41600 From: Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/1/05 9:49:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > upasaka@a... wrote: > > > The 4th sutta was the main one you were questioning me about, I > >believe. I had posted that one mainly because it speaks of "prescribing", > and not > >just "describing". But as regards conventional actions, look at the quote > "Three > >things are prescribed by the wise: giving, going forth into homelessness, > >service to one's parents." These are three conventional actions, and > obviously > >so. > > > > > > I'd like to suggest that, with the knowledge of the teachings we have > gained through study, we can say that what is being referred to here are > 3 kinds of kusala. Take the first one, giving (dana). Dana may be > performed through body, speech or even mind. Of course, every instance > of dana through body or speech will have a name by which it can be > described, and to that extent could be considered to be a conventional > action of one kind or another, but the factor common to all instances of > dana will be moments of kusala consciousness accompanied by certain > mental factors. So what is recommended by the wise is the development > of kusala of the kind that is dana (and the same for the other 2, going > forth and service to one's parents). > > Jon > ======================= Jon, you must be very physically fit, as you are excellent at (what I see as) difficult contortions! ;-)) With uncontorted 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) 41601 From: Hugo Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 9:32am Subject: Ajahn Chah on Vipassana and Samatha meditation There have been some discussions about Vipassana and Samatha meditation, if they are completely separate, if they are conjoined, etc. I found something related to this in the book: "Food for the Heart: The collected teachings of Ajahn Chah", I tried to extract the key parts as to keep this message short, hopefully it will be useful for those of us who still cling to the idea of a self who meditates, who trains, who will attain Nibbana, hopefully this will help create the causes that will condition the eradication of the clinging to that self. ============================== Page 181 Meditation is like a single stick of wook. Insight (Vipassana) is one end of the stick and serenity (Samatha) the oher. [...] When anyone picks up a stick both ends rise ogether. [...] Where does one end and the other begin? They are both the mind. [...] .....the peace afforded by samatha meditation alone is still based on attachment. [...] Serenity is not the end of the Path. [...] He (The Buddha) based on that serenity of samatha, he proceeded to contemplate, investigate and analyze the conditioned nature of reality until he was free of all attachments, even the attachment to serenity. ========== Page 144 The ways of wisdom and concentration are not the same. Some people have insight and are strong in wisdom but do not have much samadhi. When they sit in meditation they aren't very peaceful. They tend to think a lot, contemplating this and that, until eventually they contemplate happiness and suffering and see the truth of them. Whether standing, walking, sitting or lying, enlightenment of the Dhamma can take place. They attain peace through seeing, through relinquishing, through knowing the truth and going beyond doubt, because they have seen it for themselves. Other people have only a little wisdom but their samadhi is very strong. They can enter very deep samadhi quickly, but, not having much wisdom, they cannot catch their defilements; they don't know them. They can't solve their problems. [...] These two sides to practice, calm and insight, go together. We can't do away with either of them. -- Hugo 41602 From: Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/1/2005 6:06:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: >I am a hard core D.O. person. Everything that arises in bound to >conditions. I don't believe something can arise that is non-existent. > That's just it. Names and meanings are mind-created and do not arise. As you read this message to yourself, what is arising, following the seeing and visible object, is thinking consciousness only. This thinking consciousness is able to 'decipher' letters from the visible data then words and then meaning, but none of those thoughts actually arise in the sense of have any existence separate from the moment of thinking consciousness of which they are the object. Hi Jon From the above... Analysis of Sentence One: Names and meanings are not merely mind created. Names and meanings have been learned and conditioned through contacts of all the sense bases. When we go to school, we use eyes and eye objects, and ears and ear objects to learn things from teachers. Those contacts condition the mind and become objects for the mind. The mind does not "create names and meanings." Names and meanings (thoughts) are conditioned by "external and internal" conditions. The other senses are all used to learn things as well of course. Analysis of Sentence Two: As I read your message (the reading a conditioned