhis translation. 40514 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 11:52am Subject: Re: Buddhadasa Bhikkhu Hi, Howard - I am sorry for asking you to evaluate Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's teaching ability. The U.S. consumers' habit of evaluating everything and passing judgement to everybody (including their own parents and teachers) might be a reason behind this behavior of mine. ;-)) There are several ways to define sati. Your definition is pretty good and it is concise too. The following is a very good explanation of sati, I like it almost as much as the one in DN 22. "Sati is a term in Pali (the language of the Buddhist scriptures) which can be translated as mindfulness, non-forgetfulness or awareness. Sati is a mental factor which accompanies each wholesome moment of consciousness. There are different kinds and degrees of sati. When we are generous there is sati which is non-forgetful of generosity. When we abstain from killing or other unwholesome actions there is sati which prevents us from unwholesomeness. There is sati with the development of calm (tranquil meditation) and it is mindful of the meditation subject. Sati in the development of insight or right understanding of realities has a different object: it is mindful or non- forgetful of a nama or rupa which appears now. At that moment there is no notion of a "self" or something which exists and can stay. We cannot induce sati whenever we want it. Listening to the Dhamma and considering realities which appear can condition the arising of sati". [Understanding Reality by Nina van Gorkom] Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep - > > As I see it, the 2nd definition is pretty much okay, but I have some > problems with the first. First of all, sati need not "carry wisdom". It is one > requisite condition for the (eventual) arising of wisdom. I do not see sati as > a "delivery agent". Now, as to exactly what sati is I'm not sure. What I > *think* it may be is the recalling or keeping in mind to maintain attention to > whatever is arising in the moment. It performs a monitoring function, as I see > it. When that remembering to attend is strong, then, subject to other > conditions, attention also will be strong, and this may lead to arising of clear > comprehension. > > With metta, > Howard > 40515 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 11:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention Vibhanga. Dear Sarah, op 03-01-2005 09:49 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: S: You seem to be saying that references to wise and unwise attention > refer to mind-door adverting consciousness only rather than the manasikara > which accompanies the kusala and akusala javana cittas. N: I shall check again tetx you gave me, thank you. I recently heard on MP3: manodvaaravajjanacitta is kiriyacitta but it is the means (the way: thaang) for the arising of kusala citta or akusala citta, which are conditioned by accumulations. We should consider the whole lot, javanas included as yoniso or ayonoso, they are so fast anyway. I do not think so much of one cetasika in this context. This cetasika has the task to drive citta and cetasikas to the object. I am thinking more of: controller of the javanas. I was very careful to evade difficulties when I wrote in ADL: < There is 'unwise attention' (ayoniso manasikara) to the object which is experienced if akusala cittas arise, and there is 'wise attention' (yoniso manasikara) to the object if kusala cittas arise.> So, I thought of the whole lot, and I was careful not to limit the yoniso to one citta, the mind-door adverting-consciousness, only. S: I’ve looked in the Atthasalini, the Vibhanga and the Netti, as well as > references in a couple of commentary notes (eg to the Sabbasava Sutta), > and they all suggest to me that yoniso and ayoniso are not being used to > refer to the mind-door adverting consciousness... N: Where do i find the Sabbasavasutta, I could then find the Co. Perhaps also T.A.? and the Dispeller? Where in the Book of Analysis? Thank you, Nina. 40516 From: Larry Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 1:11pm Subject: Re: The All & Nibbana Hi Sarah and Howard, Sarah, thanks for the extra info on ayatanas. As you know I was arguing that no rupa is truly an object of consciousness in the sense of actually arising in the mind door. However, that is my own peculiarity and not abhidhamma. I'm a little uneasy about including nibbana in the ayatanas. For one thing it seems a little awkward to abandon it as in the Abandonment Sutta. Perhaps it would make more sense to say the ayatanas group is merely another way to understand the khandhas, particularly as a vehicle for satipatthana. Again, a personal view. Concept as a category is a little problematical. I would prefer to limit it to views. I think it could be argued that it is impossible to know rupa except as a concept. The sensation of hardness is body consciousness, not rupa. Rupa isn't an experience. At least that's how I understand the nama/rupa distinction. Howard, I don't really have a counter argument, just a couple of questions. How do you know there is an eye? Does your eye cease to exist when there is no eye consciousness? Larry 40517 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 8:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 4:14:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard, I don't really have a counter argument, just a couple of > questions. How do you know there is an eye? Does your eye cease to > exist when there is no eye consciousness? > > ===================== I understand 'eye' in a non-organic and non-material-substance sense. (I don't even like the sound of "material substance"! ;-) I understand 'eye' to refer to the active physical capacity to see. Under certain circumstances such as those we conventionally describe as "being blinded" or "going blind" or "having one's eye poked out" or "suffering visual nerve damage", conditions are such that there is not the physical capacity to see - for the moment, or for a long time. Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is unarisen. 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) 40518 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 2:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > Your messages have all been fine and packed with deep reflections. Just > don't mind if I or anyone else here is slow to respond anytime. This is > incredibly fast for me;-). Deep reflections? I dont think so. Maybe the questions are just important, but I wouldnt say deep. > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > >…but it appears to me that since > > citta and cetasika are two of the fundamental units described in > > Abhidharma, the contemplation on consciousness most especially would > > benefit from a thorough knowledges of consciousness and its associated > > states. And in this case knowing the exact factor of energy that is > > described in ACM o A seems better to me than knowing "I need to > > cultivate energy" (although this happens to be contemplations on > > dhammas, the same principle would apply to consciousness and the > > nature of all its associated states). > …. > S: Yes, good points. By consciousness under cittanupassana is meant the > citta and accompanying cetasikas. These also are all included in > dhammanupassana, for example under the khandhas (aggregates). Viriya > (energy) accompanies almost all of those cittas (not seeing consciousness, > hearing etc and one or two more. So it is included with consciousness and > dhammas. The same as you say for other associated states. It helps a lot > to understand viriya as a mental state that is conditioned to arise with > almost every citta regardless of whether one is flat on one's back or > jumping up and down, reading a Dhamma text or watching TV. No self > involved. > …. Well it's just more precise. What I'm looking to do here is have an understanding not only of what is going on in terms of ultimate realities, but knowing what needs to be done. Like I said, energy is one of the seven factors of enlightenment, now if I am outside doing a mindful walk, and I notice energy in my breathing, I am not sure whether this energy has to be maintained, increased, or what have you, in pursuit of the supramundane paths. Maybe it does, or maybe it is not the time and place for that factor to be in. Ultimately, going beyond the concept 'energy' and knowing the true nature of what is referenced by that word, seems valuable to me in my pursuit of enlightenment. The same applies for all the other cittas and cetasikas, and probably for matter as well, but I am still only re-reading chapter 1 in CMA, so I am not there yet. > > Contemplation on the repulsive nature of the body, of contemplation of > > the body in the body, is said to be able to lead one to the > > realization of Truth (3rd Noble Truth), and the end of clinging is > > described in another. Is this not too the deliverance of mind? > > Doesn't that the Buddha said "Whoever practises these four foundations > > of mindfulness [for XYZ periods of time] can experience [arahantship > > or the state of non-return] say something about *supramundane* > > awareness? Maybe it doesn't, if I'm not in the know, please tell me. > … > S: You're correct, but this is the result of the development of > satipatthana. The development of satipatthana is the understanding of the > various dhammas which will eventually lead to the full realization of the > 4 Noble Truths. As it develops, there is less doubt and less concern about > when and how this will happen as I see it. > …. > > I see your view is more 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life'ish where mine is > > 'Four Foundations of Mindfulness are life'ish. When mindfulness is > > thoroughly established, reality after reality instantaneously can be > > observed, so fast that you might say the person is being mindful of > > all things going on in the body at once. > …. > S: ;-). I'd like to think my view is both Abhidhammaish and > Satipatthanaish as there isn't any distinction for me. > > You say `when mindfulness is thoroughly established', but again I think > you're looking at the end result or the ariyan knowledge rather than the > development now. Even so, only a Buddha has the kind of omniscient > knowledge you might be referring to. Even arahants without any defilements > remainng can only be aware of one reality appearing at a time and then not > with every citta. Impossible, as panna (wisdom) can only arise with javana > cittas rooted in wisdom. So there's never going to be a mindfulness of > `all things going on in the body at once', but I'll be glad to see any > reference. Well, let's try to sort these out. You are saying "one citta can arise at a time." How can we reconcile this with walks that I have taken being mindful of the breath, feelings, and objects of a few sense doors almost concurrently, to the extent that /numerous/ devas appeared overhead streaming above me (more about this in a min.) Would you say that I was just being aware of one bit of consciousness for its split-second duration and then move on to another, to produce the illusion of continuity? It was this fast, it seemed like I was mindful of numerous feelings of pleasure, pain, or neut in my body at different times, and of what I was hearing and seeing at a split-second rate, again, seemingly like I am mindful of it all at once. So I know since this /has/ been acheived by me, it again /can/ be acheived by me, especially if it /needs/ to be acheived by me. So I still do not have a great understanding of consciousness. There was a time when I was getting myself acquianted with the Buddhist path, and I would practise formal sitting meditation at home, and be driving on the streets, I could be mindful of the hindrances that were present, as well as citta(s). Now, I do not feel I have this mindfulness. It has showed up on rare occasion but mostly I think I need a method to create more mindfulness (I have been hospitalized since having that clear awareness... hospitalizations always seem to kill what I have going for me), perhaps I could read an article someone pointed out to me before I move on with my practise. Anyhow, is it that you propose that only one consciousness can exist at a time, and that it alternates rapidly between the different sense doors, creating an illusion of continuity? Well this is sort of what I asked already but even if that's the case, I see some difference in our approach: I am trying to be mindful of every reality as it presents itself to me to the extent of knowing every possible nama or rupa that can be known at a given time, even so it looks like, I am walking, knowing all my bodily feelings, or knowing all the four elements in my mind-body complex. And I would practise each of the foundations for some time, dependent on how results come about. The Abhidhamma approach seems to to be mindful of only a bit here and a bit there-- nothing like the uninterrupted mindfulness that I have as the ideal of my practise. If you were asking for reference, all I can give you is my word. (About the devas, sometimes when I take practise walks I am especially mindful of body in the body or feelings in feelings or both, that is, thoroughly knowing my posture and its minor changes, knowing my breathing (though not knowing how/if it is taking me to the insight knowledges I need), and thoroughly knowing bodily feelings, sometimes mental feelings as they arise. And I try to guard the sense doors, too. So I have read, that the Buddha has told devas, to protect humans who live a religious life. Well, it has been said in many publications that the devas protect one who practises metta in all postures, when it practised boundlessly; this is not such a far cry from that, only I wish I had so much metta to guarantee a good rebirth; but you can be sure that at least a deva or two shine up overhead when I take these mindful walks, usually in the form of either a line streaking through the sky, either even or uneven (like a lightning strike), or as a mass of singular-color matter with static shifting and changing. So I walk out of the park of my town knowing that here I am, a kid in Floral Park, little town in suburban New York, and I know, that there is a heavenly realm, that the Buddha guided people towards, I can see it, but this is not my goal. Although I would like to work on that, that's another post. So I came home that first day of practising *extreme* mindful walks, and had a couple books on basic Buddhist meditations, because my vipassana practise hit a brick wall some months before that, and I was practising loving-kindness, trying to really earn the overlooking I get from the devas, and trying to live up to that 'religious life' instead of being a kid on the computer who's interested in Buddhism.. I just felt such gratitude for both the Buddha and these beings and well this is why I (will) say, when people ask me, oh if your spiritual practise gives you some solace, or if you can find some serenity in religion, I will say (didn't think of it till not too long ago) no, but I have found truth, in the Buddha's teachings. And I can infer a lot, too. But I disgress a large paragraph away. > …. > > In fact this makes me wonder, can there not be two cittas arising at > > the same time? Eg one for body-consciousness one for > > hearing-consciousness? > … > S: No. You'll find in CMA that processes of cittas follow each other by > various conditions. Only ever one citta at a time. It may seem that we can > hear and experience through the body sense at the same time, but it's > impossible. Also, after each series of cittas through the ear door or body > door, there has to be at least one process of cittas through the mind > door(usually many, many), before another sense door series arises. > … > >And where is consciousness of the different > > sense doors located in the mind-body complex? > …. > S: Would you elaborate on your question please. Seeing consciousness (if > that's an example of what you're referring to) depends on eye-base (a rupa > in the eye)to experience visible object, but we cannot say the seeing > consciousness itself is anywhere. Thinking consciousness depends on > heart-base, but similarly is not located anywhere. Where is body-consciousness located? If I feel the wind on my body, that is vedana, but I don't know where that cetasika is physically located - I mean it is an absolute reality, right? It's got to be somewhere either in my leg, or more likely in my head making it feel like it's in my leg. I am unable to see the consciousness of it. > … > S:> > away and that it's quite possible for awareness to be aware of these > > > states from time to time. > > > A:> Or all the time. This is possible, isn't it? > … > S: No, not even for an arahant as I mentioned before. For example, moments > of seeing and hearing are only accompanied by the 7 universal cetasikas. > They are vipaka cittas (result of kamma). There cannot be awareness with > vipaka cittas. Seeing consciousness and hearing consciousness are only the result of kamma, huh? That is kind of a new twist on things for me. It's hard for me to accept that if I idle chatter on #buddhism/EFnet, that is going to change my hearing of the car sounds, horns honking, people talking as I pass the gas station.. etc. I don't see how it's possible, but I won't negate its possibility outright. [snipped] > A:> Right but you missed the point. I was using that example to show that > > this psycho-physical organism acted as a whole to guard the sense > > doors. I am just not sure here how to reconcile the idea 'don't be > > attached to concept of self' with 'Whoever practises these four > > foundations of mindfulness'. Can you see? > …. > S: When we talk about `this psycho-physical organism acted as a whole', it > is a concept, an illusion. There never is a `whole' except conventionally > speaking. (The same applies when we speak about people and Gods as in > another thread;-)). > > I see your point, but when it is said `whoever practises', it is mere > conventional usage. We have to read all the suttas in the light of anatta. > Really, like the chariot, `whoever' only consists of cittas, cetasikas and > rupas conditioned in different combinations and ways. It is > sati-sampajanna (sati and panna) which practises these four > foundations of mindfulness'. > Right, I mean but this is what we're trying to do though. The assurance of attainment can get someone's mental factors in whatever fashion to begin practising to be contemplating all four sections (body, feelings, consciousness, dhammas), and ultimately we are going to get down to the reality, through mindfulness or contemplation, that there is no person or being, that this is just this, that is just that. Ultimate realities, the chariot, like you said. But to me it seems we can do this with idea of self to get to the point where self-view is eliminated. (This does work, with the contemplations outlined in the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, that we still go through the four stages of enlightenment, no matter which contemplation(s) we choose?) The driver factor of the chariot combined with the rope factor of the chariot driving the entire thing and instituting this practise, whihc, I guess may well involve a lot of components coming up that are dependent on causes and conditions. Nonetheless, I am unable to let go of my vision of a person practising these all because I have felt gratitude for the Buddha who I know existed many years ago, giving the teachings, that result in enlightenment, and felt, while practising, that I could acheive enlightenment when I eventually 'get it together' and keep practising. > Satipatthana Sutta sub-cmy: > > " `Necessary in all Circumstances' = Everywhere in the state of becoming, > in every sluggish and unbalanced state of mind, it is desirable…….Here, > contemplation takes place by means of wisdom that is assisted by > mindfulness." > …. I can tell you that I have felt mindfulness come up and encompass large parts of my body sitting in bed doing breathing meditations, and I have been able to walk down the streets and be increase my mindfulness to a reasonably desirable degree. If you were to tell me sati is dependent on this and that, and taht what I state is impossible, I would disagree, and I would even say we can actively cultivate sati through meditation, as I learned through Bhante Henepola Gunaratana's best-selling meditation manual "Mindfulness In Plain English" and now even come to think of it, two other books I have made use of, Thich Nhat Hanh's "The Miracle of Mindfulness" and Matthew Flickstein's "Swallowing the River Ganges." The mindful awareness seems not to last whole days from these latter methods but it is very strong, and it seems to encompass a good deal of not just 'myself,' but of other things in the room-- just the existence of awareness. Strange, huh? But it happened. > S:> > the time to be aware of anger. If it is hardness being experienced > > as one > > > types, it's not the time to be aware of feeling or attachment. > > > A:> Right, but if I'm walking down the streets and there's my entire body > > made up of the four elements, I can try to be mindful of as much of > > those four elements as possible, right? The different organs, the > > interaction of material form with the outside world? The many > > different types of bodily feeling that occur so close together in time > > that it's almost all at once? > …. > S: This is thinking about concepts of elements, organs and so on. Most > precious at such times is awareness of thinking – another conditioned > dhamma (cittanupassana). The ideas or concepts cannot be known, but the > thinking can. Thinking sure can be known. But can't we also make use of that great power of thinking to plan out how we are going to know even further realities beyond thinking? I think so. This is what I'm saying here, please reconsider the text. > …. > > Ehh I would hesitate to lose my mindfulness down to one or two nama or > > rupa (in the conventional sense) when coming back indoors for study or > > formal practise or work. > …. > S: Everything is lost at every moment. Mindfulness can only arise for an > instant and then gone. Don't cling to it or expect it or try to make it > last!! As we're comparing the way we both see practice, I'd say that I see > such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the future as > being a very big impediment to such practice. > How? It's the Four Foundations of Mindfulness > Keep posting your reflections (no need for apologies if any `mischief' > slips in – we're all pretty understanding here of mixed mental states;-)). > > In addition to the other book suggestions, it would be helpful if you > could purchase or download and bind copies of `Cetasikas' and Nina's > `ADL'.They are really very helpful reference texts to have handy. Also her > `Conditions' and `Rupas' (not published). Will-do. This is an area I want to make quick progress in, but my enthusiasm has to be toned down a degree to make sure I can understand what I'm going through. Books & meditation, some of each each day I can. > > My other suggestion would be to listen to the audio recordings of our > discussions with A.Sujin recently in India and let me know how you find > them. Scroll to the bottom of this page: > http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s I support Phil's concern when you use the other name tag and I think > it's better avoided, but of course let us know anytime you're in trouble > and we can help. > ======= I don't think I've used another username on this Y! Group at all. If there is some option that I can change to display only my other nick, thats fine. It was just how some people on and IRC chan I frequent greeted me and so I used it a couple days later to sign up for here. peace be, a.l. 40519 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 3:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi Howard, Are you saying you deduce there is an eye because there is eye consciousness? Here is something to compare your phenomenologicalness to: http://www.geocities.com/brianperkins77/165douglasharding.htm Larry ---------------------------- H: "I understand 'eye' in a non-organic and non-material-substance sense. (I don't even like the sound of "material substance"! ;-) I understand 'eye' to refer to the active physical capacity to see. Under certain circumstances such as those we conventionally describe as "being blinded" or "going blind" or "having one's eye poked out" or "suffering visual nerve damage", conditions are such that there is not the physical capacity to see - for the moment, or for a long time. Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is unarisen." 40520 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 10:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi again, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 4:48:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > I understand 'eye' in a non-organic and non-material-substance sense. > (I don't even like the sound of "material substance"! ;-) I understand 'eye' > > to refer to the active physical capacity to see. Under certain circumstances > > such as those we conventionally describe as "being blinded" or "going blind" > or > "having one's eye poked out" or "suffering visual nerve damage", conditions > are such that there is not the physical capacity to see - for the moment, or > for > a long time. Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is unarisen. > > ======================== I have given a bit more thought to what I wrote (above) about "eye" and also to the matter of "life force". What I said about "eye" being the (active) physical capacity to see still sits fine with me, but I must say that I am more inclined to think of that as concept than dhamma. I believe that when one uses the term 'eye' or one speaks of the "physical capacity to see", one is just using a name for a host of (typically unspecified) actual conditions, physical for the most part, that are requisite for seeing to occur. I do not think that "eye" is a paramattha dhamma. (Yes, I know that this is contrary to the Abhidhammic perspective.) And I think that "life force" is much the same sort of thing. There are a host of conditions, largely physical, that are required for the continued functioning of the physical organism, and thinking of them as a unity, we use the term 'life force'. What we are dealing with are "capacities", and capacities are merely cognitive abstractions. There is a tendency, I think, for Abhidhamma to take some terms used conventionally by the Buddha in the suttas and to reify them, turning them into paramattha dhammas. (Yes, I know, folks, Abhidhammic blasphemy! May the non-existent God of the Seven Tome Scripture have mercy on my non-existent Buddhist soul!) With paramatthic 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) 40521 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 10:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 6:21:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Are you saying you deduce there is an eye because there is eye > consciousness? > > =================== That is a good and perceptive (no pun intended) question. Please see my follow-up post, and you will see that the question no longer applies. But yes, you are right. If 'eye' were an unobservable phenomenon, a paramattha dhamma that is not observed, then knowing it's existence would have to be a matter of inference. 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) 40522 From: seisen_au Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 3:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi Nina There doesnt seem to be any english translations of the Samyutta on the metta site. The only english translations i could find from the Bojjhangasamyutta are these from accesstoinsight> Himavanta Sutta (SN XLVI.1) http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-001.html Gilana Sutta (SN XLVI.14) http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-014a.html Gilana Sutta (SN XLVI.16) http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-016.html Ahara Sutta (SN XLVI.51) http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-014a.html Steve --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: We see here the value of listening and study. > I have the PTS but would like to know whether there is a metta edition on > line. > op 02-01-2005 23:56 schreef seisen_au op seisen_@h...: > > > Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga, Bojjhangasamyutta, Fire Sutta > > (Aggisuttam), p.1605 in Bhikkhu Bodhis translation. 40523 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 5:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Howard: "What we are dealing with are "capacities", and capacities are merely cognitive abstractions. There is a tendency, I think, for Abhidhamma to take some terms used conventionally by the Buddha in the suttas and to reify them, turning them into paramattha dhammas. (Yes, I know, folks, Abhidhammic blasphemy! May the non-existent God of the Seven Tome Scripture have mercy on my non-existent Buddhist soul!)" Hi Howard, In the Sabba Sutta how do we know which words are referring to ultimate realties and which are "merely cognitive abstractions"? Larry 40524 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 1:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 8:11:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > In the Sabba Sutta how do we know which words are referring to ultimate > realties and which are "merely cognitive abstractions"? > > Larry > ======================= I don't know. I guess we just have to take our best shot! ;-)) 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) 40525 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 7:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi Howard, This gave me a good laugh but I can't let you off that easily (if you're game). First, maybe we should clarify the foundation. What difference does it make? When you say the eye isn't a paramattha dhamma does that mean it isn't to be abandoned or that it isn't included in the "all"? Is it an object of satipatthana? My answer to these questions is that we have to admit concept and reason into the path. Larry ----------------------------- L: In the Sabba Sutta how do we know which words are referring to ultimate realties and which are "merely cognitive abstractions"? ======================= H: I don't know. I guess we just have to take our best shot! ;-)) 40526 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 3:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/3/05 10:41:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > This gave me a good laugh but I can't let you off that easily (if you're > game). First, maybe we should clarify the foundation. What difference > does it make? When you say the eye isn't a paramattha dhamma does that > mean it isn't to be abandoned or that it isn't included in the "all"? Is > it an object of satipatthana? -------------------------------------------- Howard: This is how I see it, Larry. There are two meanings to 'eye'. One of these is the usual physical eye organ. This is concept. It also, is not what is meant in the expression "eye and forms". The second meaning, the one applicable in "eye and forms" I understand as follows: There are a bunch of physical conditions that are requisite for seeing. The collection of all of these are what is meant by "eye". It is these conditions that, together, constitute the basis, along with visual object, for the arising of visual consciousness; i.e., for seeing. As far as I am concerned, it is that collection of conditions that is what I mean by 'eye', and that means that this sense of 'eye', the physical basis for seeing, is concept and not paramattha dhamma. Each of the conditions subsumed by 'eye', however, is a paramathha dhamma and can be discerned with insight. The "eye" itself cannot, for it is merely concept. (Again, I know this is not the Abidhamma perspective.) As far as whether eye can be abandoned, I would say "Literally no, but figuratively yes." Nothing that is concept-only can literally be abandoned, for there literally are no such things. However, that doesn't stop us from being attached to these nonexistent things, for craving them, or hating them, or chasing after them. And they can be figuratively abandoned by uprooting that attachment, destroying that craving and that aversion, and ceasing that chase. ------------------------------------------ > > My answer to these questions is that we have to admit concept and reason > into the path. > > 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) 40527 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 8:12pm Subject: Re: Hello : new member Tep: As an electrical engineer you might find it easier to understand the citta vithi (process of consciousness) and the 24 modes of conditionality (paccaya). How do you view the Abhidhamma in the perspective of electrical engineering? Kel: I think Abhidhamma is very precise, systematic and scientific. It's amazing the detailed analysis given there. I admire the concise mind required to come up with it. I can also consolidate modern scientific knowledge to the world as described in Abhidhamma. Everything from kalapas to black holes I can at least find models that make sense for me. The model for citta vithi is pretty clear to me. That's one of the easier parts imho especially if you accept the different categories for each vithi. Grasping the 89/121 consciousness and corresponding cetasikas is pretty hard, trying to remember them by heart is almost impossible for me. So I use a cheat sheet :) I like how it all coming together in paccayas. hetupaccayois pretty basic since it just deals with 3 kusala and 3 akusala roots as causes and everything else is effects except for neutral consciousness and matter caused by that consciousness. Anantarapaccayo relates directly with vithi and how each momentary consciousness is effect of preceeding one and cause for the following one. In short, it very much appeals to my engineering mind :) - kel 40528 From: Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana In a message dated 1/3/2005 8:30:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: This is how I see it, Larry. There are two meanings to 'eye'. One of these is the usual physical eye organ. This is concept. It also, is not what is meant in the expression "eye and forms". The second meaning, the one applicable in "eye and forms" I understand as follows: There are a bunch of physical conditions that are requisite for seeing. The collection of all of these are what is meant by "eye". It is these conditions that, together, constitute the basis, along with visual object, for the arising of visual consciousness; i.e., for seeing. As far as I am concerned, it is that collection of conditions that is what I mean by 'eye', and that means that this sense of 'eye', the physical basis for seeing, is concept and not paramattha dhamma. Each of the conditions subsumed by 'eye', however, is a paramathha dhamma and can be discerned with insight. The "eye" itself cannot, for it is merely concept. (Again, I know this is not the Abidhamma perspective.) Hi Howard and Larry Howard...if the 'eye' is everything needed for vision to take place, wouldn't that ultimately entail that pretty much everything in the universe (other than concepts perhaps) is 'eye'? TG 40529 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 9:37pm Subject: Some sutta supports ( was Re: Meditation) Dear Nina and Mike - N: > Thank you for your posts to Mike and me. For now, I keep them until later. > Yes, very helpful if you write more. I shall look into the Path of > Discrimination. I wrote about this subject what I understood intellectually, > understanding based on listening, study and considering, but the direct > realization of the truth is quite a different matter. It cannot occur > without the right conditions. T: So far I have not found a sutta support for the 'naamaruupapariccheda', but I have found several suttas that explain the direct realization of the truth that the subba dhamma, being experienced at the present, is 'not mine, not I, not my self ' . Please allow me to show just two sutta excerpts for this time. The first one states that one must contemplate cessation (nirodhanupassana) of the sensing faculties (salayatana) before seeing the truth. The second sutta excerpt shows that in order to "see and know things the way they really are", one would contemplate the inconstant characteristic (aniccanupassana) of the internal and external sense bases. (I) ---- ` Friend, Channa, seeing what in the eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness do you realize, eye, eye- consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self? ' `Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, eye, eye- consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self '. MAJJHIMA NIKAAYA III, (5. 2) Channovaadasutta.m 144. Advice to Venerable Channa. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/144-channovada-e.htm (II) ---- "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things as they actually are present. And what does he discern as it actually is present? "He discerns, as it actually is present, that 'The eye is inconstant'... 'Forms are inconstant'... 'Eye-consciousness is inconstant'... 'Eye-contact is inconstant'... 'Whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact, experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain, that too is inconstant.' ... ... " Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.99, Samadhi Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html Kindest regards, Tep =============== 40530 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 10:36pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 91 - Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death (c) 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.5 Volition(cetanaa]in the Cycle of Birth and Death contd] ***** When there is citta which sees, there is only that citta, there cannot be any other citta at the same time. At that moment our life is seeing. Seeing does not last, it falls away again. When there is citta which hears there is only that citta and our life is hearing. This citta also falls away and is succeeded by the next one. In this life we see and hear pleasant and unpleasant objects, we have pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. We are full of attachment, aversion and ignorance. Sometimes we perform wholesome deeds: we are generous, we abstain from killing and we develop right understanding. Our life actually consists of one moment of citta which experiences an object. The citta of a moment ago has fallen away completely, but right now another citta has arisen and this falls away again. When we understand that there are conditions for each citta to be succeeded by the next one, we will also understand that the last citta of this life, the dying-consciousness, will be succeeded by a next citta which is the rebirth-consciousness of the next life. So long as we are in the cycle of birth and death there are conditions for citta to arise and to be succeeded by a next one. ***** [Ch.5 Volition in the cycle of Birth and Death to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 40531 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 11:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] MIke- Wise attention Vibhanga. Dear Nina, Thank you for your comments. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: . > N: I shall check again tetx you gave me, thank you. > > I recently heard on MP3: manodvaaravajjanacitta is kiriyacitta but it is > the > means (the way: thaang) for the arising of kusala citta or akusala > citta, > which are conditioned by accumulations. …. S: Yes. Without this citta, no kusala or akusala to follow … > We should consider the whole lot, javanas included as yoniso or ayonoso, > they are so fast anyway. I do not think so much of one cetasika in this > context. This cetasika has the task to drive citta and cetasikas to the > object. I am thinking more of: controller of the javanas. > I was very careful to evade difficulties when I wrote in ADL < There is > 'unwise attention' (ayoniso manasikara) to the object which is > experienced > if akusala cittas arise, and there is 'wise attention' (yoniso > manasikara) > to the object if kusala cittas arise.> <…> …. S: It seems fine there. But I understood in yr other message you were just referring to mind-door adverting consciousness. Perhaps I misunderstood you. When I’ve asked KS about it, she’s stressed ‘it’s just one citta’ when ppl give it or determining consciousness a lot of undue emphasis in terms of determining or controlling javana cittas etc rather than looking at accumulations and nat decisive support condition. Maybe a ‘package’ of cittas and cetasikas as you just suggested. …. > N: Where do i find the Sabbasavasutta, I could then find the Co. Perhaps > also T.A.? and the Dispeller? Where in the Book of Analysis? > Thank you, …. S:Vibhanga 936 on ayoniso manasikara (Bk of Analysis p483)”in impermanence there is permanence” etc T.A. (comy to Abhidammattha Sangaha)p101, Misc Topics Difficult. I didn’t make notes of refs. This is from an old post of mine on the sutta. I think you now have BB’s translation: S:>I'm reading the Sabbasava Sutta (MN2) again as I type. My quotes are from B.Bodhi's translation. (MA refers to the commentary). It discusses in detail how wise attention (yoniso manasikara) attends to what is skilful and understands what is 'unfit for attention'. In other words, comprehends what is kusala and akusala. n36 'MA makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. The distinction conisists, rather, in the mode of attention. That mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed.' In other words it is not the object of citta that matters (however akusala or unpleasant) but the citta and cetasikas (consciousness and mental factors) cognizing it that counts. The four Noble Truths are treated as a 'subject of contemplation and insight'. n41 'MA says that up to the attainment of the path of stream-entry, attention denotes insight (vipassana), but at the moment of the path it denotes path-knowledge. Insight directly apprehends the first two truths, since its objective range is the mental and material phenomena comprised under dukkha and its origin; it can know the latter two truths only inferentially. Path-knowledge makes the truth of cessation its object, apprehending it by penetration as object (arammana). .'..When he attends wisely in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: personality view, doubt, and adherence to rules and observances. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by seeing.' (n35 'the word 'seeing' (dassana) here refers to the first of the 4 supramundane paths (sotapattimagga) so designated because it offers the first glimpse of Nibbana.'< .... S: As I paste this is, I’m reminded that here it says “attention denotes insight (vipassana), but at the moment of the path it denotes path-knowledge”. Another deep topic and clearly the meaning of manasikara (attention) depends on contexts which have to be considered carefully as you’ve stressed. Metta, Sarah ===== 40532 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Mon Jan 3, 2005 11:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L > > >…but it appears to me that since > > > citta and cetasika are two of the fundamental units described in > > > Abhidharma, the contemplation on consciousness most especially would > > > benefit from a thorough knowledges of consciousness and its associated > > > states. And in this case knowing the exact factor of energy that is > > > described in ACM o A seems better to me than knowing "I need to > > > cultivate energy" (although this happens to be contemplations on > > > dhammas, the same principle would apply to consciousness and the > > > nature of all its associated states). > > …. > > S: Yes, good points. By consciousness under cittanupassana is meant the > > citta and accompanying cetasikas. These also are all included in > > dhammanupassana, for example under the khandhas (aggregates). Viriya > > (energy) accompanies almost all of those cittas (not seeing > consciousness, > > hearing etc and one or two more. So it is included with > consciousness and > > dhammas. The same as you say for other associated states. It helps a lot > > to understand viriya as a mental state that is conditioned to arise with > > almost every citta regardless of whether one is flat on one's back or > > jumping up and down, reading a Dhamma text or watching TV. No self > > involved. > > …. > > Well it's just more precise. What I'm looking to do here is have an > understanding not only of what is going on in terms of ultimate > realities, but knowing what needs to be done. Like I said, energy is > one of the seven factors of enlightenment, now if I am outside doing a > mindful walk, and I notice energy in my breathing, I am not sure > whether this energy has to be maintained, increased, or what have you, > in pursuit of the supramundane paths. Maybe it does, or maybe it is > not the time and place for that factor to be in. > > Ultimately, going beyond the concept 'energy' and knowing the true > nature of what is referenced by that word, seems valuable to me in my > pursuit of enlightenment. The same applies for all the other cittas > and cetasikas, and probably for matter as well, but I am still only > re-reading chapter 1 in CMA, so I am not there yet. Kel: As far as I've been taught, you want to move away from concepts to reach paramattha. So to analyze each mental state or consciousness you're experiencing and attempting to label would be futile. Not only is your awareness lagging behind the "present moment" but you end up adding another layer of concepts. viriya is sometime translate as effort too or some claim more accurately as "sustained or continous effort". You definitely don't want to over-exert yourself and run out of steam. At the same time, you don't want sloth and torpor to take over by making you feel sluggish. The practice to learn the right amount of effort or energy to apply at a particular situation. Depending on your state I would argue the amount is different. It's the balancing of these mental factors you want to practice. When they're exactly balanced and strong enough to be of indriya/bala quality then it'll approach sambojjhanga. Anicca, dukkha, anatta are the signs of all phenomenon. Viriya like other factors are merely a mean to an end, vehicles. You want to reach an object that is beyond the entire field of mind and matter as we know it. S: > > Impossible, as panna (wisdom) can only arise with javana > > cittas rooted in wisdom. So there's never going to be a mindfulness of > > `all things going on in the body at once', but I'll be glad to see any > > reference. Kel: Body-contact is one consciousness and that covers the whole body. Though that doesn't include eyes, ears, tongue and nose based consciousness. Also not the mind-object based consciousness of course. > Well, let's try to sort these out. You are saying "one citta can > arise at a time." How can we reconcile this with walks that I have > taken being mindful of the breath, feelings, and objects of a few > sense doors almost concurrently, to the extent that /numerous/ devas > appeared overhead streaming above me (more about this in a min.) Kel: Simply your awareness (sati) and concentration (samadhi) are lagging behind to give the illusion of continuity and simultaneity. Once you obtain a better sati and a mind that stays on one object, you'll find other sense-doors almost "shut down". This is why some texts call walking meditation samadhi the best out of four postures because it is the hardest one due to amount of stimulus to deal with. > Would you say that I was just being aware of one bit of consciousness > for its split-second duration and then move on to another, to produce > the illusion of continuity? Kel: consciousness is said to happen "trillion times in a flash of lightning or blink of an eye". Your mind was ping-ponging among objects. > mindful of numerous feelings of pleasure, pain, or neut in my body at > different times, and of what I was hearing and seeing at a > split-second rate, again, seemingly like I am mindful of it all at > once. So I know since this /has/ been acheived by me, it again /can/ > be acheived by me, especially if it /needs/ to be acheived by me. Kel: as long as you can identify the sound like a dog barking, movement of your arms or the sensation is pleasure or pain or neutral, these are still mere concepts. You need to reach to the subtle realities where everything starts getting blurred and hard to describe. You are merely aware. > our approach: I am trying to be mindful of every reality as it > presents itself to me to the extent of knowing every possible nama or > rupa that can be known at a given time, even so it looks like, I am > walking, knowing all my bodily feelings, or knowing all the four > elements in my mind-body complex. And I would practise each of the > foundations for some time, dependent on how results come about. Kel: This is the way to practice. One example is to meditate like a spider, you feel and note everything that gets caught in the web while remaining in the center. However, as you get better the process necessarily slows down and you can pick out individual events separately. This takes time and a lot of practice. > Abhidhamma approach seems to to be mindful of only a bit here and a > bit there-- nothing like the uninterrupted mindfulness that I have as > the ideal of my practise. Kel: Abhidhamma is a description of how the mental process actually happen. It's very rare indeed for individual meditator to see the process as it actually happens. In fact some say impossible except for Buddha and Sariputta. Regardless, the practice is to make your mindfulness/concentration to be as continous as possible because the more vithi you can string together, the faster your path will be. > I just felt such gratitude for both the Buddha and these beings and Kel: I would just watch out for 10 imperfections of insight. > Where is body-consciousness located? If I feel the wind on my body, > that is vedana, but I don't know where that cetasika is physically > located - I mean it is an absolute reality, right? It's got to be > somewhere either in my leg, or more likely in my head making it feel > like it's in my leg. I am unable to see the consciousness of it. Kel: That's the whole point of the mind, you can't really "see" the 4 mind khandas. You can only experience them, infer them and penetrate them eventually to see it's all just phenomena. This is one reason vedanaupassana is popular and doable for majority of people. The body is there and easy to observe. And it's easy to reach the subtler depths by following vedana. > Nonetheless, I am unable to let go of my vision of a person practising > these all because I have felt gratitude for the Buddha who I know > existed many years ago, giving the teachings, that result in > enlightenment, and felt, while practising, that I could acheive > enlightenment when I eventually 'get it together' and keep Kel: some use example of a river. You can give it a name but ask if it's exactly the same from one moment to another. The water that keeps flowing are not the same droplets. right-view says it is not the same yet not another, merely a stream of consciousness. > > S: This is thinking about concepts of elements, organs and so on. Most > > precious at such times is awareness of thinking – another conditioned > > dhamma (cittanupassana). The ideas or concepts cannot be known, but the > > thinking can. > > Thinking sure can be known. But can't we also make use of that great > power of thinking to plan out how we are going to know even further > realities beyond thinking? I think so. This is what I'm saying > here, please reconsider the text. Kel: Thinking is a very gross type of consciousness. You definitely need to move to subtler level. > > S: Everything is lost at every moment. Mindfulness can only arise for an > > instant and then gone. Don't cling to it or expect it or try to make it > > last!! As we're comparing the way we both see practice, I'd say that > I see > > such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the > future as > > being a very big impediment to such practice. > > > > How? It's the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Kel: true test of attachment is how you react when you preceive yourself losing or lessening in sati. Are you agitated or accept it as is. Do your best to increase it with full equaminity or not? - kel 40533 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 0:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi Larry, Howard, TG (Tep & All). --- Larry wrote: >I'm a little uneasy about including > nibbana in the ayatanas. For one thing it seems a little awkward to > abandon it as in the Abandonment Sutta. … S: As the commentary note to the Sabba Sutta indicated, sometimes nibbana is included in the ‘All’ and sometimes not. So we have to keep this in mind when reading the suttas in Salayatanasamyutta. In SN35:24 (2) Abandonment, nibbana is not included as I read it in ‘sabbappahaanaaya’, (the abandoning of all).As Nina said, we always have to look at the context. These suttas are interesting because they do touch on Tep’s question about the stages of insight in the suttas. In the next one (Abandonment 2), we read about ‘abandoning all through direct knowledge and full understanding.’ (sabba.m abhi~n~aa pari~n~aa pahaanaaya). This is a reference to the third pari~n~naa (full understanding), (pahaanapari~n~naa) when the defilements are abandoned by the path. The two earlier par~n~naas are the full understanding of the known (~naatapari~n~naa) and full understanding by scrutinization (tira.napari~n~naa). [BB gives more details on these on p354, note 36 in vol 1 of SN. Also see under ‘pari~n~naa’ in Nyantiloka’s dictionary.] Also, Larry, see Vism XX 89 (a bit ahead I know!!) on the 18 Prinicpal Insights: "89: Having thus become familiar with the material and immaterial meditation subjects, and so having penetrated here already a part of those eighteen principal insights which are later to be attained in all their aspects by means of full-understanding as abandoning starting with contemplation of dissolution, he consequently abandons things opposed [to what he has already penetrated]. ‘Eighteen principal insights’ is a term for understanding that consists in the kinds of insight beginning with contemplation of impermanence…” ***** Much more detail follows, but I just wish to indicate here (as Nina also did in a recent message) that the detail (such as here regarding the stages of insight) is understood in the suttas if one really understands words such as ‘pahaana’ or ‘pari~n~naa’. For those who have BB’s full translation of the Mulapariyaya Sutta and commentaries, on p36 there is a breakdown of the fivefold abandoning by factor substitution (taa’ngapahaana), by suppression (vikkhambhana-p), by eradication (samuccheda-p), by subsiding (pa.tipassaddhi-p), and by escape (nissara.na-p). It goes into lots of good detail such as how ‘the personality view is abandoned by the defining of mentality-materiality (nama-rupa) etc. for factor substitution, by the development of samatha for suppression, by eradicating defilements following the Path for theeradication, by fruition consciousness for the subsiding and finally the last, escape, refers to ‘Nibbana, in which all that is conditioned is abandoned by the escape …’. So in our SN sutta, ‘all’ refers to ‘all that is conditioned’ as I read it. In the same translation of the Mulapariyaya Sutta and commentaries, p47 there is also more about the 3 pari~n~naa mentioned above, relating these to the sutta. Again, full understanding by abandoning is the abandoning of desire and lust for the elements (starting with earth element in the sutta) after developing full understanding of the known and of scrutinization. Again relating these to the stages of insight, it says “…the defining of mentality-materiality (naamaruupa vavatthaana) is the full understanding of the known; from insight-comprehension of the groups (kalaapasammasana) as far as conformity knowledge (anuloma) is the full understanding of scrutinization; and the knowledge of the ariyan path is the full understanding by abandoning.” So, Tep, all the stages of insight are included in the pari~n~naa and it is the last one (the knowledge of the ariyan path) which is being referred to in the SN suttas on ‘Abandoning’. Of course, first there has to be the ‘full understanding of the known’ by ‘the defining of mentality-materiality’ (nama-rupa pariccheda ~nana) or as it puts it another way in the comy to the Mulapariyaya Sutta” “Therein, what is the full understanding of the known? He fully understands the earth element thus: ‘this is the internal earth element, this the external. This is its characteristic, this its function, manifestation, and proximate cause.’ This is full understanding of the known.” In other words, pathavi (earth element or solidity with the characteristic of hardness/softness) has to be clearly understood when it is experienced, an element, a rupa, no self at all, coniditioned by kamma, citta, nutriment or temperature (only the latter in the case of external rupas of course) and not in anyone’s control. Other namas and rupas given as examples in the ‘Abandoning’ suttas also have to be known when they appear repeatedly for what they are so that full understanding can be developed, step by step. Apologies for a lot of technical detail here. Comments welcome of course! Metta, Sarah ======= 40534 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello : new member Hi Kelvin, Many thanks indeed for giving your intro - we really appreciate it when new members do this a lot;-).i'm glad to see that Tep and maybe others have also welcomed you already and you're right into the discussions here. --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > > I found this group as I was browsing for information about > paramis. .... Two excellent booklets are Nina's own shorter one of the 'Perfections' and her translation of Sujin Boriharnwanaket's longer one which she posted here in segments for discussion before. You should find them both on 'Zolag' and Nina, I and others would be very glad of any further input. .... >I was born and raised in Burma. My family moved to > America back in 91. Currently, I'm a graduate student at UC > Berkeley in Electrical Engineering. > > I grew up with Theravada teachings so I do have some common > knowledge. Unfortunately I didn't start meditating seriously until > two summers ago despite my childhood exposure. For the past year, I > also have been taking introductory Abhidhamma course at a Burmese > monastery. I noticed this group is very technical and precise in > the materials posted. Just hoping to learn and trade information > from the discussions here. .... S: A group of us went with A.Sujin to Burma last year - wonderful, esp. Pagan. Greatly looking forward to 'trading information. Yes, I think it's better to study and discuss Abhidhamma together than on one's own;-). Oops, my battery is about to go, so a quick sign off. Speak later, Metta, Sarah ======= 40535 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 1:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] groups.yahoo.com/group/life-atmosphere/message/656 Dear Ai, Welcome to DSG! I was confused by the context of your post, but you clearly have a keen interest in the Pali canon teachings. Please let us know where you live and anything else about your background. --- Ai Le wrote: > 1. parable of the saw / metta > 2. anatta > 3. four aryan truths (also the 'four noble truths') [this is Ill, > Arising of Ill, Cessation of Ill, and the path leading to the cessation > of Ill] > 4. anicca, dukkha, anatta > 5. somethings I get from the 'Happy' chapter of the 'Dhammapada' > 6. Majjhima Nikaya 19 > > The difference between my # 2 listing and my # 4 listing is that > 'anatta' ("not-self") "is a kind of view that goes with metta ( parable > of the saw/metta are the # 1 listing, first thing in my mind). I think > in the past it went like this or something like this: when I completed > my parable of the saw meditation (# 1 listing), I would then let go > further (?) with anatta". .... S: Maybe you can elaborate on this before I comment. .... > > The # 4 listing -- anicca, dukkha, anatta -- was what was called the > 'paramita' ('paramita' the term for one of the ten 'perfections' of a > bodhisattva?) of 'wisdom' (panna'?), in the book 'The Buddha and His > Teachings' or titled something like that, by Narada (Maha Thera? Maha > Thera = Great Elder?). > > Here's something like my way or my way on "anicca, dukkha, anatta": what > is impermanent (anicca), that is ill (dukkha); what is ill, that is > not-self (anatta); what is not-self, one should regard as 'this is not > mine, this am not I, this is not my self'. .... S: Good! ... > > Majjhima Nikaya 19 (# 6 listing) is, ACCORDING TO ME, the teaching on > the three right thoughts of renunciation, non-ill will, and (right) > thoughts imbued with harmlessness, as opposed to the (three) thoughts of > sense desires, ill will, and thoughts imbued with harmfulness. ... S: Yes. In your list, you really include the heart of the Teachings. I hope you'll participate in threads here. You may also find it helpful to look at some of the useful posts from the archives on particular topics such as 'Abhidhamma- beginners' etc: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Let us know if you have any further questions or comments. Metta, Sarah p.s if your previous post was on another list, pls assume we don't know what you are referring to! Also, pls make it clear whom you are addressing here, even if it's 'Everyone'. ========================================= 40536 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (212), submoments Dear Nina, Thanks for your kind words. We can here see how intricate and subtle The Dhamma is. There are many who are materialists and all their thoughts are based in a way or another on physical matters like 'stimulation of seeing area in the brain cause seeing and so on' which actually is not. But The Buddha discovered all these without any physical instruments like microscopes, alpha rays, beta rays, gamma rays, X-rays etc. 3 submoments are yes 1.uppaada[uppada] khana, 2.tithii[tithi] khana, and 3.bhanga khana. This is not a product of logical thinking but what The Buddha penetrated and discovered and preached. A simile for arising of these 3 anukhana or submoments is passing electrical current through a tungsten wire. But still this is also a physical simile does not represent fully on mind matter. But at least it may help us understand. When the current passes there comes out light. That light can be assumed as 'tithii' anukhana. There is a weak light in weak red colour just before and just after that bright light. Before is uppaada anukhana and after is bhanga anukhana. These 2 anukhanas of rupa are so weak and that they cannot serve as object[light]. Thanks again for your kind words and comment. With much respect, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > Thank you. I like your similes. > man running is also in the Tiika, and then you made it clear with the > warning shots, etc. I like it. > When the reader hears about submoments he may have questions why. I could > add something from my Thai translation to help here. > moments of citta. Rúpa does not fall away as quickly as citta. Citta can be > subdivided into three infinitesimal moments, the moment of its arising, > uppåda khaùa, the moment of its presence, tiììhi khaùa, and the moment of > its falling away, bhanga khaùa. When we take this subdivision into account, > rúpa lasts as long as three times seventeen, that is, fiftyone moments of > citta.> > Nina. > op 31-12-2004 15:49 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: 40537 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 127 and Tiika --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > thank you very much. I sent the correction. > How can I correct? Should I repost the whole? > Nina > op 31-12-2004 12:40 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > In your opening of this mail the numbers are right. But later, you > > said 'there are fiftytwo types left and these are accompanied by > > indifferent feeling'. There are 55 upekkha cittas out of 121 total > > cittas. 62 are somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 > > domanassa cittas (121 - 66 = 55 cittas not 52 cittas). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, The moderators can help you. Please repost the whole after correction and then the moderators can delete the old one. I myself is not flawless. But we all need to be careful when we write a lot. There are always typo errors or transcription errors in texts. But when I read them I always reflect the contents and at the same time I always am respectful to those writers. Because any ill thoughts related to text-writers have bad effect. An example is 'ayam' and 'ajam'. I do not know any word 'ajam' in Pali. Then when I saw the text with 'ajam' I will consider it as 'ayam'. Again 'j' and 'y' are very close and quite similar in hand-written form. Sometimes a couple of words are dropped out. At that time I myself abridge to get the meaning without any ill-will on writers. With much respect, Htoo Naing 40538 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:18am Subject: Dhamma Thread (214) Dear Dhamma Friends, As soon as votthapana citta or determining consciousness passes away next arises the 1st javana citta or mental impulsive consciousness. When votthapana citta is a kiriya citta and not bearing any kamma, javana cittas when they are not kiriya cittas do bear good or bad kamma as soon as they arise. The commender of the army has decided to share the food inside of the truck to all soldiers [including officials grade]. So the whole army have food and each member of the whole army now realizes fully what the food is like and they all realize now. But as there are many different personalities even among soldiers let alone officials the understanding, the feeling, the responses will not be the same. Some would say 'awful food'. Some would say 'not too bad' and some would say 'just good' and some 'excellent' and so on. There are many different kinds of javana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: 1.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. 40539 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/4/05 12:08:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard and Larry > > Howard...if the 'eye' is everything needed for vision to take place, > wouldn't > that ultimately entail that pretty much everything in the universe (other > than concepts perhaps) is 'eye'? > > TG > ======================= Well, that is not what is meant, I believe. I believe the concept of "eye" is more restrictive than that, but it is a somewhat fuzzy concept- not precisely delimited. But, in fact, the point you raise can probably be truly said of all things. There are no two things that are not related, at least indirectly. Reality "as a whole" is a net of conditions such that each is related to each other and to the whole, and the whole is dependent upon each of its of its elements. The attempt at separating out any part or element, or the whole, as an independent entity is, in my opinion, exactly what the error of reification is. 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) 40540 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 7:09am Subject: Re: Hello : new member Hi, Kel - > > Kel: > I think Abhidhamma is very precise, systematic and scientific. It's > amazing the detailed analysis given there. I admire the concise > mind required to come up with it. I can also consolidate modern > scientific knowledge to the world as described in Abhidhamma. > Everything from kalapas to black holes I can at least find models > that make sense for me. > I am glad to read your reply which shows your familiarity with the fundamentals of the Abhidhamma. I am indeed interested in your intellectual perspective and engineering approach to the Dhamma, and look forward to reading more from you. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Tep =========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > 40541 From: shakti Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 8:03am Subject: Cancelled trip to California and Montana Dear Friends, I spoke with Jack in California. Khun Sujin's trip to California and Montana has been cancelled. Jack has had numerous family medical situations, that make it difficult for him to organize the trip at this time. We hope that when his situation improves we can organize another trip. We will advise dsg at that time. With metta, Shakti 40542 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 9:01am Subject: Dhamma Thread (215) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 7 successive javana cittas in a vithi vara[ a series of cittas in knowing process of object]. Among them the 1st javana citta is the weakest. This is because that citta is the first in the whole series of 7 javana cittas and it is the first to taste what the object is like. Votthapana citta or determining consciousness just decides how to feel, how to appreciate, how to apperceive and he himself does not do the job of javana. So it is just kiriya citta or functional consciousness or inoperational consciousness. 2nd javana citta is stronger than the 1st javana citta. Because this 2nd javana citta has received what the object is like through the 1st javana citta. The message is passed on to following javana cittas. This is repeatition conditioning of cittas and this kind of condition is only possible to interact between nama dhamma and nama dhamma. 1st javana citta is nama dhamma and 2nd javana citta is nama dhamma and so do other following javana cittas. Again the 7th javana citta is weaker than its preceeding javana cittas even though it is stronger than the 1st javana citta. This is because it is just going to disappearing. The object has to finish or if there is 2 more moments for rupa object to exist then 2 tadarammana cittas have to arise to retain the object. If there is only one extra moment to exist for rupa object no tadarammana can arise and instead bhavanga cittas have to follow these 7 javana cittas. qThis is the rule of citta or citta niyama that tadarammana cittas always arise 2 successive moments. If there is only one momnent then tadarammana citta cannot arise. The 7th javana citta is leading to bhavanga cittas who are not able to take the current object or 2 tadarammana cittas who are just vipaka cittas and do not have any kammic force because of their arising. So it seems like that javana cittas are running man and the 1st step is very weak in terms of speed and the second weakest is the 7th javana citta who is just going to passing away. The middle 5 javana cittas are so strong that the kamma that arises because of these middle cittas is able to give rise to effect or result for the whole samsara as long as satta concerned is in the samsara. This effect starts from the third life from this life where kamma is generated. This current life is the first life, next life is the second life and the life after that is third life. So strong are those 5 middle javana cittas that they do carry the potentials or kamma along with each and every arising citta. The first javana citta is so weak that its effect may be in the just first life and the second weakest 7th javana citta may give rise to its effect in the 2nd life or next life only and they do not bring along for the whole samsara like the middle 5 javana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: 1.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. 40543 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana Hi Howard In a message dated 1/4/2005 6:33:58 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Well, that is not what is meant, I believe. I believe the concept of "eye" is more restrictive than that, but it is a somewhat fuzzy concept- not precisely delimited. But, in fact, the point you raise can probably be truly said of all things. TG: Yes There are no two things that are not related, at least indirectly. Reality "as a whole" is a net of conditions such that each is related to each other and to the whole, and the whole is dependent upon each of its of its elements. The attempt at separating out any part or element, or the whole, as an independent entity is, in my opinion, exactly what the error of reification is. TG: Yes, and the concept of "whole" shares the problem too. There is a Sutta where the Buddha is asked 'straight out' -- if feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness are actually separate states or, are they not separatable states? And if the latter, does the Buddha separate them merely to analyse them? The Buddha answers that they cannot in reality be considered separate states. He only separates them for purposes of analysis. (This creates a problem for Abhidhamma in my view as seeing them as separate ultimate realities.) At any rate, with this in mind, I think the analysis of "elements" can be done realizing that the purpose is not to be technically perfect...but rather...the purpose is merely to aid in seeing things as conditioned, impermanent, suffering, and not-self...for the greater purpose of eliminating attachments and suffering. It is not "reality" the Buddha is interested in teaching...its the Path to escaping suffering he is interested in teaching. And although it may be as "real" a teaching as it gets, its just not the point to get 'hung up' on realities. (Not that this necessarily applies to your post.) The goal in having things expressed as accurately as possible would be to convense the mind that -- "yes, this is the way it is, things are conditioned, impermanent, suffering, not-self." If they are not expressed in a convensing fashion, people would discount it and not pursue it. States ultimately don't have separate existence. And although the Buddha was only asked about Nama in the Sutta mentioned above, I suspect 'the un-separatable-ness' would apply to nama and rupa as well. Mental models are very useful and necessary things though, and each of us needs to models things in our minds, to the best of our ability, so that the impact of the Buddha's teaching has the greatest effect on us. Once we achieve the goal, the model becomes as useless and a snakes shed skin. With metta, Howard TG 40544 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Hi Larry, op 03-01-2005 22:11 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > Hi Sarah and Howard, I was > arguing that no rupa is truly an object of consciousness in the sense > of actually arising in the mind door. However, that is my own > peculiarity and not abhidhamma. N: When I first came to Kh Sujin I had doubts about sense-door processes. She answered: how can the mind-door get the rupa if it is not first known in a sense-door process? Seeing arises in a sense-door process. Visible object is known by seeing, it is seen. Afterwards it is known by cittas arising in a mind-door process. Lodewijk thinks that there may be confusion about mind and mind-door because of the English translations. Is there anything not cleared up here? L: I think it could be argued that it is impossible to know rupa except as a concept. The sensation of hardness is body consciousness, not rupa. Rupa isn't an experience. > At least that's how I understand the nama/rupa distinction. N: This is correct. Only the first: it is impossible to know rupa except as a concept. But rupa is not a concept, rupa is rupa. I do not see the problem here. These points are important to clear up, otherwise they obstruct the understanding which is the groundwork for the development of insight. Nina. 40545 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 127 and Tiika Dear Htoo, do not worry, corrections are useful. After all, it is about Dhamma and writing about Dhamma is always a great responsibility. One can't be careful enough. Nina. op 04-01-2005 13:06 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > There are always typo errors or transcription errors in texts. But > when I read them I always reflect the contents and at the same time I > always am respectful to those writers. 