skill/memory), light from the monitor is making contact with patterns that have been learned and are recognizable (words). This conditions a variety of memories that follow in sequence to the words you typed. These memories follow my experiences, not yours. So what you say has to be interpreted based on my experience. If I haven't had the same general experiences as you have, I won't be able to follow what you are saying. I.E., the meaning won't arise because it won't have a condition that can support it. (Unless I can be "led" to understand it based on "my experiences.") The thoughts are not just "being created," they are being conditioned by so many things. Analysis of Sentence Three: I basically agree with your last sentence except for the line about "separate existence." Nothing conditioned has "separate existence" so the arguement is doesn't work. (If you were to say that names and meanings did have separate existence, then I'd be worried that I was wrong.) ;-) A thought that has arisen in the mind, in the present, is indeed accompanied by consciousness...as well as a slew of mental factors...that take the thought as an object. This doesn't make the thought any less actual, it makes it fully actual. The thought has been conditioned by all the past learnings we have had. Not to mention the evolution of knowledge, the planet Earth (as a foundation that can support life), the sun, the galaxy, the universe. Thoughts are just thoughts. They're not supposed to be anything else. They are just as conditioned as anything other conditioned thing. TG 41603 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 10:08am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Sarah, Thanks for your reply. This is my second reply as the one I have already type was lost. You wrote: Dear Htoo, Again I've snipped your interesting and helpful comments which we have no disagreement about. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: That is fine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 'Ati-itthe pana somanassa saha gataa neva santirana tadaarammanaani' …. Sarah wrote: S: If I understand, you are quoting the text which indicates that if an undesirable object is experienced, it is akusala vipaka and vice versa.(translations in future, please, otherwise we'll get complaints!!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. I will. I did because I expect you know it and I just showed as an evidence. That is why I untouched the whole. At another site people are saying inderectly regarding usage of Pali. Some even said that The Buddha did not use Pali. I know. The Buddha spoke Magadha. All Buddha teachings were handed down only by oral citation until 4th Buddhists Council. Actually oral citations are much much more accurate than written equivalent. Because written scripts need voicing and timing of voicing. This is the main reason why the 5th and the 6th Buddhists Councils were done in Myanmar. Whether The Buddha spoke Pali or not the 4th Buddhists Council recorded the teachings in Sanskript, Pali, Sinhalese. The reason why I stick to Pali is to lessen variations. Examples here. Dukkha. This topic is very very important. Because when someone does not see this there is no way for him searching for liberation. This dukkha is translated as 1. stress 2. suffering Even though it is possible to use all-English for Buddha's Teachings, I think it is better to use Pali words for essential dhammas. Otherwise there will be growing variation and this variation will finally lose all senses. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: Of course, there's no disagreement on this. My point was that we can say in general that when we see rotten flesh or hear about a disaster, that's it's akusala vipaka, but this is just speaking conventionally. In reality, it depends at that very instant whether there are conditions for kusala or akusala vipaka to arise and experience a desirable or undesirable object. When we hear about a disaster, for example, only sound is experienced. It may be a pleasant sound when a news broadcaster speaks gently. The unpleasantness may just be in the subsequent thinking with dosa. …. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is different. The smell of dead body are dhamma. It is foul smelling. It is disagreeable smell. It is anittha-arammana or disagreeable object. The sound heard as sweet voice of news announcer is not like smell of rotten flesh. The idea of disaster actually come after several vithi vara called tadanuvattaka vithi varas that follow the initial panca-dvara vithi vara. I do not translate these any more as I repeatedly written them in the old posts. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S: If I follow you (with trouble), you've missed my point here. We're not talking about tadarammana cittas. … ….. … S: No problem, but we were talking about the javana cittas, not the tadarammana cittas as I understood. …. S: Yes, but again we were talking about the javana cittas. … ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. But there must have been missing something. You missed or I missed or both missed the point. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S: Yes, akusala cittas following the kusala vipaka. This was my point. No disagreement, here, perhaps a misunderstanding. …. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Samanantara paccaya : contiguity condition 1. abyakata dhamma + akusala dhamma 2. abyakata dhamma + kusala dhamma 3. abyakata dhamma + abyakata dhamma Here + means immediately followed by. There is no interval or space or gap. It is samanantara. Sam + anantara Sam means 'very well' 'without ever breaking rules' 'rightly' Again 'anantara' is made up of 'ana' and 'antara'. Ana means 'no' 'nothing' 'no one' 'none' 'not one'. Antara means 'gap' 'interval' 'space'. So there is no space, no gap, no interval between abyakata dhamma and akusala/kusala/abyakata dhamma. So anittha-arammana or 'non-agreeable object' conditions arising of different dhamma. First abyakata dhamma. It is kiriya dhamma called avajjana citta. I did not argue your javana. If you can read Pali you will see that all vipaka will be akusala vipaka if it is non-agreeable object'. This also comprises tadarammana cittas which you agreed. Again panca- vinnana citta,sampaticchana, and santirana cittas are all akusala vipaka in non-agreeable object. I did not say javana citta. Whether it is kusala or akusala or abyakata, after javana the following tadarammana cittas are all akusala vipaka cittas. What I said about javana citta is in normal conditions agreeable object or ati-itthia-arammana is unusally apperceived by kusala javana citta or abyakata javana citta. In that case tadarammana are kusala vipaka. If javana are somanassa then tadarammana will more likely to be somanassa cittas. When somanassa citta it is not akusala vipaka citta. --------------------------------------------------------------------- … S: But I wasn't talking about tadaarammana cittas!! …. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. If it is anittharammana or non-agreeable object vipaka cittas will all be akusala vipaka cittas in respective of accumulation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- … S: No disagreement on any of this or on anything to do with tadaarammana cittas;-). I had no trouble with what you wrote about them from the outset. …. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: So far we have a clear understanding and no dispute on anittharammana or non-agreeable object. Actually I was talking on anittharammana or non-agreeable object. A-nit-tha-ram-ma-na is 6-syllable-word like 'coun-ter-pro-duc-ti-vi- ty'. By choosing anittharammana we can avoid risks of non-agreeable object. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** S:> Why is concentration on a 'whole circle' kusala in any way? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Because there is sati, saddha, and other components of kusala dhamma > including panna. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- … S: So it is the cittas and accompanying mental factors that are kusala. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. No. No. Citta and cetasikas cannot be separated out. When it is said kusala that means 'cetana' and the whole citta. There are 1. kusala cetana 2. akusala cetana 3. abyakata cetana When concentrating on kasina object that state of concentraing mind is kusala dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah asked: Please explain why they are kusala just by concentrating on a `whole circle'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It is not just concentrating. There involve many energy, effort, and activities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: If we concentrate on a `whole circle' now, would it be kusala? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. :-)) Because you just said 'if we concentrate on a 'whole circle' now'..' If you asked 'If you concentrated on a whole circle, would it be kusala', the answer is yes. :-) Because I know 'this is good' and 'this is bad'. In initiation when a thought of bad quality arises it is remembered as bad thought and another citta arises and it direct to the wholeness again. The director is vitakka. He is very powerful. If you tried to sit in a cross-legged position (:- I believe you will not), you will find flows of thought. They may or may not be racing. The ocean receives rivers. There are red-flow, white-flow, yellow- flow, green-flow, blue-flow, brown-flow, grey-flow, black-flow, and radiant-flow. If you sat you would see them. Brown-flow is switched to green-flow and then to yellow-flow. This is done by vitakka or initial application. He (vitakka) will not know nothing. But he is to do application to an object. So when concentrating this means this is reverse of diluting. You know dilution. When there is 100 % water. It is water and not a solution. When you add a tiny amount of salt, then it becomes a solution. But it is a dilute solution. When there is 100 % bhavanga citta it is bhavanga flow and nothing happen apart from living as bhavanga cittas who are taking their own object. But as soon as you add a tiny amount of vithi cittas-salt then it becomes a solution. When you are awake and