40546 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi Steve, thank you for the trouble. It is regrettable, but I shall just type what I want to quote. Nina. op 04-01-2005 00:34 schreef seisen_au op seisen_@h...: > There doesnt seem to be any english translations of the > Samyutta on the metta site. The only english translations i could > find from the Bojjhangasamyutta are these from accesstoinsight> 40547 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wise attention Dear Sarah, Thank you for your observations. I went meanwhile to a few texts which I shall add here. op 04-01-2005 08:34 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: When I’ve asked KS about it, she’s stressed it’s just one citta’ > ppl give it or determining consciousness a lot of undue emphasis in > terms of determining or controlling javana cittas etc rather than looking > at accumulations and at decisive support condition. Maybe a package’ of > cittas and cetasikas as you just suggested. N: Right. Undue emphasis. I shall now also transcribe the MP3, where this is dealt with. First Vis. XIV, 152: here is defined manasikaara cetasika, the controller of the object (it yokes the accompanying dhammas to the object) and it also refers to the two cittas which are manasikaara: the sense-door adverting citta (called here controller of sense-door process) and the mind-door adverting citta, controller of the javanas. The word controller is misleading. The word pa.tipaadaka is used. pa.tipaada is the way and the suffix -ka makes it an adjective (bahubbiihi compound). I find that often it is doing something. It paves the way, a way-paver. The Tiika: this deals first with the two cittas and then states as to the cetasika: this is another manasikaara included in sankhaarakkhandha. The others are viññaa.nakkhanda. Of course, the cetasika attention when it accompanies kusala citta is also kusala and when it accompanies akusala citta it is also akusala. But it does not have the function of paving the way for kusala javana cittas or akusala javana cittas. I looked at some other texts, mostly referring to suttas. In the suttas kusala cittas and akusala cittas are given as wise and unwise attention, but no detail can be expected such as the mind-door adverting-consciousness. Expositor, p. 84: right attention is given as the proximate cause for kusala citta. You quoted Exp. p. 385, about kiriyacitta in general: no kusala hetus or akusala hetus of wise and unwise attention: I see this more as just explaining further that this citta is neither kusala nor akusala. Transcript of Pakinnaka 2, no 110 and 111. In Huahin. Acharn Sompon: Before kusala citta arises there is yoniso manasikaara, it is called javana pa.tipaada manasikaara. It is hetu paccaya for the arising of kusala. If kusala arises there must be yoniso. Yoniso is the beginning, before kusala arises. It is only one citta. Also Kh Sujin explains: Kusala citta itself is yoniso, akusala citta is ayoniso. Each citta is anantara paccaya for the next one, it occurs vey fast. Kusala citta and akusala citta arise because of natural strong dependence condition. N: At that moment it has happened before we realize it, we cannot prevent cittas from arising. Peope become confused because the manasikaara that is the mind-door adverting citta is kiriyacitta. As I see it: yoniso and ayoniso manasikara and the following javana cittas are one big sweep. Nina. 40548 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: Cancelled trip to California and Montana Hello Shakti, Thank you for letting us know. I hope Jack's family overcome any illnesses and once again grow healthy and strong. Disappointing about the trip though ... I have been reading a little ... had my mind set on tasting a huckleberry and canoeing :)... another time maybe. metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > I spoke with Jack in California. Khun Sujin's trip to California and Montana has been cancelled. Jack has had numerous family medical situations, that make it difficult for him to organize the trip at this time. We hope that when his situation improves we can organize another trip. We will advise dsg at that time. > > With metta, Shakti > > 40549 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 0:07pm Subject: Doubt and Confidence Hello all, Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and wanes ... ? I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to do - other than having patience, and keeping on keeping on .... metta and peace, Christine --- The trouble is that you think you have time--- 40550 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 0:26pm Subject: Re: Doubt and Confidence Hi Chris - Before starting to write this mail, I read your message twice. A question came to my mind about what conditions (paccaya) we must keep throughout each day such that "great interest, strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice" can be maintained. Then I recalled a sutta I had read long ago. It says that the monk can be steady in the progress toward Nibbana when he keeps a "samadhi nimitta" in the morning, in the evening, and at night. I am not sure what it may mean to most people who don't do meditation. Warmest regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and > wanes ... ? > I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, > strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and > then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of > that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to do - > other than having patience, and keeping on keeping on .... > > metta and peace, > Christine > --- The trouble is that you think you have time--- 40551 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 7:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Doubt and Confidence Hi, Christine - In a message dated 1/4/05 3:11:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello all, > > Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and > wanes ... ? > I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, > strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and > then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of > that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to do - > other than having patience, and keeping on keeping on .... > > metta and peace, > Christine ==================== Yes, there is an up-down-up-down cycle. The reason, I think, is that for all but arahants (or maybe also anagami) there is attachment to "progress". When our practice, however we view "practice", seems to be "going well", we rejoice and have confidence and enthusiasm, but when it seems to "go badly", we exhibit, as you say, "boredom, alienation, doubt, and discontent." (Of course an ariyan will not have the doubt.) This cycle is a special case, I think, of samsara, our wandering on, buffeted by the waves of tanha and upadana - now raised high on the crest of a wave, and then dashed low to the trough. The solution? Just as you say: "having patience, and keeping on keeping on." 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) 40552 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 7:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Doubt and Confidence In a message dated 1/4/2005 12:11:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: Hello all, Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and wanes ... ? I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to do - other than having patience, and keeping on keeping on .... metta and peace, Christine Hi Christine This is a very normal pattern according to my experience. I've been studying Buddhism since 1981. Sometimes I'll go at it: 2, 3, 4, 5 years in a row very motivated, then I'll drop off for a year or two without much motivation to read. Its been awhile since I've been in a dry period in terms of reflecting on the teachings, but I've been there too. I think sometimes we need to take two steps forward and one step back to progress. When the teachings are taken up again, they will likely be fresh again and new/stronger insights will be developed. And you may wonder -- how could I have wasted all that time not studying? ;-) TG 40553 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 7:36am Subject: Seeing & Hearing Howard wrote: > Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is > unarisen. Studies have demonstrated that the data from the eyes and the ears is often combined to form a 'bound' percept. For example, if a listener is blindfolded it is difficult to locate the exact source of sound waves. If the blindfold is removed the sound can usually be located at the source. You can try this yourself. How does this fit in with the idea that "when one is hearing.. physical capacity to see is unarisen"? Matthew P.S. This is my first post. Hello everybody. 40554 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 9:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Seeing & Hearing Hi, Matthew - In a message dated 1/4/05 4:47:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: > Howard wrote: > >Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > >the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is > >unarisen. > > Studies have demonstrated that the data from the eyes and the ears is > often combined to form a 'bound' percept. For example, if a listener > is blindfolded it is difficult to locate the exact source of sound > waves. If the blindfold is removed the sound can usually be located > at the source. You can try this yourself. > > How does this fit in with the idea that "when one is hearing.. > physical capacity to see is unarisen"? > > Matthew > P.S. This is my first post. Hello everybody. > > ==================== Welcome to posting Matthew! :-) It sounds to me that what those studies are pointing to is some additional mental processing, what might be called "sankharic fabrication" by some Buddhists, a processing that is itself neither hearing nor seeing. The Buddha said that mind moves very quickly, as compared, presumably, to the objects of consciousness. Abhidhamma in particular points out how consciousness flits from one sense door to another, in a kind of time-share mode, and each conscious flashing at a sense door goes by very rapidly. So I suspect that what is going on in this matter is a flitting amongst eye door, ear door, and mind door, with mind-door operations working on the material presented through eye and ear to "compute" location. But the moments of visual consciousness are moments of auditory unconsciousness, and vice-versa. One aspect of the physical capacity to see (or "eye", for short) is the condition that there be no other sense-door object present. (Of course, that is only 80% physical condition, as it includes that no mind-door object be present and not just other physical objects.) 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) 40555 From: Egbert Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 3:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does Hi Jon, Thank you for the gift of your time and effort, I really appreciate it. There are some more comments below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Herman > > I think you see the holy life and the household life as being > antithetical to each other (which I would not argue with), and from this you say that since the holy life is lived for the sake of enlightenment then the household life must be antithetical to that goal. === H > I found it quite useful to see things juxtaposed this way. And yes, juxtaposed this way, the household life is antithetical to Nibbana. There are only two choices (not that there is anyone that chooses). There is the choice for suffering or the choice for Nibbana, there is the choice for illusion or the choice for reality, the choice for self or the choice for not-self. The householders life is essentially a vote for attachment to the meaningless, and a rejection of the real. The householders life is defined in terms of having, not being. And having is defined in terms of attachment. > > In particular, you see social discourse as a real hindrance to the development of the path because of the effect it has of inducing discursive thought, which makes difficult the removal of clinging. ==== H > I could not write down a single thought that I have ever had that wasn't meaningless, except for the thought that they were all meaningless. > > To my reading of the suttas and texts, the message taught by the Buddha is a somewhat different one. He did not extol silence or a life of physical seclusion for their own sake, or as being necessary for the development of the path, or even as being necesarily conducive to the development of the path for all persons. He did of course on numerous occasions (but not to every follower) extol the monks' life, but he did so with the qualification that it was the monks. life that was 'well lived' to which her referred. We need to understand the significance of this qualification which, as I see it, has the effect of putting the monk's life beyond the capability of most people. > > What the Buddha in fact lays down as the necessary conditions for the > development of the path are, in comparison to the ideal of a reclusive > lifestyle spent in meditative contemplation, relatively > mundane-sounding. In numerous suttas, including suttas directed to > audiences that include laypeople, the Buddha talks about knowing the > presently arising dhammas such as seeing consciousness and visible > object and so on through the six senses, or the five khandhas, or the > elements. On many occasions those listening to the discourse became > enlightened then and there or a short time later. === H> Out of interest, did those lay folk who "got it" return to their householders life, and carry on managing their superannuation funds (preparing for the future based on the past) as normal? === We should not ignore > the obvious message this carries for us. > > That message as I see it is that there is the potential for development > of the path at this very moment, regardless of lifestyle or current > situation. It is a matter of understanding at an intellectual level > first the significance of dhammas such as seeing and visible object. ====== H > I think the reality is that the suffering we know is preferred to the freedom we don't want to know. But of course a point will come in the lives of every being, of every status, in which everything that was gained will be lost, everything that was clung to will be washed away. There will be nothing of an intellectual level which will do anyone any good, at that time. And we all know that, intellectually. If the time for relinquishment and release is not now, it will never be! If intellectual understanding is something held dear, it will be a cause for great loss and grief. > There are dhammas arising now, which may be the object of awareness > given the right conditions (as set out in the texts). > ======= H > What you say is technically correct. Of course it is *possible* that this very moment ripens as path development, regardless of lifestyle or current situation. But is it *probable*? If there are 10 seconds a day of insight and 23 hours 59 minutes and 50 seconds of involvement in meaningless concepts, which do you think is being learnt, nurtured, developed, reinforced, is it insight into reality with a consequent dissolving of attachments, or is it the preference for illusion and attachment to it? I am not writing prescriptively. The simple choice/determination that is made each moment again simply has consequences for the moments that follow, that's all. I believe that a person who lives in the midst of and maintains family and friends, possessions and status in the world, and believes they can all-the-while be completely detached from this is setting themselves up for an inevitable fall. Kind Regards Herman > Jon > > Egbert wrote: > > >H > The major issue I have with the possible implications of the > >above (there is no suggestion that you have implied them) is that > >the mind is posited as a thing with its own nature. I accept that it > >is very difficult or impossible to make very precise statements that > >are also short. I would just like to make some brief counterpoints. > > > >Thinking (reflexive mind) is unique to humans. > > > >Thinking is conditioned. > > > >Language is a condition for thinking. > > > >Language is conditioned. > > > >Society is a condition for language as language is a condition for > >society. This is borne out by the fact that people not exposed to or > >removed from society loose their capacity for speech/thinking. > > > >The holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of total > >Unbinding through lack of clinging. > > > >Secular society is a mass of clinging that teaches/learns clinging > >by way of discursive thinking. > > > >The holy life of the Blessed One is the antithesis of secular > >society. This is of necessity, because discursive thinking militates > >against the most basic development of mind. > > > >The fruits of the holy life are not harvested in thinking > >conditioned by a social setting. > > > >My discursive thoughts only, now back to some silence > > > > > >Kind Regards > > > > > > > >Herman > > > > 40556 From: Egbert Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 3:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Seeing & Hearing Hi Matthew, Howard, (and everyone), Welcome aboard, Matthew. I had earlier intended to write something based on the same material you quote. Thanks for bringing the matter up. > > >Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > > >the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is > > >unarisen. Howard, I'm wondering if my following rephrasing would alter your meaning significantly. "When one is listening, the physical capacity to watch is unarisen". That there can be advertance to one sense at a time only, does not limit what those senses are upto, inadvertantly, does it? My wife has this great example from her first marriage. She would "hear" (read "advert to") the crying babies as night, while her husband wouldn't "hear" them. He would "hear" the alarm clock at 5 am, and she wouldn't. Kind Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Matthew - > > In a message dated 1/4/05 4:47:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, > bupleurum@y... writes: > > > Howard wrote: > > >Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > > >the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see is > > >unarisen. > > > > Studies have demonstrated that the data from the eyes and the ears is > > often combined to form a 'bound' percept. For example, if a listener > > is blindfolded it is difficult to locate the exact source of sound > > waves. If the blindfold is removed the sound can usually be located > > at the source. You can try this yourself. > > > > How does this fit in with the idea that "when one is hearing.. > > physical capacity to see is unarisen"? > > > > Matthew > > P.S. This is my first post. Hello everybody. > > > > > ==================== > Welcome to posting Matthew! :-) > It sounds to me that what those studies are pointing to is some > additional mental processing, what might be called "sankharic fabrication" by some > Buddhists, a processing that is itself neither hearing nor seeing. The Buddha > said that mind moves very quickly, as compared, presumably, to the objects of > consciousness. Abhidhamma in particular points out how consciousness flits from > one sense door to another, in a kind of time-share mode, and each conscious > flashing at a sense door goes by very rapidly. > So I suspect that what is going on in this matter is a flitting > amongst eye door, ear door, and mind door, with mind-door operations working on the > material presented through eye and ear to "compute" location. But the moments > of visual consciousness are moments of auditory unconsciousness, and > vice-versa. One aspect of the physical capacity to see (or "eye", for short) is the > condition that there be no other sense-door object present. (Of course, that is > only 80% physical condition, as it includes that no mind-door object be present > and not just other physical objects.) > > With metta, > Howard > 40557 From: Andrew Levin Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 3:27pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi all, It looks to me like all of the suttas linked to have not been the appropriate ones, ie, they don't fit the description of the function they are supposed to describe as described in the commentary I am reading from. However, the Vism seems to contain the essential text for each sutta in itself (eg IV 51 for the proper time to develop each factor of enlightenment, the passages following VII 73 for the other two on realizing coolness and attending to the three signs of concentration, exertion, and equanimity. I guess I don't have to go farther than this, but thanks for your efforts, all. Peace, A.L. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > > Hi Nina > There doesnt seem to be any english translations of the > Samyutta on the metta site. The only english translations i could > find from the Bojjhangasamyutta are these from accesstoinsight> > > Himavanta Sutta (SN XLVI.1) > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-001.html > > Gilana Sutta (SN XLVI.14) > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-014a.html > > Gilana Sutta (SN XLVI.16) > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-016.html > > Ahara Sutta (SN XLVI.51) > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn46-014a.html 40558 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Seeing & Hearing Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/4/05 6:25:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > > Hi Matthew, Howard, (and everyone), > > Welcome aboard, Matthew. I had earlier intended to write something > based on the same material you quote. Thanks for bringing the matter > up. > > >>>Also, I would also say that when one is hearing, for example, > >>>the eye is not present - that is, the physical capacity to see > is > >>>unarisen. > > Howard, I'm wondering if my following rephrasing would alter your > meaning significantly. > > "When one is listening, the physical capacity to watch is unarisen". > > That there can be advertance to one sense at a time only, does not > limit what those senses are upto, inadvertantly, does it? > > My wife has this great example from her first marriage. > > She would "hear" (read "advert to") the crying babies as night, > while her husband wouldn't "hear" them. > > He would "hear" the alarm clock at 5 am, and she wouldn't. > > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > > ========================= I think that the issue you are raising is that of attention, and what registers and what does not. But that, I think, is a different matter. I believe that attention "highlights" experience, and that a certain highlighting threshhold is required for an experience to "register". But even when it does not register, it is still sensed, and at the time there is, for example, hearing, even of a sound that does not register, there will not be seeing. 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) 40559 From: Andrew Levin Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:01pm Subject: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > > > >…but it appears to me that since > > > > citta and cetasika are two of the fundamental units described > in > > > > Abhidharma, the contemplation on consciousness most especially > would > > > > benefit from a thorough knowledges of consciousness and its > associated > > > > states. And in this case knowing the exact factor of energy > that is > > > > described in ACM o A seems better to me than knowing "I need to > > > > cultivate energy" (although this happens to be contemplations > on > > > > dhammas, the same principle would apply to consciousness and > the > > > > nature of all its associated states). > > > …. > > > S: Yes, good points. By consciousness under cittanupassana is > meant the > > > citta and accompanying cetasikas. These also are all included in > > > dhammanupassana, for example under the khandhas (aggregates). > Viriya > > > (energy) accompanies almost all of those cittas (not seeing > > consciousness, > > > hearing etc and one or two more. So it is included with > > consciousness and > > > dhammas. The same as you say for other associated states. It > helps a lot > > > to understand viriya as a mental state that is conditioned to > arise with > > > almost every citta regardless of whether one is flat on one's > back or > > > jumping up and down, reading a Dhamma text or watching TV. No > self > > > involved. > > > …. > > > > Well it's just more precise. What I'm looking to do here is have > an > > understanding not only of what is going on in terms of ultimate > > realities, but knowing what needs to be done. Like I said, energy > is > > one of the seven factors of enlightenment, now if I am outside > doing a > > mindful walk, and I notice energy in my breathing, I am not sure > > whether this energy has to be maintained, increased, or what have > you, > > in pursuit of the supramundane paths. Maybe it does, or maybe it > is > > not the time and place for that factor to be in. > > > > Ultimately, going beyond the concept 'energy' and knowing the true > > nature of what is referenced by that word, seems valuable to me in > my > > pursuit of enlightenment. The same applies for all the other > cittas > > and cetasikas, and probably for matter as well, but I am still only > > re-reading chapter 1 in CMA, so I am not there yet. > > Kel: As far as I've been taught, you want to move away from > concepts to reach paramattha. So to analyze each mental state or > consciousness you're experiencing and attempting to label would be > futile. Not only is your awareness lagging behind the "present > moment" but you end up adding another layer of concepts. OK. This goes along with what I have been thinking. Instead of labeling consciousness 'sleepy,' direclty know it by type as explain in Abhidhamma, right? So 'knowing' or recognizing,' not labeling. No? > viriya is sometime translate as effort too or some claim more > accurately as "sustained or continous effort". You definitely don't > want to over-exert yourself and run out of steam. At the same time, > you don't want sloth and torpor to take over by making you feel > sluggish. The practice to learn the right amount of effort or > energy to apply at a particular situation. Depending on your state > I would argue the amount is different. It's the balancing of these > mental factors you want to practice. When they're exactly balanced > and strong enough to be of indriya/bala quality then it'll approach > sambojjhanga. Anicca, dukkha, anatta are the signs of all > phenomenon. Viriya like other factors are merely a mean to an end, > vehicles. You want to reach an object that is beyond the entire > field of mind and matter as we know it. OK.. I was just using this as an example of how I can 'know' it through Abhidharma, know it thoroughly, more than just described as 'energy' in a commentary I have. Not actually asked when/how to develop it, merely that Abhidharma should make things more precise. > > Would you say that I was just being aware of one bit of > consciousness > > for its split-second duration and then move on to another, to > produce > > the illusion of continuity? > Kel: consciousness is said to happen "trillion times in a flash of > lightning or blink of an eye". Your mind was ping-ponging among > objects. > > > mindful of numerous feelings of pleasure, pain, or neut in my body > at > > different times, and of what I was hearing and seeing at a > > split-second rate, again, seemingly like I am mindful of it all at > > once. So I know since this /has/ been acheived by me, it > again /can/ > > be acheived by me, especially if it /needs/ to be acheived by me. > Kel: as long as you can identify the sound like a dog barking, > movement of your arms or the sensation is pleasure or pain or > neutral, these are still mere concepts. You need to reach to the > subtle realities where everything starts getting blurred and hard to > describe. You are merely aware. Yeah, mindful awareness. I am fond of nonconceptual awareness, especially for mindfulness of dhammas and consciousness, but however I contemplate feelings seems OK, this is an easier section. > > > our approach: I am trying to be mindful of every reality as it > > presents itself to me to the extent of knowing every possible nama > or > > rupa that can be known at a given time, even so it looks like, I am > > walking, knowing all my bodily feelings, or knowing all the four > > elements in my mind-body complex. And I would practise each of the > > foundations for some time, dependent on how results come about. > Kel: This is the way to practice. One example is to meditate like > a spider, you feel and note everything that gets caught in the web > while remaining in the center. However, as you get better the > process necessarily slows down and you can pick out individual > events separately. This takes time and a lot of practice. > So the events present themselves with more distinction, that is, as ultimate realities, as you progress. Is that what you're saying? > > Abhidhamma approach seems to to be mindful of only a bit here and a > > bit there-- nothing like the uninterrupted mindfulness that I have > as > > the ideal of my practise. > > Kel: Abhidhamma is a description of how the mental process > actually happen. It's very rare indeed for individual meditator to > see the process as it actually happens. In fact some say impossible > except for Buddha and Sariputta. Regardless, the practice is to > make your mindfulness/concentration to be as continous as possible > because the more vithi you can string together, the faster your path > will be. Which processes is it so difficult to see? Only mental processes? This is what I was thinking, that I would know which consciousnesses are arising and passing away, along with their factors. If that's not how to do it, then how do I go beyond something so simple as noting "sleepy, sleepy" or "mindful, mindful" as the commentary says? This is why I originally began studying Abhidharma, to know the processes themselves. Isn't it necessary to know thoroughly what is happening for the assurance of attainment to apply? Knowing each mind-state as described by the Buddha in the Maha-satipatthana sutta? Is awareness of 1/100th of the mental processes actually occurring going to cut it?!?! > > I just felt such gratitude for both the Buddha and these beings and > Kel: I would just watch out for 10 imperfections of insight. > > > Where is body-consciousness located? If I feel the wind on my > body, > > that is vedana, but I don't know where that cetasika is physically > > located - I mean it is an absolute reality, right? It's got to be > > somewhere either in my leg, or more likely in my head making it > feel > > like it's in my leg. I am unable to see the consciousness of it. > Kel: That's the whole point of the mind, you can't really "see" > the 4 mind khandas. You can only experience them, infer them and > penetrate them eventually to see it's all just phenomena. This is > one reason vedanaupassana is popular and doable for majority of > people. The body is there and easy to observe. And it's easy to > reach the subtler depths by following vedana. > > > Nonetheless, I am unable to let go of my vision of a person > practising > > these all because I have felt gratitude for the Buddha who I know > > existed many years ago, giving the teachings, that result in > > enlightenment, and felt, while practising, that I could acheive > > enlightenment when I eventually 'get it together' and keep > Kel: some use example of a river. You can give it a name but ask > if it's exactly the same from one moment to another. The water that > keeps flowing are not the same droplets. right-view says it is not > the same yet not another, merely a stream of consciousness. > One consciousness appearing knowing now body, now mind state, now element, right? > > > S: This is thinking about concepts of elements, organs and so > on. Most > > > precious at such times is awareness of thinking – another > conditioned > > > dhamma (cittanupassana). The ideas or concepts cannot be known, > but the > > > thinking can. > > > > Thinking sure can be known. But can't we also make use of that > great > > power of thinking to plan out how we are going to know even further > > realities beyond thinking? I think so. This is what I'm saying > > here, please reconsider the text. > Kel: Thinking is a very gross type of consciousness. You > definitely need to move to subtler level. > > > > S: Everything is lost at every moment. Mindfulness can only > arise for an > > > instant and then gone. Don't cling to it or expect it or try to > make it > > > last!! As we're comparing the way we both see practice, I'd say > that > > I see > > > such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the > > future as > > > being a very big impediment to such practice. > > > > > > > How? It's the Four Foundations of Mindfulness > > Kel: true test of attachment is how you react when you preceive > yourself losing or lessening in sati. Are you agitated or accept it > as is. Do your best to increase it with full equaminity or not? > How necessary is sati, if it is not essential to the practise? And how is it that people here generally think of sati in terms of what we can do to develop it or allow it to stay and not decrease? > - kel Thanks, AL 40560 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All & Nibbana TG: "At any rate, with this in mind, I think the analysis of "elements" can be done realizing that the purpose is not to be technically perfect...but rather...the purpose is merely to aid in seeing things as conditioned, impermanent, suffering, and not-self...for the greater purpose of eliminating attachments and suffering." Hi TG, I agree with this. One of yesterday's posts was discussing what is sati. What I came up with is sati is impersonal identification, unlike sanna which is usually personal identification. By personal I mean that desire or aversion, and bewilderment is mixed in with the identity. I think this aspect of impersonality is the key, rather than accuracy. I don't see any problem with identifying the conventional eye as eye. It is certainly conventionally impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self. A deeper insight would see that this eye is a conceptual fabrication and in fact all identity is a conceptual fabrication. To my mind, that just shows it to be even more profoundly empty. Larry 40561 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Nina: "When I first came to Kh Sujin I had doubts about sense-door processes. She answered: how can the mind-door get the rupa if it is not first known in a sense-door process?" Hi Nina, This doesn't help because the sense door process arises in the mind door. The problem is how do we get this gigantic mindless 100% physical earth into my 0% physical mind? Larry 40562 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 4:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi Nina, I'm interested in this project also. If I could help out with the typing let me know. Larry --------------------------- N: "Hi Steve, thank you for the trouble. It is regrettable, but I shall just type what I want to quote. Nina." 40563 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. In a message dated 1/4/2005 4:23:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi Nina, This doesn't help because the sense door process arises in the mind door. The problem is how do we get this gigantic mindless 100% physical earth into my 0% physical mind? Larry Hi Larry You may be reiterating a point of view that is not your own above. My view is that the physical is 100% energy, and that the mental is 100% energy. These are just energy transformations that take place between the physical and mental. Some energies are configured as a cognitive instrument. Other energies are configured as visual objects. Other energies are configured as pianos. It depends on conditions. There is no "conversion" of different types of states. And furthermore I can quote this... "A deeper insight would see that this eye is a conceptual fabrication and in fact all identity is a conceptual fabrication. To my mind, that just shows it to be even more profoundly empty." (source -- Larry) Identifying mental and physical states would also be a conceptual fabrication would it not? TG 40564 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 0:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/4/05 7:23:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Nina: "When I first came to Kh Sujin I had doubts about sense-door > processes. > She answered: how can the mind-door get the rupa if it is not first > known in a sense-door process?" > > Hi Nina, > > This doesn't help because the sense door process arises in the mind > door. The problem is how do we get this gigantic mindless 100% physical > earth into my 0% physical mind? > > Larry > ====================== Larry, what the "heck" do you mean by "this gigantic mindless 100% physical earth'?! A rupa of "earth" is a particular physical sensation, period. All we ever experience are experiential objects: bodily sensations, sights, sounds, tastes, smells, feelings, emotions, thoughts, urges, inclinations, etc. The first five are physical, and the rest are mental. Consciousness is the presence of any of these. That presence is also considered mental, regardless of whether the present content is physical or mental. None of this pertains to the conceptually constructed "external world". 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) 40565 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 5:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does Friend Herman, Herman: Out of interest, did those lay folk who "got it" return to their householders life, and carry on managing their superannuation funds (preparing for the future based on the past) as normal? James: No. According to the texts, if a person achieves Nibbana they must become a monk or they will die and enter paranibanna (the Buddha's father is an example…he died shortly after enlightenment rather than becoming a monk). An enlightened person cannot be a householder; I guess it is too antithetical to the enlightened life. Metta, James 40566 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 6:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does > Herman: Out of interest, did those lay folk who "got it" return to > their householders life, and carry on managing their superannuation > funds (preparing for the future based on the past) as normal? > > James: No. According to the texts, if a person achieves Nibbana > they must become a monk or they will die and enter paranibanna (the > Buddha's father is an example…he died shortly after enlightenment > rather than becoming a monk). An enlightened person cannot be a > householder; I guess it is too antithetical to the enlightened life. Kel: You can live a householder life up to 3rd stage of enlightenment, non-returner. It is not so much what you do but how you do it. A stream-enterer, first stage, for example would follow five percepts flawlessly. They would be faithful follower of buddha, dhamma and sanga because the seed of doubt has been destroyed. They can carry on normal lives; get married, have kids and what have you. In fact, they're still very much attached to the sensual world, else why would they come back seven more lives in the sensous sphere? The best thing is destruction of the possibility of being born into lower, unhappy existence because they are no longer capable of actions leading to that. The rounds in samsara has become finite instead of the usual infinite cycle for puthujjana. -kel 40567 From: Ken O Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 6:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - - To ... Hi Tep, Suan and Howard I have before quoted MN 32, Mahaagosinga Sutta para 8 <<"Here friend Sariputta, two bhikkhus engage in a talks on the Higher Dhamma* and they questions each other, and each being questioned by the other answers without foundering, and their talk rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma. That kind of bhikkhu could illuminate this Gosinga Saala-tree Wood.">> Then later in the same sutta we see Buddha approve of B. Moggallana. * - the Higher Dhamma (translated from the pali word- abhidhammakatham)- B Bodhi personal notes. <> The there arise these questions, why did the Buddha approved it if it is not of the dhamma, so in that sense it rise doubt whether it is philosophical. Even if Buddha did not teach it as some has said, his mere approval has bear a lot of weight that Abhidhamma originate during the time of Nikayas and not after it. Furthermore , it is the other chief disciple and not Ven Sariputta who said the word on higher dhamma because usually Ven Sariputta is known to be the main proponent of Abhidhamma. Ken O 40568 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 1:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... In a message dated 1/4/2005 6:32:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: Hi Tep, Suan and Howard I have before quoted MN 32, Mahaagosinga Sutta para 8 <<"Here friend Sariputta, two bhikkhus engage in a talks on the Higher Dhamma* and they questions each other, and each being questioned by the other answers without foundering, and their talk rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma. That kind of bhikkhu could illuminate this Gosinga Saala-tree Wood.">> Then later in the same sutta we see Buddha approve of B. Moggallana. * - the Higher Dhamma (translated from the pali word- abhidhammakatham)- B Bodhi personal notes. <> The there arise these questions, why did the Buddha approved it if it is not of the dhamma, so in that sense it rise doubt whether it is philosophical. Even if Buddha did not teach it as some has said, his mere approval has bear a lot of weight that Abhidhamma originate during the time of Nikayas and not after it. Furthermore , it is the other chief disciple and not Ven Sariputta who said the word on higher dhamma because usually Ven Sariputta is known to be the main proponent of Abhidhamma. Ken O Hi Ken O The so-called Abhidhamma that Sariputta taught was completely within the bounds of the Suttas and did not resemble the Abhidhamma Pitaka as your own posts points out. Apples and Oranges. This is quite a stretch to support the Abhidhamma Pitaka which itself has been stretched quite a bit in the commentaries. TG 40569 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 7:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does > The householders life is essentially a vote for attachment to the > meaningless, and a rejection of the real. The householders life is > defined in terms of having, not being. And having is defined in > terms of attachment. Kel: This seems to imply everyone should become an arahant or bust which need not be the case. Having is not attachment. Losing what you have and reacting with negativity is attachment. Even while "being" there's still goals like reaching nibbana. Again it's not the lack of goals, it's how you go about achieving those goals and what you do when you fail. An arahant doesn't sit in a forest like a vegetable. They go about expounding dhamma to the masses. Relieving people of their misery is very much goal-oriented work. > H > I could not write down a single thought that I have ever had > that wasn't meaningless, except for the thought that they were all > meaningless. Kel: too extreme imho. Buddha taught "right thought" not "no thought". > it, has the effect of putting the monk's life beyond the capability > of most people. Kel: simple fact is it is beyond most people's reach. Not even all monks can or do live fully in accord with vinaya. Perfect sila is the one thats pure in bodily, verbally and mentally actions. How many people can claim that? > > That message as I see it is that there is the potential for > development > > of the path at this very moment, regardless of lifestyle or > current > > situation. It is a matter of understanding at an intellectual > level > > first the significance of dhammas such as seeing and visible > object. > > ====== > > H > I think the reality is that the suffering we know is preferred > to the freedom we don't want to know. But of course a point will > come in the lives of every being, of every status, in which > everything that was gained will be lost, everything that was clung > to will be washed away. There will be nothing of an intellectual > level which will do anyone any good, at that time. And we all know > that, intellectually. Kel: You're both right, just arguing at different levels. Wisdom is sometime split into three categories: received (suta), intellectual (cinta) and experiential (bhavana). You need fairly mature suta and cinta wisdom as not only foundation but guide in gaining experiential wisdom. Without a proper guide, we can wander in the dark forever (or have been) and not make any notable progress. At the same time, we can spend the whole life reading a million different guides and never move a step. Both extremes have to be avoided. > I believe that a person who lives in the midst of and maintains > family and friends, possessions and status in the world, and > believes they can all-the-while be completely detached from this is > setting themselves up for an inevitable fall. A true test of someone's progress on the path is how they handle vissitudes of life. A monk is not necessarily free from friends, possessions or status in the world. They have to maintain relations with devotees. Take care of the monastery or their disciples. Even a meditation master has to worry about his students and whether he's providing proper guidance. The dhamma gives us the strength to face things straight-on, not avoid them. Of course the more one can reduce the external stimulus the faster or higher probability of one's progress on the path. However, saying work can't be done as a householder is a disservice to dhamma according to Ledi Sayadaw. - kel 40570 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 8:51pm Subject: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi Andrew, I think this discussion is mostly your own meditate practice now. So if you want to email me directly instead of posting to the group, that's fine with me. In general, I don't think full understanding of abhidhamma is necessary for a meditator. Basic concepts which you already have a firm grasp of is enough. You just need to establish yourself firmly in the practice with a technique. While Buddha encouraged us to find our own path, he also extolled the immeasurable value of a competent teacher or mentor. From my own experience, they can point out things to me in 5 mins while I can spend hours pondering and lose valuable practice time. > > Kel: As far as I've been taught, you want to move away from > > concepts to reach paramattha. So to analyze each mental state or > > consciousness you're experiencing and attempting to label would be > > futile. Not only is your awareness lagging behind the "present > > moment" but you end up adding another layer of concepts. > > OK. This goes along with what I have been thinking. Instead of > labeling consciousness 'sleepy,' direclty know it by type as explain > in Abhidhamma, right? So 'knowing' or recognizing,' not labeling. No? Kel: Yes but even recognizing is labelling at a subtle level. The fact that you can equate the consciousness with the types defined in Abhidhamma means there was a series of complicated mental processes (recall memory) that you missed. You just want to cognize because that's the only thing you can't stop (being product of kamma). > OK.. I was just using this as an example of how I can 'know' it > through Abhidharma, know it thoroughly, more than just described as > 'energy' in a commentary I have. Not actually asked when/how to > develop it, merely that Abhidharma should make things more precise. Kel: Well this was one point I wanted to make actually. Abhidhamma is like the periodic table. It's just tabulation and systemization of how the world works. It's not meant to be a guide for a practitioner. Of course it you understand it then your progress could be faster but it's not necessary or even the proper guide. > Yeah, mindful awareness. I am fond of nonconceptual awareness, > especially for mindfulness of dhammas and consciousness, but however I > contemplate feelings seems OK, this is an easier section. Kel: Thing to watch out for