alert and taking current object there also are mixing of bhavanag cittas even though there are vithi cittas. If these vithi varas become kusala dhamma then the solution becomes kusala solution. There are dana-kusala, sila-kusala and bhavana- kusala. If you choose bhavana-kusala there have to arise bhavana-kusala cittas. If you choose kasina for example 'white circle' then the mind will take the idea of white. As initiation you will not be all the time on 'the idea of white'. But there are different thoughts. Again in this bhavana solution there is dilute-citta-on-the-idea-of-white because you are thinking 'what you will do tomorrow' 'what you will reply Htoo' 'what you will cook for the whole family' and endless thought. At first you see that 'O! Buddho! My thoughts are no more on the idea of white and I have been drifted away of tomorrow matters. Then you will be again onn the idea of white. At a time, you will be most of the time 'on the idea of white'. This is because you understand that the thought of tomorrow etc etc called hindrances are not good and then you re-direct to 'the idea of white'. This is wisdom. But it does not cast any light on 'anicca, dukkha, anatta' which is unique to 'Buddhism'. Once you and I argued on jhana matters. You said that jhanas were taught by The Buddha or something like that and you seemed to mean it is totally impossible to attain any jhanas without studying jhanas in Buddhism. At that time, I said there are 2 teachers who attained 3rd and 4th arupa jhana respectively and they did not know any anicca, dukkha, anatta and they were not taught by The Buddha but they taught The Bodhisatta Siddhattha Gotama. So in summary it is kusala to concentrate on kasina object. When you say 'white circle' it becomes non-sense but if you say it is odata-kasina-arammana then it is kusala citta that take that object. Why? Because to direct to that object mind knows bad and good things and this is wisdom or panna. This does not necessarily mean there is 'knowledge of anicca, dukkha, anatta' which is unique to Buddha and Buddhism. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: In other words, there has to be understanding of how the object of samatha conditions calm, otherwise the wholesome cittas can never be developed in this way. … ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Please above long-winded message of me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- … S: OK, all agreed, but you haven't said anything about the significance of the `whole circle' or white kasina as an object of samatha here. … ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Because it should be another thread and entitled to separate discussion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: **** All your details on the jhana and lokuttara processes are very clear and detailed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks for your kind words. I have Myanmar friends who have reached advanced meditative stage. But they cannot talk much on the subject. When you say 'my details on the jhana and lokuttara processes are very clear and detailed' I feel calm because this transferring of 'knowledge' is my main and chief aim here in different Yahoo Groups. It is not my aim to do self- promotion. Jhana and lokuttara dhammas are difficult areas and it is more difficult to express in English becuase these are relatively new as compared to Indian and Asian. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: No quibbles, but I don't understand this: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: :-) I know you are not. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2nd kind > > > > Lokuttara cittas > > > > 1st time ---> BBB...BBBMPUAGMPPBBBBB > > > > 2nd M is magga citta while 1st M is manodvara-avajjana citta. Magga > > citta is immediately followed by 2 phala cittas if the practitioner > > is mandha puggala or less intelligent and if tikkha puggala or > > intelligent person then it will be like this > > > > 1st time ---> BBB...BBBMUAGMPPPBBBBB > > > > There are 7 javana cittas in both series. > > > > In the 1st 1.parikamma, 2.upacara, 3.anuloma, 4.gotrabhu, 5.magga, 6. > > phala, 7 2nd phala. > > > > In the 2nd 1.upacara, 2.anuloma, 3. gotrabhu, 4. magga, 5.1st phala, > > 6.2nd phala, 7.3rd phala ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah continued: … S: I'm not familiar with these terms ` mandha puggala or less intelligent and if tikkha puggala or intelligent person', but I don't see it as being of any concern for a good long while;-). Just curious about the words `less intelligent' here…. Metta, Sarah ====== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If I have to explain roughly itn is the matter of intelligence or ability to realise. Example is 1. Someone reads abhidhammatthasangaha text for 2 years and still does not fully understand the whole text. 2. Another person reads the same text in a matter of a few hours and he realises the whole text. This is just a rought example. The first one is mandha. Mandha here works as an 'adjective'. The second one is tikkha. Example persons are 1. Tikkha Puggala The Buddhas are tikkha. When they show miracles they have to do many different kasina kammatthana. Example for creation of 'fountain' apo kasina, vayo kasina etc have to be done. During these times, The Buddha switches from one kasina to another very quickly. As you know even in normal waking hours there are numerous bhavanga cittas. But The Buddha in such time switches from one kasina to another with only 2 bhavanga citta interval. This is major difference between The Buddhas and theirn Savakas or disciples. Even Mahamoggallana could not be as fast as The Buddha. Again when The Buddha does paccavakkhana javana or 'scrutinization' or 'contemplation' on jhana factors there arise only 4 or 5 javana cittas while savakas will have 7 javana cittas. 