is if you fall into bhavanga or actually aware. Then you feel like aware but it's not sharp. Feels like floating around effortlessly but not very investigative or insightful. At some point you have to penetrate through layers to reach paramattha. > So the events present themselves with more distinction, that is, as > ultimate realities, as you progress. Is that what you're saying? Kel: Events or even prominent cetasika are observed individually and clearly instead of a group as one prominent monk described it. This is clearly a very advanced stage though. > Which processes is it so difficult to see? Only mental processes? Kel: well rupa vithi is 16 or 17 times slower (depends on how you count). It's EASIER to follow, but still pretty hard to see the whole process clearly. > This is what I was thinking, that I would know which consciousnesses > are arising and passing away, along with their factors. If that's not > how to do it, then how do I go beyond something so simple as noting > "sleepy, sleepy" or "mindful, mindful" as the commentary says? This > is why I originally began studying Abhidharma, to know the processes > themselves. Kel: Doesn't matter at the end since you have to observe each consciousness with equanimity. There are many techniques and systematic way of cultivating it. Vissudhimagga gives a few examples i know but it's mostly samatha. I think you've been practicing vipassana. You can mix and match the two as required. Basically if your noting mind is powerful, it can shatter 'sleepy' state as soon as you observe it. Now if you look at it with intention of shattering then it probably won't work since your mind wasn't equanimous. I'm not qualified to give meditative instructions so I won't. I would just ask how continuous is your mindfuless, what do you do when thoughts appear or pain? Can you stare at the pain just knowing it's just body/matter and impermanent and not related to you, as if happening to someone else? Ever get impatient with the practice or can't wait for a sit to be over? How do you handle many different things that appear during a session? > Isn't it necessary to know thoroughly what is happening for the > assurance of attainment to apply? Knowing each mind-state as > described by the Buddha in the Maha-satipatthana sutta? Is awareness > of 1/100th of the mental processes actually occurring going to cut it?!?! Kel: Well if you can keep up 1/100 for 24/7 then i can pretty much guarantee you'll be at least stream-enterer. From my perspective he's just enumerating all the possibilities so people understand you just have to be aware in every situation. Paraphrasing a bit, every state just know it as mind and matter phenomena. Then you'll see there is nothing to be attached to because it's fleeting. The moment you want to latch onto is already gone and all you can tether are concepts. Then when you experience this for yourself the (arising-passing away and later just passing away) nature of vedana (or whatever object). You should see an increase in your ability to "let go" of things. Then when it matures to a point, you'll let go of the view of a fixed entity self and reach first stage of liberation. > > Kel: some use example of a river. You can give it a name but ask > > if it's exactly the same from one moment to another. The water that > > keeps flowing are not the same droplets. right-view says it is not > > the same yet not another, merely a stream of consciousness. > > > > One consciousness appearing knowing now body, now mind state, now > element, right? Yeah in a sense. You have to look at the citta vithi to see the complete sequence. One vithi says knowing body-object. Then another vithi says knowing mind-object. A vithi isn't just one consciousness, Htoo posted the technical details of it. If you don't understand it, don't worry, it's not fundamental. Just have to know it arises and passes away. > > Kel: true test of attachment is how you react when you preceive > > yourself losing or lessening in sati. Are you agitated or accept it > > as is. Do your best to increase it with full equaminity or not? > > > > How necessary is sati, if it is not essential to the practise? And > how is it that people here generally think of sati in terms of what we > can do to develop it or allow it to stay and not decrease? Sati is very necessary but it's just a mean. In the same way, viriya, samadhi, panna and etc are all essential too. But, equanimity is the yardstick if you can truthfully examine yourself. Do you best to stay aware with sustained effort while remaining equanimous. Choiceless observation method is one of the harder ones to remain focused or concentrated. So find an anchor to increase your samadhi like anapana if you need it. With better practice you can "rebuild" your samadhi using kanika concentration. - kel 40571 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 9:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Howard: "A rupa of "earth" is a particular physical sensation, period." Hi Howard and TG, A physical sensation is body consciousness, not rupa. The nama/rupa distinction is simply mind and matter, the material and the immaterial. They are not the same in any way, yet somehow they interact. When your hand and an object touch you know there is an object, which is rupa, but the touch sensation is nama. The only thing we can say about rupa is that it is void of all mental qualities. Color, sound, taste, smell, texture are all mental qualities. You can tell this because you experience the same thing in different ways, often due to changes in your sensory organs. When our organs are working properly we assume there is an exact correlation between sensation and rupa but sensation behaves in a much different way, flickering here and there, always moving. If the furniture in my room danced around like my mind I would be living in a whirlpool. Larry 40572 From: Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. In a message dated 1/4/2005 9:03:09 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi Howard and TG, A physical sensation is body consciousness, not rupa. The nama/rupa distinction is simply mind and matter, the material and the immaterial. They are not the same in any way, yet somehow they interact. When your hand and an object touch you know there is an object, which is rupa, but the touch sensation is nama. The only thing we can say about rupa is that it is void of all mental qualities. Color, sound, taste, smell, texture are all mental qualities. You can tell this because you experience the same thing in different ways, often due to changes in your sensory organs. When our organs are working properly we assume there is an exact correlation between sensation and rupa but sensation behaves in a much different way, flickering here and there, always moving. If the furniture in my room danced around like my mind I would be living in a whirlpool. Larry Hi Larry Sounds like you got it all figured out. What I don't understand is why you asked the question. ;-) BTW, your furniture is dancing around much like your mind...its just doing it much slower and "unsystematically." Both mind and furniture are just respondents to conditional forces. TG 40573 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi AndrewL, Kel has made some good points, but I’ll add mine to your qs anyway. Thx for all the detailed comments. --- Andrew Levin wrote: > Well, let's try to sort these out. You are saying "one citta can > arise at a time." …. S: This is not just what I say, but what we read in the texts. See BB’s Guide to ch1,#3: “…..cittas, are reckoned 89, or, by a finer method of differentiation, as 121 (see Table 1.1) what we ordinarily think of as consciousness is really a series of cittas, momentary acts of consciousness, occurring in such rapid succession that we cannot detect the discrete occasions, which are of diverse types.” There can however be awareness of the characteristic of seeing or hearing or thinking, each kind different and never arising together. … >How can we reconcile this with walks that I have > taken being mindful of the breath, feelings, and objects of a few > sense doors almost concurrently, to the extent that /numerous/ devas > appeared overhead streaming above me (more about this in a min.) …. S: Our thoughts (not necessarily in words, but just attention to ‘signs’ about experiences) follows the sense experiences so quickly that it seems there can be mindfulness of many objects at once, but really it’s impossible. Only one reality ever appears at a time. Furthermore, when we’re referring to satipatthana, we’re only referring to mindfulness of cittas, cetasikas and rupas – not concepts such as breath or devas. For example, hardness or softness may appear, but if we then think about breath, devas or many objects, it’s thinking at that moment. … …. > Would you say that I was just being aware of one bit of consciousness > for its split-second duration and then move on to another, to produce > the illusion of continuity? It was this fast, it seemed like I was > mindful of numerous feelings of pleasure, pain, or neut in my body at > different times, and of what I was hearing and seeing at a > split-second rate, again, seemingly like I am mindful of it all at > once. So I know since this /has/ been acheived by me, it again /can/ > be acheived by me, especially if it /needs/ to be acheived by me. …. S: Recently I heard about 3 things which produce the illusion of continuity as you put it. One is the clinging to the idea of posture. For example, when we cling to an idea of our body sitting or walking, it covers up the momentary arising and falling of dhammas. Another is the continuity or succession of realities themselves.As you say, they follow each other so quickly and without any break, so it seems they can be experienced at once. Finally, there is the memory of a group or a whole, a perversion of sanna which makes it seem there can be seeing and hearing at the same time and so on. It’s not mindfulness. No one can say for another when there is or is not mindfulness. Panna (understanding) will know when it develops and really understands the nature of the mindfulness. What’s gone is gone. If there is clinging to it or dwelling on it now, this is the reality to be known. What’s gone is of no importance or value at all. …. >Anyhow, > is it that you propose that only one consciousness can exist at a > time, and that it alternates rapidly between the different sense > doors, creating an illusion of continuity? …. S: Yes, very well put.Of course, moha or delusion is really at the root of this illusion. Vism V111,40: ‘ “Life, person, pleasure, pain – just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return. No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow” ‘ (Nd 1,42) There is also the example given of the chariot wheel which touches the ground at just one spot at a time. …. > Where is body-consciousness located? If I feel the wind on my body, > that is vedana, but I don't know where that cetasika is physically > located - I mean it is an absolute reality, right? It's got to be > somewhere either in my leg, or more likely in my head making it feel > like it's in my leg. I am unable to see the consciousness of it. …. S: Body consciousness is ‘based’ all over the body. There is body-sense in the fingers, toes, arms etc whereby body consciousness can experience heat/cold, hardness/softness and motion. These are rupas experienced by body consciousness. Vedana (feelings) are cetasikas (mental factors) which accompany the body consciousness. So there is pleasant or unpleasant feeling at the instant the rupas are experienced by body consciousness. Yes, vedana is a reality, a nama, quite distinct from the rupas experienced by it, the citta and other cetasikas. Vedana arises at every moment, accompanying every citta. You can never see any consciousness, but awareness can be aware of the experiencing/consciousness or the feeling or the heat experienced, for example. …. > Seeing consciousness and hearing consciousness are only the result of > kamma, huh? …. S: Yes! … >That is kind of a new twist on things for me. It's hard > for me to accept that if I idle chatter on #buddhism/EFnet, that is > going to change my hearing of the car sounds, horns honking, people > talking as I pass the gas station.. etc. I don't see how it's > possible, but I won't negate its possibility outright. …. S: Unless the idle chatter is of the degree of kamma patha (another topic), it cannot bring results, but at the same time all kusala and akusala accumulates and can assist kamma patha in future. Recently in the ‘Cetasikas’ series there were examples of harsh speech resulting in hearing loud sounds etc as given in a sutta. Kamma-vipaka is of course a deep, deep subject, but we can see how there is kusala and akusala vipaka changing all the time, such as hearing pleasant and unpleasant sounds. Herman just gave the example of people hearing different sounds. Why? Vipaka and other conditions. Nothing unfair. …. > But to me it seems we can do this with idea of self to get to the > point where self-view is eliminated. (This does work, with the > contemplations outlined in the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, that we > still go through the four stages of enlightenment, no matter which > contemplation(s) we choose?) …. S: No, the idea of self just leads to more idea of self as I see it. Comy to Satipatthana Sutta: “What he sees that is not (properly) seen; What is seen, that he does not (properly) see; Not seeing (properly) he is shackled clean; And he, the shackled fool, cannot get free. ‘What he sees’ = what man or woman he sees……That perception, owing to wrong comprehension, does not get at the sense-basis [ruupaayatana] in the highest sense, philosophically, through the falsely determined condition of material form….etc” …. > Thinking sure can be known. But can't we also make use of that great > power of thinking to plan out how we are going to know even further > realities beyond thinking? I think so. This is what I'm saying here, > please reconsider the text. … S: But this is just thinking about knowing realities in the future, or become enlightened in future, instead of being mindful and understanding what is real right now. In other words, it’s wishful thinking, it seems to me. …. S:>>As we're comparing the way we both see practice, I'd say that > I see > > such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the > future as > > being a very big impediment to such practice. > > > A:> How? It's the Four Foundations of Mindfulness … S: Pls explain your qu. Clinging is included in the Foundations as an dhamma to be known, but it’s not itself the path to be followed. Al, I’ve ruthlessly trimmed your content. If there’s anything else you’d like discussed, pls repost it. I’ll be glad for any of your feedback and further comments on anything I’ve written here. I’m also delighted to read your discussion with Kel (& others I think). Pls keep it up for us all to learn from. Metta, Sarah ======= 40574 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:25pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 92 - Volition in the Cycle of Birth and Death (d) 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.5 Volition(cetanaa]in the Cycle of Birth and Death contd] ***** Rebirth-consciousness, the first citta of life, and its accompanying cetasikas are the mental result of kamma. In the planes where there are nåma and rúpa kamma also produces rúpas from the first moment of life. Also throughout life there are rúpas produced by kamma such as eyesense, earsense and the other senses which are the means for vipåkacittas to experience pleasant or unpleasant objects. The rúpas produced by kamma are the physical results of kamma. The different rúpas of our body are not only produced by kamma, but also by citta, by temperature and by nutrition. Thus, there are four factors which each produce different rúpas of our body. ***** [Ch.5 Volition in the cycle of Birth and Death to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 40575 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Apologies to the bees Hi Herman, --- Egbert wrote: > In closing, a little ditty > > I'd rather be a bee > It 'd sure beat being me > > As a worldling I can see > That it would be so heavenly > To buzz around unreflexively > > But for the bee > There would not be > even any dimensionality > > It is a human fantasy > that projects self-hood outwardly > > If there is an I > than that is why > everything else is seen anthropomorhically .... S: Cute;-) And here's another ditty, Still harping on micha ditthi. It's said a sotapanna's so wise, No self-view in any guise. In short, there's no doubt, All ditthi are out. Metta, Sarah ======= 40576 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 4, 2005 11:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Apologies Friend James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > I have been giving the Brahajala Sutta some study and I don't think > it includes *ALL* types of wrong views. It only includes wrong > views which are `fixed' and of an ontological order. … ;-). We’re taling about views relating to Truths, to an understanding of Dhamma. … > Not only that, > these various views were from the Buddha's time period and don't > necessarily apply to all time periods (for example, from my reading, > it doesn't include the modern wrong views of Existentialism and > Objectivism). … S: don’t you think the Buddha was teaching universal truths for all time periods? … From the Brahajala Sutta: > > "There are, monks, some ascetics and Brahmins who are speculators > about the past, having fixed views about the past, and who put > forward various speculative theories about the past, in eighteen > different ways. On what basis, on what grounds do they do > so?"… "This, monks, the Tathágata understands : These viewpoints > thus grasped and adhered to will lead to such-and-such destinations > in another world."… …. S: “Whatever recluses or brhamins are speculators about the past, hold settled views about the past, and assert various conceptual theorems referring to the past, all of them do so on these eighteen grounds, or on a certain one of them. OUTSIDE OF THESE THERE IS NONE.” {my caps]. S: Lots of detail in the commentary BB has translated. Lots of Q and A on the views and classifications too. At the end of one section, the comy gives: “…Therefore whatever views the Exalted One has explained, and the way they have been explained, should be accepted with conviction precisely in that way. No demonstration or examination is pertinent here, for this is the domain of the buddha’s knowledge, and the domain of the Buddha’s knowledge is inconceivable.” … > "Whatever ascetics and Brahmins who are speculators about the past > or the future or both, having fixed views on the matter and put > forth speculative views about it, these are all trapped in the net > with its sixty-two divisions, and wherever they emerge and try to > get out, they are caught and held in this net. Just as a skilled > fisherman or his apprentice might cover a small piece of water with > a fine-meshed net, thinking : `Whatever larger creatures there may > be in this water, they are all trapped in the net, caught, and held > in the net', so it is with all these : they are trapped and caught > in this net." …. Thank you. Again from the sutta: “It is on these sixty-two grounds, bhikkhus…….past…future……all of them do so on these sixty-two grounds, or on a certain one of them. OUTSIDE OF THESE THERE IS NONE.” Metta, Sarah ======= 40577 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 0:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. different individuals Hi Phil, Hope you're there and your computer's still running. I wished to say that I thought your post #40283 was really very astute and I agreed with all your points. Just a couple below: --- Philip wrote: > Am I right in assuming that once we know in theory about this > arising of the characteristics at enlightenment, that it is not > necessary to consider which characteristic one is most likely to > experience? Well, that's an obvious question - the answer is "yes > Phil, you're right. No need to think about that." .... S: ;-). Exactly. .... > Yet again, for the beginner there is such danger in thinking too > much about what kind of person one is because it invites wrong view > of self as fixed. But there *are* tendencies, and the verb "usually" > is used in the translation of one sutta (can't dig it up at the > moment) to encourage us to consider what we "usually" think about. .... S: Exactly again. Different tendencies changing all the time. ... > Is it possible to know where one's tendencies lie and is this > encouraged by the Buddha? Yes. Is it easy to take advantage of > knowing where one's tendencies lie in a skillful way? No. More > opportunity to cultivate patience here. ... S: Just at the present moment only. .... > BTW, what does everyone think about this next bit of the Bhikkhu's > commentary?: "Additionally, we might suppose, one is reckoned not > only by way of the defilements, but even more prominently by way of > the aggregate with which one principally identifies. One who inclines > to form is reckoned a "physical" person, one who inclines to feeling > a "hedonist", one who inclines to perception "an aesthete" (or fact- > gatherer?) -- one who inclines to > volition a "man of action" one who inclines to consciousness a > thinker etc." > > Is this commentary just speculation on the Bhikkhu's part or is > there any such teaching? I must respectfully say that it sounds a bit > dubious. ... S: I preferred your commentary comments too in this instance;-). Metta, Sarah ====== 40578 From: Egbert Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 0:16am Subject: Re: Seeing & Hearing Hi Howard (and all), Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated. Big snip up ahead :-). > I think that the issue you are raising is that of attention, and what > registers and what does not. But that, I think, is a different matter. I > believe that attention "highlights" experience, and that a certain highlighting > threshhold is required for an experience to "register". But even when it does not > register, it is still sensed, and at the time there is, for example, hearing, > even of a sound that does not register, there will not be seeing. > ====== HH > Am I right in reading you as saying that at a most basic level there cannot be a concurrent/parallel sensing? Are you saying that all sensing is serial ie one basic sensation at a time? (I accept that attention is serial in nature) Kind Regards Herman > With metta, > Howard > 40579 From: Egbert Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does Dear James, Thank you for this. As well as the Buddha's father, there is Bahiya, gored by a bovine. There is another sutta, which I just cannot place at the moment, where the Buddha chooses to teach Dhamma to a fellow he is sharing a stable with. The fellow "got it" as well, and got gored pretty much next day, if I remember correctly. All the best to you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Friend Herman, > > Herman: Out of interest, did those lay folk who "got it" return to > their householders life, and carry on managing their superannuation > funds (preparing for the future based on the past) as normal? > > James: No. According to the texts, if a person achieves Nibbana > they must become a monk or they will die and enter paranibanna (the > Buddha's father is an example…he died shortly after enlightenment > rather than becoming a monk). An enlightened person cannot be a > householder; I guess it is too antithetical to the enlightened life. > > Metta, > James 40580 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:16am Subject: Htoo- I'm seeing DTs in my dreams! Hi Htoo, You’ve written a whole series of excellent Dhamma Thread (DT) posts since we last chatted. Sometimes I get behind, but I do follow and appreciate them a lot as you know. I’m going to use short-hand for all these comments/qus which may only make sense to you. ..... DT185 #40338 Tadarammana – yes, I follow your posts and I think there are a complexity of conditions determing tadarammana as Sammohavinodani indicated I think.As you say it’s ‘patthana dhamma’ and the Patthana will be the first to disappear due to its profundity. I agree (or I read) as you say in #40339 that kus vipaka tadarammana can follow experience of a disagreeable object and vice versa. (Nina, we can possibly raise it with KS sometime too if you like, but I think we know the answer to this intricate points;-)). ..... DT196 #40169 Past/current object. I’m not sure that it’s correct that the object of patisandhi is always classified as past object. If the object of marana-asanna-javana-cittas was a ‘present object’, I understood it is the ‘duplicate’ which is the object of patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti in the next life, i.e ‘present’ object by navattaba (Not so Classifiable) object. Lots of detail in Sammohavinodani, but I confess this is just my understanding and I’m not checking now. It’s just like the way sense objects are understood in the mind-door process. Strictly speaking they’re past, but they are considered as ‘present’. Also this is the way citta B has citta A as object as you were discussing with Howard. Not just by thinking as in your example about dosa when you say ‘such and such time I was angry and that must be dosa….’. The characteristic of dosa can be understood directly as ‘present’ object. This comes up in other posts too. ….. DT 202 #40197 I’m sure I’m being dense, but under hadayavatthu nissita cittas ( cittas which depend on hadaya as base), - Ok got it now. I was confused before about the 75 and 33, but you’re indicating those that don’t arise in the arupa brahma realm in the ‘other’ 30. Perhaps this one was rather unclear, but correct I’m sure. ..... DT205 #40202 I’m confused about whether aragatta maggatthana puggala is considered as sikkha (trainer) or asikkha. I thought the latter as it is the magga citta which eradicates the defilements. You write that no 2 (this one) ‘have not yet attained arahatta magga nana’ and are called ‘sikkha’.. Maybe it’s a typo, b.c in DT206 #40245, you refer to asikkha cittas arising in the arahant inc. 1 arahatta phala citta. ..... DT208 #40248 I just want to say I like it a lot when you stress the points you do here such as: “many classifications of citta have been discussed……. There are illusionary lives as we define them but actually in ultimate sense there are only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana.’ We can’t stress this enough imho. ..... DT209 #40342 Excellent points.and post. The summaries are very helpful for clarification. You mention how patisandhi can arise anywhere (‘heaven’ or ‘top of a mountain’ )but you also stress ‘in actual term or in real term, there is no being at all but cittas and cetasikas arising and falling away along with arising and falling away of rupas even though they are not mixed and they are separate matters’. And of course, like it discusses in Milinda panha, wherever rebirth occurs, the time for patisandhi to arise is the same! ..... Mind-door processing #40345 I don’t know why you suggest ‘there is no rupa as object or arammana’ in the mind-door processes. Generally this is true, but rupas can also be experienced in the mind-door immediately after the sense door process as you know ..... Finally, a very small point DT210 #40373 Why do you say ‘the cittas of these vithi varas take panca-arammana or 5 sense object’? Why not 7 sense object? I assume, pathavi, tejo and vayo are being classified as one here? Anyway v.interesting and useful. ..... Really, Htoo, your output has been very prolific (I know it’s slowed down a little recently) and there’s been almost nothing I’ve found unclear and almost nothing to nit-pick or question. I greatly look forward to the continued series. (I’m still a little behind and have a few to read later, but you know me – I’m always behind with comments). Metta and anumodana. Please meet Kel, also from Burma and with keen Abhidhamma knowledge. and interest to help us out here. Metta, Sarah ======= 40581 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Hi Larry, op 05-01-2005 01:22 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: how can the mind-door get the rupa if it is not first > known in a sense-door process?" > > This doesn't help because the sense door process arises in the mind > door. The problem is how do we get this gigantic mindless 100% physical > earth into my 0% physical mind? N: Lodewijk thinks that this is a perfectly good question and completely understandable that you ask this. Next week when we propably go away for a few days he will think further about this. Meanwhile, what shall I say? I am not inclined to have pictorial ideas about mind and matter. I think that citta can experience anything, even nibbaana which is unconditioned. If you were blind you could not think about visible object. But you can verify that now you can think of colour or visible object which is rupa. But why can you think of it? Because there has been seeing through the eyesense. We can call eyesense, a rupa, the eyedoor. Doorway, because it is the means for the experiencing an object. Without a doorway you could not experience visible object, you could not see. You write to Howard: N: Color etc. do not experience anything, they are rupas. But these rupas themselves are different all the time. They are never the same. There are many different colors, many different sounds because of conditions, they are conditioned dhammas. Even though there is a great variety of colour, sound etc. citta experiences them all. And sañña marks each object. That is why citta knows whether the flower is a real one or a fake one. Just a few thoughts, Nina. 40582 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubt and Confidence Dear Tep and Chris, This is a good topic. op 04-01-2005 21:26 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > Before starting to write this mail, I read your message twice. A question > came to my mind about what conditions (paccaya) we must keep > throughout each day such that "great interest, strong enthusiam, > confidence, contentment in the practice" can be maintained. N: I read a sutta, G.S. Book of the Tens, Ch II, §1, Making for Warding (It is in the beginning): it is about a monk's dwelling that is complete in five factors. Where it is easy to obtain the requisites, where elders are dwelling who are well versed in the dhamma. I like the emphasis on Dhamma discussions here as a means to solve doubts. More understanding does condition confidence, enthusiasm. T: Then I recalled a sutta I had read long ago. It says that the monk can > be steady in the progress toward Nibbana when he keeps a "samadhi > nimitta" in the morning, in the evening, and at night. I am not sure what it > may mean to most people who don't do meditation. N: I read a sutta in S.N. before about the three times of day, that it is always the auspicious time for kusala. I did not see the samadhi nimitta, but this can be included, for example by way of a meditation for every occasion, like the Buddha's excellent qualities. Even while working or . But I am thinking foremost of Dhamma as meditation. Considering and beginning to be aware of nama and rupa. This solves doubts even at a beginning stage. Recently I have been reflecting on beginners and progress and how to see this. If you are interested I may write about this. Perhaps a seemingly lack of progress could make some friends here discouraged. What do you think, Tep? I like very much what Howard and TG wrote. Nina. 40583 From: nina Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:24am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 128, and Tiika Visuddhimagga XIV, 128, and Tiika. Intro: in the previous section feelings were classified according to jaati, class, as kusala, akusala and indeterminate, including vipaaka and kiriya. In this section feelings classified as fivefold are analysed according to the object that is experienced. The object can be desirable or undesirable and this conditions the arising of different feelings. Text Vis. 128: Herein, 'pleasure' has the characteristic of experiencing a desirable tangible datum. N: The Tiika states that all feelings have the general characteristic of experiencing, but that they here are explained by defining their object, with the words:< 'pleasure' has the characteristic of experiencing a desirable tangible datum.> Text Vis. : Its function is to intensify associated states. N: The Tiika explains intensifying (upabruuhana) as development and growth. It strengthens the accompanying dhammas. Text: It is manifested as bodily enjoyment. The Tiika quotes from the K.S. III, Ch 3, § 26: The Tiika explains that the word means, dependent on the body, thus, that here satisfaction (assaado) is the manifestation of bodily pleasant feeling. Text Vis: Its proximate cause is the body faculty (kaayindriya). The Tiika explains that this is its physical base, vatthu. N: The bodysense is all over the body and this is the base for the citta which is body-consciousness and its accompamying cetasikas, including bodily feeling. Vis. text: 'Pain' has the characteristic of experiencing an undesirable tangible datum. It function is to wither associated states. It is manifested as bodily affliction. Its proximate cause is the body faculty. The Tiika states that this should be understood according to the same method. Text Vis: 'Joy' has the characteristic of experiencing a desirable object. Its function is to exploit [55] in one way or another the desirable aspect. N: The Tiika explains (yathaa tathaa vaa) as pertaining to truly desirable or not truly desirable. The object may be intrinsically desirable or imagined to be so (T.A. p. 90). The function of happy feeling is making use of or enjoying (sa.mbuñjana) the pleasant object. Text Vis: It is manifested as mental enjoyment. N: mental enjoyment is the translation of enjoyment of cetasikas (cetasikaassaada). This is the satisfaction of the accompanying cetasikas. The cetasika which is happy feeling conditions the accompanying cetasikas. Text Vis: Its proximate cause is tranquility. The Tiika quotes from the G.S. Book of the Elevens, Ch 2, § 1, Mahaa-nama, Body in this context means the mental body, cetasikas. The Tiika explains that, based on the words of the sutta, happiness should be understood as referring to happy feeling that is not material, not worldly (niraamisa). N: Happy feeling arising with the jhånacitta is not based on the household life or the sensepleasures, but based on renunciation. Thus, the proximate cause of this kind of happy feeling is calm. Text Vis: 'Grief' has the characteristic of experiencing an undesirable object. Its function is to exploit in one way or another the undesirable aspect. It is manifested as affliction. N: The Tiika explains that the characteristic of unhappy feeling should be dealt with in the same way as the characteristic of happy feeling. Text Vis: Its proximate cause is invariably the heart-basis. Herein is the difference with happy feeling. The Tiika explains that since unhappy feeling arises in the sensuous planes of existence (kaama-dhaatu) its proximate cause is invariably the heartbase. N: Unhappy feeling can only arise in the sensuous planes where there are naama and ruupa. Citta rooted in dosa accompanied by unhappy feeling is conditioned by clinging to sense objects. Text Vis.: 'Equanimity' has the characteristic of being felt as neutral. N: the Tiika explains that it is impartial in the experience of the object. The Pali term majjhatta, being in the middle, neutral, is used here. Text Vis.: Its function is not to intensify or wither associated states much. It is manifested as peacefulness. Its proximate cause is consciousness without happiness.[56] N: As to its manifestation, the Tiika explains that this is to be understood as the blameless indifferent feeling which is not worldly, based on renunciation (niraamisa). The Tiika states that this does not pertain to all kinds of indifferent feeling. N: The indifferent feeling arising with jhaanacitta of the fifth stage (of the fivefold system) is indifferent feeling which is based on renunciation. Its proximate cause is citta without happiness, which is here the translation of piiti, rapture. The jhaanacitta of the fourth stage is without rapture, this has been abandoned. However, it is still accompanied by happy feeling. This citta is the proximate cause of the indifferent feeling arising with the jhånacitta of the fifth stage. Vis. Text: This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the feeling aggregate. ---------------------------- Note 55. Sambhoga--'exploiting': not in this sense in P.T.S. Dict. (see also Ch. XVII,51). Note 56. The translator should have added this note to the previous para, no. 127, where the Tiika deals with these subjects, and uses the similes of hammer and cottonwool. **** N: The condition for pleasant or painful bodily feelings is only a desirable or undesirable tangible object. Thus, the elements of solidity, temperature and motion. Bodily feelings are mental, they are vipaakacittas, produced by kamma. We find it very important whether the object that is experienced is desirable or undesirable, and on account of that object defilements are likely to arise shortly after the vipaakacittas. We should remember that feelings arise each because of their own conditions and that there is no self who feels. It is feeling that feels. The Dispeller of Delusion, (Ch 7, Classification of the Foundations of mindfulness, Contemplation of Feeling, 1215) explains that the basis of feeling is its object. We read:< Therefore he knows accordingly that ³feeling feels by making this or that basis for pleasure and so on its object, but [the words] ŒI feel¹ are merely a conventional expression [used] with regard to the occurrence of that feeling.² In this way it should be understood that ³ he knows: ŒI feel a pleasant feeling¹ ² while discerning thus that ³it is feeling that feels by making the basis the object.² > When we read in the Satipatthaana Sutta the words: we should remember the real meaning of these words as explained above. They point to the truth of anatta. **** Nina. 40584 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 2:51am Subject: Re: Doubt and Confidence --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and > wanes ... ? > I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, > strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and > then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of > that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to ... Dear Christine O yes, I recognize this and have it myself too on this moment. To be honest: it's not for buddhism in general but for the scholastic Abhidhamma details (which I called in a not yet finished discussion with Sarah 'orthodoxy'). I now think the study of it's details are not fruitfull for me now; I think (intuition !) now doing (insight-) meditation and studying sutta's and sutra's are more fruitfull. And perhaps in half a year studying Abhidhamma helps me again: there are more paths to enlightenment. Metta Joop 40585 From: Philip Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 3:09am Subject: Re: sutta, to Phil Hi Nina, and all > Thank you for your good wishes also to Lodewijk, and we also wish you a year > fruitful with Dhamma. > The birthday part went fine, music included. But my father was overtired > when we celebrated Christmas and New Year's Eve. He could hardly eat and > everything was really difficult. Nina, there is an expression in Japanese you probably remember from your time here. "O-tsukaresama-deshita." Said to thank people for their sincere efforts to do good work. Literally, more like "you must be tired!" > I had to laugh that you dreamt of me. I used to write all my dreams in notebooks and really cling to the symbolism and whatnot. And I did overdo it. But I still feel encouraged by this one. By the way, I am reading your "Introduction to the Buddhist Scripture" and find many of my favourite suttas from Samyutta Nikaya. "This is impermanent, I do not cling to it. It has no lure for me." I still find myself saying "mai pen rai!" a lot these days, just letting go of things, knowing that it doesn't concern me. You know, it is probably just a coinicidence, but since I listened to those audio clips of K Sujin I have stopped pressing so hard to figure things out, struggling over whether to practice more formal meditation or not. Now it is just appreciation of moments of letting go of things, real confidence that I am working on the eradication of unwholesome roots, little by little. I have read that along with samvega, that sense of urgency, there arises something called pasada, I think, which is a kind of calm confidence or something. I'm also reconnected to my Japanese studies, and my writing. Perhaps not quite as intense on the Dhamma study as I was throughout last year, but that's OK. > personally, the recollection of the > > Buddha as worthy and rightly self-awakened and such is personally not > > so helpful for me. I find these days the way I reflect on the Buddha > > is by reflecting on the Noble Truth of Suffering, really soak in it, > > and from that arises such gratitude to the Buddha who shows us the > > way to liberation. > N: Meditation can be a short recollection. When you find that subjects of > Abhidhamma like akusala cittas can be verified in life, you can remember > that the Buddha taught all this. Where would you be without his teaching? I would probably still be doing visualization involving light flowing from my forehead and whatnot. And on the surface might be more blissed out and prone to the teary-eyed ecstasies I used to get a lot. Now I am sober - that's a term Phra D used in his Dhamma talk - sober. By no means cold or joyless, but definitely more sober and heedful. Also sober when it comes to the booze! But there is not telling when that might come bubbling up again. As you say, we can supress defilements, but when the conditions are right, they come forth again. Metta, Phil 40586 From: Egbert Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 3:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: What the mind does Hi Kel, Nice to see you posting to the list, and thanks for the feedback. There are some comments interspersed below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > > The householders life is essentially a vote for attachment to the > > meaningless, and a rejection of the real. The householders life is > > defined in terms of having, not being. And having is defined in > > terms of attachment. > Kel: This seems to imply everyone should become an arahant or > bust which need not be the case. === H > I was not intending to write prescriptively, but I can see how it could appear that way. It is possible to read the Suttas as if- then statements. As in - If you do this, that will follow. No thought of shoulding, just if you do this, that will follow. I think there is an implication that if you are happy to suffer, keep doing what you are doing. > Having is not attachment. Losing > what you have and reacting with negativity is attachment. H > I agree, but only in part. Having also prevents approaching the Teachings. This is from Udana 2:5 " Thus have I heard. On a certain occasion the Blessed One dwelt at Savatthi, in the Jetavana, the garden of Anâthapindika. At that time a certain lay disciple, by name Icchanangolaka arrived at Savatthi for the purpose of transacting some business. When this lay disciple had completed what he had to do at Savatthi, he went to where the Blessed One was, and drawing near he saluted the Blessed One and sat down respectfully apart. And the Blessed One said to the disciple as he sat there: "For a long time, O disciple, you have behaved in this manner, that is, with regard to coming here." "For a long time, Sire, I have desired to approach and see the Blessed One, but I have been deterred by business, so I have been unable to approach and see the Blessed One." And the Blessed One, in this connection, on that occasion, breathed forth this solernn utterance:-- "Happy is that upright and learned one who has no possessions! See how the rich man is troubled; How one man is in bondage to another." Even > while "being" there's still goals like reaching nibbana. Again it's > not the lack of goals, it's how you go about achieving those goals > and what you do when you fail. An arahant doesn't sit in a forest > like a vegetable. They go about expounding dhamma to the masses. > Relieving people of their misery is very much goal-oriented work. H > I do not think an arahant thinks "I'm an arahant and they are not. I will relieve their misery". Arahants do not think in terms of self, or in terms of other (selves). What an arahant does, an arahant does. What a worldling perceives an arahant to be doing is bound to be wrong. > > > H > I could not write down a single thought that I have ever had > > that wasn't meaningless, except for the thought that they were all > > meaningless. > > Kel: too extreme imho. Buddha taught "right thought" not "no > thought". Anguttara Nikàya 1. Ekakanipàta XVI. Ekadhammapali 320 Bhikkhus, just as a little bit of excreta smells and should be got rid of, I do not specify thinking even for the fraction of a second. Thanks again for your feedback, and kind regards Herman 40587 From: Philip Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 3:15am Subject: Re: Book recommendations Hi Andrew > Not meant to cause harm or ideas others. > If more people are concerned about it in the future I might change > the nick. That'S OK. I just wanted to mention that it did catch my attention. Anyways, glad to her it's just a nick. I hope you enjoy the book. It really focusses in a very clear way on the kusala and akusala roots, with sutta selections and brief commentary. Metta, Phil 40588 From: Egbert Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 3:47am Subject: Re: Doubt and Confidence Hi Christine, > Hello all, > > Strange, isn't it ... how enthusiam for the Dhamma wafts and > wanes ... ? > I've noticed a pattern over the last year or so - great interest, > strong enthusiam, confidence, contentment in the practice .. and > then, boredom, alienation, doubt, discontent. I'm at the bottom of > that cycle at the moment - hope it is a cycle - not sure what to do - > other than having patience, and keeping on keeping on .... > > metta and peace, > Christine > --- The trouble is that you think you have time--- My father appends his posts with "No matter were you go, there you are". The following is a vague memory of something Leigh Brassington may have said "Don't worry about it, you'll never get out of this alive" And I say "What is real is beyond doubt, and beyond discussion. Whatever you doubt can be safely discarded as being unreal" Cheers, big ears Herman 40589 From: Egbert Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 4:08am Subject: Re: Apologies to the bees Hi Sarah, > > And here's another ditty, > Still harping on micha ditthi. > It's said a sotapanna's so wise, > No self-view in any guise. > In short, there's no doubt, > All ditthi are out. > You're a poet, and you didn't even know it :-) You'll hear no more about the matter for at least a period of time :- ) Cheers Herman > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= 40590 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 5:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: Doubt and Confidence --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep and Chris, > This is a good topic. ... Dear Nina I already had sent my reaction to Christine before I read yours. In fact my doubt is not about the Dhamma itself but about the question if studying the details of the Abhidhamma is relevant to me on this moment. Especially the lack of doubt by you and some other dsg-contribuants gives me the most problems. Stating the complex details of Abhidhamma without ever explaining how you get this information, without any emperical reference, does not give me inspiration, is only scholastic. On these moments reading for example the Heart-Sutra does give me more inspiration Two points about your message: - You said: "Dhamma as meditation. Considering and beginning to be aware of nama and rupa". I had understood, and sometimes experienced, that this awareness (the first nana, Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind (nama-rupa- pariccheda-ñana) is a result, a output of insight-meditation. But if I understand you well you state it is a inpute, is that correct? - You proposed (to Tep): "Recently I have been reflecting on beginners and progress and how to see this. If you are interested I may write about this. Perhaps a seemingly lack of progress could make some friends here discouraged." Maybe it is to me, if you understand that's not "lack of progress" but "lack of inspiration" that is my problem. Metta Joop 40591 From: Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sense-door process, rupa. Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/5/05 12:02:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "A rupa of "earth" is a particular physical sensation, period." > > Hi Howard and TG, > > A physical sensation is body consciousness, not rupa. The nama/rupa > distinction is simply mind and matter, the material and the immaterial. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Nope, I beg to differ. So-called matter, external physical substance, is concept-only. It is never an element of experience. There is no knowing of it - only conjecturing of it. There are two kinds of phenomena (by which word I mean "elements of experience" or "content of consciousness"): the mental (nama) and the physical (rupa). What the Buddha called "earth", "air", "fire", and "water" are examples of physical phenomena, with earth, for example, being felt solidity. These are phenomenological distinctions. ----------------------------------------- > They are not the same in any way, yet somehow they interact. When your > hand and an object touch you know there is an object, which is rupa, but > the touch sensation is nama. > --------------------------------------- Howard: No. The touch sensation is rupa. It's presence - the consciousness of it - is nama. ----------------------------------------- The only thing we can say about rupa is> > that it is void of all mental qualities. Color, sound, taste, smell, > texture are all mental qualities. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: No, they are not mental qualities. They are rupas. ---------------------------------------- You can tell this because you> > experience the same thing in different ways, often due to changes in > your sensory organs. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: They are not the same thing. They are different dhammas. Because they are similar, we *think* of them as the same. --------------------------------------- When our organs are working properly we assume> > there is an exact correlation between sensation and rupa but sensation > behaves in a much different way, flickering here and there, always > moving. If the furniture in my room danced around like my mind I would > be living in a whirlpool. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Your "organs", "furniture", and the "whirlpool" are all concept-only. There is no correlation to be made between sensation and rupa. The sensation *is* rupa. ----------------------------------------- > > 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) 40592 From: Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 1:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeing & Hearing Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/5/05 3:23:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > HH >Am I right in reading you as saying that at a most basic level > there cannot be a concurrent/parallel sensing? Are you saying that > all sensing is serial ie one basic sensation at a time? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: That is what I understand the Buddhist belief to be, and I suspect that it is correct. I don't, however, know it to be correct, and parallel sensing wouldn't bother me in the slightest. However it is, well, so it is. ---------------------------------------- > > > (I accept that attention is serial in nature) > > ===================== 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) 40593 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 7:06am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >Howard: >... I think that properties, relations, tuples, and collections are all >concept-only. They do give understanding about the way things are, but they are >mental constructs - all of them. > > The kind of conditions referred to in the teachings are not so much things that *give* understanding as things that *arise from* understanding as it is developed (although of course intellectual understanding of conditions does act as a basis for the further development of direct understanding). > Howard: > > Yes, I think that is correct. And then, also realizing, fully, that no >dhammas are self-existent, the entire experiential edifice is seen to be a >house of fragile glass cards that with the final enlightenment that is the end >of the card game comes crashing, shatteringly, down. > I'm afraid you've lost me here. Dhammas as 'not self-existent' is not terminology I am familiar with (I am of course familiar with the 3 characteristics and also dhammas as conditioned). Likewise the expression 'experiential edifice'. > Howard: > > If not a dhamma and not a concept, then what? That's all there is, >Jon. > As I said in an earlier post, you are assuming a 'rule' that isn't there. Actually, to be exact, dhammas are all there is (not concepts too). Dhammas have characteristics that, according to the texts, are apparent to developed panna. Likewise the conditioning factors that pertain between dhammas are potentially observable to developed panna, as an outcome of insight into the true nature of the individual dhammas to which they pertain, as I read the texts. Jon 40594 From: Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 2:42am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/5/05 10:13:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > >Howard: > > > > Yes, I think that is correct. And then, also realizing, fully, that no > >dhammas are self-existent, the entire experiential edifice is seen to be a > > >house of fragile glass cards that with the final enlightenment that is the > end > >of the card game comes crashing, shatteringly, down. > > > > I'm afraid you've lost me here. Dhammas as 'not self-existent' is not > terminology I am familiar with (I am of course familiar with the 3 > characteristics and also dhammas as conditioned). Likewise the > expression 'experiential edifice'. > ====================== It's just ordinary English, Jon, not special Dhammic terminology. To not be self-existent is to be dependent. Everything that arises does so *in dependence* on conditions, making them not SELF-existent. By "the entire experiential edifice" I mean all that we experience. No big deal here. 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) 40595 From: Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 4:01am Subject: Concepts and Questions Hi All Few questions... #1 Did the Buddha ever say "concepts don't exist" or discuss thier ontological irrelevence in any manner? (He did say..."In whatever way it is conceived, the fact is ever other than that." This shows concepts miss the mark in describing "non-relative truths." But doesn't say concepts aren't real.) #2 Does anyone believe it is possible to attain enlightenment without using concepts as a "stepping stone" for that attainment? #3 If so I'd be interested in how that's done? #4 If not, I'd be interested in how "non-existent states" can lay a "real foundation" for attaining enlightenment? In other words, how does something that doesn't exist have causal impact? TG 40596 From: Andrew Levin Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 9:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, > > Kel has made some good points, but I'll add mine to your qs anyway. Thx > for all the detailed comments. > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > > Well, let's try to sort these out. You are saying "one citta can > > arise at a time." > …. > S: This is not just what I say, but what we read in the texts. See BB's > Guide to ch1,#3: > > "…..cittas, are reckoned 89, or, by a finer method of differentiation, as > 121 (see Table 1.1) what we ordinarily think of as consciousness is really > a series of cittas, momentary acts of consciousness, occurring in such > rapid succession that we cannot detect the discrete occasions, which are > of diverse types." > > There can however be awareness of the characteristic of seeing or hearing > or thinking, each kind different and never arising together. Point. > … > >How can we reconcile this with walks that I have > > taken being mindful of the breath, feelings, and objects of a few > > sense doors almost concurrently, to the extent that /numerous/ devas > > appeared overhead streaming above me (more about this in a min.) > …. > S: Our thoughts (not necessarily in words, but just attention to `signs' > about experiences) follows the sense experiences so quickly that it seems > there can be mindfulness of many objects at once, but really it's > impossible. Only one reality ever appears at a time. Furthermore, when > we're referring to satipatthana, we're only referring to mindfulness of > cittas, cetasikas and rupas – not concepts such as breath or devas. For > example, hardness or softness may appear, but if we then think about > breath, devas or many objects, it's thinking at that moment. What I am getting at here with the deva information is taht I was practising so intensely that the devas felt it worthwhile to protect me. This does not happen just sitting at a computer and watching one element. When I practise, I will try to be mindful of all the elements at one time, or with such frequency that in conventional standards, it is all at once. Again, the difference appears very stark to me. The difference being enough that celestial beings viewed me as living a religious life when I was practising the way I said. (I know it is not good to dwell on the devas, a local monk has told me it could have me stray off the path, but I thought it would illustrate my point here well. And your point of the signs is understood. > …. > > Would you say that I was just being aware of one bit of consciousness > > for its split-second duration and then move on to another, to produce > > the illusion of continuity? It was this fast, it seemed like I was > > mindful of numerous feelings of pleasure, pain, or neut in my body at > > different times, and of what I was hearing and seeing at a > > split-second rate, again, seemingly like I am mindful of it all at > > once. So I know since this /has/ been acheived by me, it again /can/ > > be acheived by me, especially if it /needs/ to be acheived by me. > …. > S: Recently I heard about 3 things which produce the illusion of > continuity as you put it. One is the clinging to the idea of posture. For > example, when we cling to an idea of our body sitting or walking, it > covers up the momentary arising and falling of dhammas. Another is the > continuity or succession of realities themselves.As you say, they follow > each other so quickly and without any break, so it seems they can be > experienced at once. Finally, there is the memory of a group or a whole, a > perversion of sanna which makes it seem there can be seeing and hearing at > the same time and so on. It's not mindfulness. > > No one can say for another when there is or is not mindfulness. Panna > (understanding) will know when it develops and really understands the > nature of the mindfulness. What's gone is gone. If there is clinging to it > or dwelling on it now, this is the reality to be known. What's gone is of > no importance or value at all. Pffft! I say it's reproduceable. Try to understand, I am not trying to practise to the goal right now, I am trying to outline a path of practise I can take, that allows me to see progress along the way, and that I am confident will lead to the goal. So thinking *is* called for here - as I read in "Zen (Meditation?) In Plain English," thinking is a tool- not one that is appropriate for every situation, but it certainly has its uses, and I think trying to establish the validity of where my practise seems it will go appears to be such a situation to me. > …. > >Anyhow, > > is it that you propose that only one consciousness can exist at a > > time, and that it alternates rapidly between the different sense > > doors, creating an illusion of continuity? > …. > S: Yes, very well put.Of course, moha or delusion is really at the root of > this illusion. > > Vism V111,40: > > ` "Life, person, pleasure, pain – just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow" ` (Nd 1,42) > > There is also the example given of the chariot wheel which touches the > ground at just one spot at a time. OK, but to clear up, the cittas are always located in the mind, right? Or is it on different sense-bases? > S: Body consciousness is `based' all over the body. There is body- sense in > the fingers, toes, arms etc whereby body consciousness can experience > heat/cold, hardness/softness and motion. These are rupas experienced by > body consciousness. Vedana (feelings) are cetasikas (mental factors) which > accompany the body consciousness. So there is pleasant or unpleasant > feeling at the instant the rupas are experienced by body consciousness. > Yes, vedana is a reality, a nama, quite distinct from the rupas > experienced by it, the citta and other cetasikas. Vedana arises at every > moment, accompanying every citta. Is consciousness there too? > > You can never see any consciousness, but awareness can be aware of the > experiencing/consciousness or the feeling or the heat experienced, for > example. Weird, I thought I've seen consciousness, and on a Buddhist community forum I visit, one of the top important posts is "Does anything exist other than consciousness?" So it appears other people have seen it too. > …. > > Seeing consciousness and hearing consciousness are only the result of > > kamma, huh? > …. > S: Yes! > … > >That is kind of a new twist on things for me. It's hard > > for me to accept that if I idle chatter on #buddhism/EFnet, that is > > going to change my hearing of the car sounds, horns honking, people > > talking as I pass the gas station.. etc. I don't see how it's > > possible, but I won't negate its possibility outright. > …. > S: Unless the idle chatter is of the degree of kamma patha (another > topic), it cannot bring results, but at the same time all kusala and > akusala accumulates and can assist kamma patha in future. Recently in the > `Cetasikas' series there were examples of harsh speech resulting in > hearing loud sounds etc as given in a sutta. Kamma-vipaka is of course a > deep, deep subject, but we can see how there is kusala and akusala vipaka > changing all the time, such as hearing pleasant and unpleasant sounds. > Herman just gave the example of people hearing different sounds. Why? > Vipaka and other conditions. Nothing unfair. I am just lost here. How can idle chatter not be kamma patha? > …. > > But to me it seems we can do this with idea of self to get to the > > point where self-view is eliminated. (This does work, with the > > contemplations outlined in the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, that we > > still go through the four stages of enlightenment, no matter which > > contemplation(s) we choose?) > …. > S: No, the idea of self just leads to more idea of self as I see it. > > Comy to Satipatthana Sutta: > > "What he sees that is not (properly) seen; > What is seen, that he does not (properly) see; > Not seeing (properly) he is shackled clean; > And he, the shackled fool, cannot get free. > > `What he sees' = what man or woman he sees……That perception, owing to > wrong comprehension, does not get at the sense-basis [ruupaayatana] in the > highest sense, philosophically, through the falsely determined condition > of material form….etc" > …. > OK. Best to know ultimate realities then, right? > > Thinking sure can be known. But can't we also make use of that great > > power of thinking to plan out how we are going to know even further > > realities beyond thinking? I think so. This is what I'm saying here, > > please reconsider the text. > … > S: But this is just thinking about knowing realities in the future, or > become enlightened in future, instead of being mindful and understanding > what is real right now. In other words, it's wishful thinking, it seems to > me. I know that one day, as I go through all this, running through day hospital, taking showers, being overcome with feelings of fear and dread of death, taking walks, the point will come where I have great mindfulness, and will take taht and stay with it as long as I can or until I get enlightened. So I am anticipating that (and it has happened before that I've had this opportunity) and trying to make sure it's the right way. Trying to understand how practise is and how, if at all, it will bear fruit. > …. > S:>>As we're comparing the way we both see practice, I'd say that > > I see > > > such clinging to mindfulness that has arisen or may arise in the > > future as > > > being a very big impediment to such practice. > > > > > > A:> How? It's the Four Foundations of Mindfulness > … > S: Pls explain your qu. Clinging is included in the Foundations as an > dhamma to be known, but it's not itself the path to be followed. It explains that mindfulness is to be cultivated, developed, and enlarged, especially a factor of enlightenment, and that mindfulness of certain nama and rupa (such as four elements) will see craving and clinging wane. Mindfulness is the objective of the Four Foundations of _Mindfulness_ :0) > Al, I've ruthlessly trimmed your content. If there's anything else you'd > like discussed, pls repost it. I'll be glad for any of your feedback and > further comments on anything I've written here. > > I'm also delighted to read your discussion with Kel (& others I think). > Pls keep it up for us all to learn from. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= Kel and I have gone to private e-mail. There was some overlap here with Q&A between you & I and between Kel & I. Will post if it goes deeper or longer than a few replies. Thanks Sarah, For being unbelievably patient with me as always, A.L. 40597 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 10:31am Subject: The Buddha and mass destruction of lives and The Dhamma Dear Dhamma Friends, In any era, in any life there hears at least one event of mass destruction of lives. Even in The Buddha time there were events. The Buddha is incomparable as He is the perfected one. Among many different qualities, 'karuna' is amazing. 'Arising of karuna or not' is not in connection with achieving liberation. His Buddhahood was actually the final result of 'the maha- karuna'. This maha-karuna led Him to fulfil the hardest things at the expence of unbearable sufferings. There used to say blood donated were much much more than maha-samuda or great oceans. Eyes donated were larger than great mountains when they were piled up. Once in His last life that is when He was a Buddha there came news that there was an event of mass destruction of lives. It was in 'Vesaalii'. He looked into the matter with special nanas and told Ananda that He would go to 'Vesaalii' where mass destruction of lives happened with the aim of prevention of further destruction of lives. Once Vesaalii was in disaster. The Buddha acted as a leader along with state officials in sorting out these mass destruction of lives. On another occasion, The Buddha foresaw that there were possibilities of a war and mass destruction of many lives. The Buddha personally helped people to be free from the war. The king Vitaddupa was extremely angry on a matter personally and that led him to declare a war on Sakya clan people. The king went for war for the first time. But in the midway there was The Great Buddha sitting under a tree. The king could not trapess and he approached The Buddha and The Buddha preached him to calm down. He stopped his thought of making war and went back. This happened up to 3 separate times and The Buddha, our Great teacher, the Possesser of the Great Karuna stopped the war up to 3 times. The problem was between the king Vitaddupa and relatives of The Buddha, all of whom were Sakya clan. As the matter happened 3 times even in the His presence, The Buddha looked into the matter and saw that 'niyama cannot be changed'. Once in an era long long long ago, these clan people were fisher men. They did have bad kamma of killing in mass. The results were coming right now and 3 times had been already attempted by The Buddha's power. But as niyama cannot be changed niyama is just going to take its own action. So even The Buddha could not stop that particular war among Sakya clan people and the king Vitaddupa and there had to happen mass destruction of lives. Maha-karuna was so great that even after passing away [mahaparinibbana] it was still working. In which way? The body of The Buddha was there in Kusinaarammana awaiting Venerable Mahakassapa. When the Venerable came and saw with his own eyes that the body of The Buddha was on the sweet wood sticks. Before his arrival bhikkhus tried to light to cremate the body of The Buddha. But everyone was unsuccessful and the fire cannot be created. Mahakassapa approached the body of The Buddha and gave homage to The Buddha. It is said that the feet of The Buddha came out and touched the forehead of Mahakassapa when he gave homage. It was on Sunday that auto-cremation happened. The karuna was there. There will be relics. But there was possibilities of war because of unjustice sharing of relics. There was a river and each side lived people the groups of whom were not friend but enemies. The autocremation happened right at the border of two countries and relics fell to both side equally. In this way the war was stopped. When The Buddha was alive He had to tame these two group not to fight each other. They were enemies because of 'river-water' which flowed between the two countries. There were several occasions that The Buddha Himself helped in the disasters. But helping could not go beyond niyamas. The best help that He left for all of us [todays living beings including disasters victims] was The Dhamma. The Dhamma. The Dhamma. The Dhamma. The Buddha was Perfected One. He was The Exalted One. He was Tathagata. He was Bhagava. He was Sammasambuddha. He was Sugata. All beings in all realms should give homage to The Buddha. But for The Buddha He does not have to worship anyone. But The Buddha worshipped The Dhamma. See 'Dhammapuujaamudra'. The Buddha left 'The Dhamma'. This is the best medicine. This is the best food. This is the best shelter. No rich man can supply 'food, shelter, medicine' for many beings for unlimited time. But 'The Dhamma' does. All karuna flows and this made billions of dollars. This has to continue. Yes, of course. This is a longterm process and a lot of money, resources, supports are needed to rehabilitate the area. If The Dhamma is grown inside of all, the rehabilitation process will not take very long. May 'The Dhamma' be the shelter, the food, the medicine for all [not only for the victims but for all beings]. Fire destroys the world including all kama world that is 11 kama sugati realms and 3 of 1st jhana rupa brahma realms. Water destroys the world up to 3 2nd jhana rupa brahma realms. December 26 was just a reminder. Tectonic plates, overlap, crack, shockwave etc etc are just scientific intellectualization. Wind destroys the world up to 3 3rd jhana rupa brahma realms. When the world has been destroyed for 7 times with fire, the 8th time is the turn of water. When the world has been destroyed for 7 times with water that is after 56 times destruction which was caused by the water there follow 7 times destruction by fire again (56 + 7 = 63). So the 64th turn is for the great wind to destroy the world. Now the water just gave a hint. It has the power to destroy the whole world. So do not be proud now and forever that 'we are lucky'. When the wind destroys the world all kama realms are destroyed. All rupa brahma realms are destroyed except 4th jhana rupa brahma realms. So what happen to those who die? Each is reborn in the realm just higher than their previous one. As the whole world is set in fire/water/wind there is no shelter and as soon as each is reborn they die again and this happen till they gain access to a stable realm. Let us say the world was destroyed by the wind. At that time all beings in lower realms including hell beings will be reborn in 4th jhana rupa brahma realms. After a while the earth is settled down slowly. Because of accumulative kama power those 4th jhana rupa brahmas who were previously from kama realms become craving to visit the world. And soon they reach the world and taste the worldly things and again they proliferate kama things and then the world has to begin. This water December 26 of 2004 might well be a forerunner. The Buddha left the medicine, the food, the shelter. It is The Dhamma. This Dhamma will help a large mass of lives as it always helps in any given era. May all beings stay with The Dhamma. With Unlimited and Great Metta, Htoo Naing 40598 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas Appear To Only Teach Abhidhamma (Was: abhidhamma - - -... Hi Ken O and TG, When we see Abhidhamma in a text we have to be careful and look at the context. Evenso when we read: the Dhamma and the Vinaya. What is included in the word Dhamma? We read in M I, 133: that the Tipitaka can be classified as nine limbs, angas: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyaakarana, gaathaa etc. The Expositor p. 33 explains that the Abhdidhamma is included in Veyyaakarana. We have to study carefully the different classifications. Nina. op 05-01-2005 03:55 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > The so-called Abhidhamma that Sariputta taught was completely within the > bounds of the Suttas and did not resemble the Abhidhamma Pitaka as your own > posts > points out. Apples and Oranges. This is quite a stretch to support the > Abhidhamma Pitaka which itself has been stretched quite a bit in the > commentaries. 40599 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 5, 2005 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Availability of three suttas, bojjhangas. Hi Larry, You are very kind, thank you. But I want to study very gradually, not much typing. I let it depend on others' input. The subject is important, and the Co I have in Thai are very good. Any of these suttas you or Tep want to go into specifically? Nina. op 05-01-2005 01:26 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I'm interested in this project also. If I could help out with the typing > let me know.