2. Mandha puggala Here in this world many of us are mandha person. This include very intelligent scientists. That is another point why I use Pali. If geneticians and genetic engineers are thought to be intelligent then many will confuse the term intelligent. They are still not tikkha mostly even though they may be intelligent. By the same token it is wrong to say un-intelligent one as mandha. No one know whom is tikkha and who is mandha. This is The Buddha matter. So you [Sarah] also do not need to know mandha-tikkha matter. But The Buddha preached that there will be 2 phala cittas or 3 phala cittas depending on the state of meditators. If there are 3 phala cittas he or she is tikkha and if there are only 2 phala cittas then he or she is mandha. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41604 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 10:17am Subject: Re: for James Hi Connie (and Ken O., Htoo) - This commentary summary is very concise and should be read over several times so that confusions concerning the true meanings of the Path factors will be put to rest. Thank you very much for this contribution. Warm regards, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep (Connie, Ken O and All), This is why suttas should be leanred along with learning of abhidhamma and commentaries. Suttas use conventioanl language. There are times that suttas and abhidhamma should not mix. Example when you offer something to someone you should just offer conventionally. Otherwise??? Nama and dhamma is holding rupa and then nama and rupa is offering rupa to nama and rupa. Do you recognize any sense in above sentence? With Metta, Htoo Naing 41605 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:09am Subject: Kamma and Buddhism Dear Dhamma Friends, Kamma is our refuge. Kamma is our father. Kamma is our mother. Kamma give us food, shelter, medicine and everything. Therefore we need to know 1.where is kamma made of? 2.when is kamma made of? 3.why is kamma made of? 4.who makes kamma? 5.what is kamma? [nama, rupa, an energy] 6.how is kamma made of? Answer 1: There are 2 kinds of place. One is conventional place. This will be known and no need to be explained. Again another place which is a bit abhidhammical is at cakkhu, sota, ghana, jivha, kaya, hadaya. These are all 6 rupas and where kamma creators dwell. So where is kamma made of has to be answered as 'at cakkhu, sota, ghana, jivha, kaya, and hadaya vatthu' or conventionally where it is done like 'on the road' 'in the house' 'in the river' 'in the air' 'on top of a mountain' 'in a forest'. Essentially the whole answer is not needed and it is not essential to answer. Answer 2: Again there will be 2 kinds of answers. One is conventioanl like at the time of committing kusala or akusala like 'this morning' 'last year' 'in 1915' 'in July' etc etc. Another is a bit technical. It is when non-abyakata javana cittas arise. [Sarah would not agree this]. As soon as 'ekha hetuka moha mula akusala javana cittas' arise or as soon as 'dvihetuka dosa mulsa akusala javana cittas' arise or as soon as 'dvihetuka lobha mula akusala javana cittas' arise or as soon as 'dvihetuka 4 nana-vippayutta mahakusala cittas' arise or as soon as 'tihetuka 4 nana-sampayutta mahakusala cittas' arise or as soon as '5 rupakusala jhana cittas' arise or as soon as '4 arupakusala arupa jhana cittas' arise. As soon as magga cittas arise their respective phala cittas instantaneously arise without delay of even a moment, which is akalika(giving result without delay) attribute of The Dhamma. 3.why is kamma made of? This need to learn paticca-samuppada dhamma. Kamma is made of because of the power of avijja or ignorance-potential. We are doing kama kusala because we have avijja which again covers the light of Noble Truth of suffering. We are doing rupa kusala (developing rupa jhana) because .. We are doing arupa kusala (developing arupa jhana) because .. We are doing akusala because we have avijja which again covers the light of Noble Truth of suffering. 4. who makes kamma? There are 2 kinds of answer. Conventionally being concerned makes kamma of their own. So these creators are us and no other daities or gods or Gods. Technical answer of abhidhamma will be like 'no one makes kamma' but cetana in citta makes kamma instantaneously. Because citta is just to know the object even though he is the main committer. There are 52 cetasikas which help citta to do the job. Among them cetana is the chief to help citta commits. There are 3 boaters. At the front is vitakka cetasika. At the back or rear is manasikara cetasika. At the middle is cetana cetasika. Vitakka rows the boat. This means vitakka put the mind on an object and mind has to stay on that object. But vitakka does not have any sin doing so. Manasikara steers the boat to get the right direction. Again he is not sinful. In the middle is cetana cetasika. He encourages and urges vitakka to row the boat, manasikara to steer the boat and cetana cetasikas also co-ordinate other associated cetasikas in a citta and it aslo urge the citta to do the things. Here as cetana is co-ordinator and he is performing everything in the army of mind or nama dhamma cetana is the most responsible person for all actions done by each of these cetasikas and citta. So cetana is kamma and kamma is cetana. No one makes kamma but cetana makes kamma. 5. what is kamma? [nama, rupa, an energy] Kamma is 'cetana that arise when actions are performed'. Again it [kama] is unlike cenata cetasika which is an ultimate reality kama is hard to perceive like other 51 cetasikas and also cetana cetasika itself is included. Because it is like a potential and this potential will always be there with each arising new and new citta as long as the debt has not been returned that is as long as the result is given rise to. But as soon as the result (vipaka) arise as the debt is already given there is no more debt and there is no more kamma. In kamma creation there are 7 javana cittas. If these javana cittas are not kiriya javana cittas there arise kamma. Cetana in the 1st javana citta gives rise its effect in the current life and if it cannot there is no more kamma from that cetana after that life. This is because it is so weak to follow to next life. Cetana in 7th javana citta is also weak and it gives rise to its effect in the 2nd life and after that there is no more debt from that cetana of 7th javana citta. Unlike these 2 javana cittas, the middle 5 javana cittas create kamma and this kamma follow each and every citta that arises one after another like wheel-track immediately follow foot-track of cows in a travelling cart. But as soon as arahatta-cuti-citta arises all kamma cannot proceed further and these kamma are known as 'ahosi kamma' or 'ineffectual kamma which have never given rise their effect. 6. how is kamma made of? Kamma is made of in the dictation of kamma niyama. How fast is kamma made of? --->instantaneously May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41606 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:27am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up Dear Joop (Kel, Nina, and All), Apology for my delay. You wrote: Dear Htoo (and all) In the end of your message you say: "When the old kamma is used up …" That reminds me on a question I've a longer time. So out of the context of your Dhamma Thread 249 I will ask it: All phenomena are conditioned, except Nibbana, the arise and fall away after some time that is different for different kinds of phenomena. But, is my question, how about kamma? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I have replied to you. But as it is a good subject I changed the topic as 'Kamma and Buddhism'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: I have read somewhere that the question "where is kamma made of, is it a nama or a rupa or an energy etc ?" should not be asked (acinteyya: the four unthinkables). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Please see the details in 'Kamma and Buddhism'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: But my question is: does kamma fall away after some time, after tens or hundreds or billions of years ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Never. Once it arises it follows each and every citta as if it is the shade of citta. They do not fall away even after Kappas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: I think it does, otherwise animals, living totally akusala, can never be reborn in higher sentient beings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. There are examples that animals are reborn in deva realms after death of animals' life like Kandaka horse of Bodhisatta, Ghosita dog of an upasaka etc. The prince Temiya was reborn in human realms after many many billions of year in hell, before that was a king who had to invlove in akusala things that led him to rebirth in hell and as soon as he was reborn in human realm he did not speak any word for fear of being a king again and involving in akusala actions. But generally once beings get to those 4 apaya bhumis or 4 woeful planes they will be there for a long time until their kamma have been given their debt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: And when kamma falls away, it does just because it's the time for it, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Falling away of kamma may be equated with giving rise to their effects. Otherwise they will be there all the time until the end of the whole samsara. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: automatically like a rupa falls away after a millisecond (or shorter); ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Kamma is not like a rupa. If the results have not been given rise to kamma will never fall away. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: or is kamma conditioned and does it only falls away when conditions for that falling away occur ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: When conditions fall away, kamma do not fall away. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: Or means 'used up": only when the being living with this kamma, has experienced the results of it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Yes. It is used up means the results have been given rise to. That is the debt is return and nothing more to pay back. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: If you answer: please not to much Pali and not a to broad context. Metta Joop ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. I just use simple terms in this reply. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41607 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:28am Subject: jhanas: [dsg] Re: sutta, to Tep - Ken O Hi Ken O, KenO: Aiya, I said before already, one cannot go into immaterial jhanas without going through the material jhanas ;-). James: And as I said, the Buddha did it before he became enlightened! Wanna arm wrestle over it?? ;-)) This conversation isn't going anywhere because you don't directly address what I write and which I support with sutta quotations. Remember, your word is not the word of God…or the Buddha. ;-) Metta, James 41608 From: nina Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:33am Subject: Pilgrimage India 4 c Pilgrimage India 4 c In India we were often disturbed by beggars who would touch us, or even push us or make us stumble while we were walking to the holy places. Conceit is bound to arise while we are thinking: why are they doing this to us? We cling to the importance of self and this can condition aversion, dosa. Such situations are a test for our patience. If there would be less clinging to a person or a self there would be more conditions for kusala citta. Wrong view of personality, sakkaya diììhi, is a main cause of many other defilements. The sotåpanna who has eradicated wrong view cannot transgress the five precepts anymore, he does not steal, kill, lie or harm other beings by evil deeds. I am inclined to be angry because of what others do to me. I am thinking of a situation and I blame others. I am always thinking of other people as being the cause of my aversion. This kind of thinking is not helpful to cure anger. The Buddha taught us that anger arises with the citta and that it has nothing to do with the outward circumstances and other people. Anger has become a habit, because formerly we were angry many times. We accumulated this inclination from life to life. There are conditions for its arising, it is conditioned by lobha, attachment. When things are not the way we would like them to be we have aversion. It is also conditioned by ignorance of realities. Aversion, dosa, and attachment, lobha, are real for everybody, no matter how we call them. They are not situations, they are not persons, not conventional realities. They are real in the ultimate sense. It is important to learn their different characteristics when they appear. In this way there can be right understanding of dhammas as impersonal elements, not self or mine. I said to Acharn Sujin that I cling to people who are dear to me, that I cling to the idea of a person. She said: is seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? The answer is no, these cittas arise and fall away immediately. Whatever appears does so because of its own conditions, and this can help us to have a certain degree of detachment, although it is mostly on the level of intellectual understanding. The purpose of the teachings is not to stop thinking, clinging to persons or worrying about them, but to understand such moments as dhammas arising because of their own conditions. ****** Nina. 41609 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:36am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) - Definition of Pali Words --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Illusion" wrote: For those of you,including myself :), who do not understand the meaning of these pali words posted by Htoo Naing in the Dhamma Thread, here are the definitions that I looked up in the Buddhist Dictionary. Hopefully it is beneficial. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks for your post. Whenever you post, could you please address someone or some members and all members? Without addressing your message would be like 'a man without a head'. When you end your message, could you please sign your name at the bottom. Otherwise it would be like 'a man without any foot'. With Metta, Htoo Naing ~~~~ Dhamma Thread is now at the station of DT(250). It starts with very very very simple and the messages are with all the explanations. And at the bottom of each and every message, there encourages that any question, query etc are welcome. This also include 'to ask any Pali word if they believe they have not learned yet. Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > maranasanna-javana: marana meaning "death" means the disappearance > of the vital faculty confined to a single life-time. But strictly > speaking,---snipped-- > This consciousness has not come from the previous existence to this > present existence, yet that it has come into existence by means of > conditions included in the previous existence. This fact may be > illustrated by various things, such as the echo, the light of a > lamp, the impression of a seal, or the image produced by a mirror. > For just as the resounding of the echo is conditioned by a sound, > etc., and nowhere a transmigration of sound has taken place, just so > it is with this consciousness. []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} (Maya Putra) "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: []\/[] = M []D = P Maya Putra = mayaputra = artupayam ---> artupayam@hot.... 41610 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:53am Subject: Re: for James Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary summary > ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma--VII, 30 > "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, right view > (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in understanding the > Four Noble Truths. Right intention (sammasmakappa) is the cetasika of > initial application (vitakka) directed towards renunciation, good will, > and harmlessness. Path-factors (3)-(5) are identical with the three > abstinences. Right effort is the same as the four supreme efforts. Right > mindfulness is the same as the four foundations of mindfulness. Right > concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta > system." Thanks for sharing this. Did you have any comments? Metta, James 41611 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 0:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2, oral tradition. Dear Htoo, This is very interesting. I also think that oral tradition is very reliable. Think of the whole group doing it and the control they have if someone makes a mistake. Generally people do not trust oral tradition. Can you tell us more please about oral tradiiton and how it works? Nina. op 01-02-2005 19:08 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > All Buddha teachings were handed down only by oral citation until 4th > Buddhists Council. > > Actually oral citations are much much more accurate than written > equivalent. Because written scripts need voicing and timing of > voicing. 41612 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 0:06pm Subject: Re: for James Hi Htoo - You have offered some leading questions for further discussion. H: > There are times that suttas and abhidhamma should not mix. > Example when you offer something to someone you should just offer > conventionally. Otherwise??? > T: Very good, friend. Please tell us about the examples you had in mind. Otherwise, what? H: > Nama and dhamma is holding rupa and then nama > and rupa is offering rupa to nama and rupa. > > Do you recognize any sense in above sentence? > T: Are you referring to a looping-back part of the Dependent Origination : Vinnana-paccaya nama-rupam; nama-rupa-paccaya vinnanam, or are you talking about a citta-vithi during meditation? Forgive my Abhidhamma inadequacy. (: =|) Warm regards, Tep ============== > Dear Tep (Connie, Ken O and All), > > This is why suttas should be leanred along with learning of > abhidhamma and commentaries. Suttas use conventioanl language. > > There are times that suttas and abhidhamma should not mix. > > Example when you offer something to someone you should just offer > conventionally. Otherwise??? > > Nama and dhamma is holding rupa and then nama and rupa is offering > rupa to nama and rupa. > > Do you recognize any sense in above sentence? > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 41613 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Kel Thanks for coming in on this. kelvin_lwin wrote: >Hi Jon and Howard, > >... > From following this thread I got general questions. Why can't >both ways work? If one is able to see paramattha dhammas directly >then they would work with that. If not they can work with pannatti >and work toward paramattha. > Is this the message we get from reading the suttas? -- I don't think so. No suggestion that a 2-track approach is being taught. I rather think that, whatever conventional action is being talked about (and there is of course much talk about conventional actions in the suttas), the reference is always to the kusala mind-state that underlies the outward deed. If we don't 'get' this then we will just end up developing more akusala. > Also if someone is able to be >completely within present moment during everyday activities then do >that. If other people need quiet and dedicated sessions of >meditation to get to that level then let them do that. Or mix and >match the two as required. Why does it all have to be one way or >another? > > Well, I am certainly not against a quiet time ;-)) As regards dedicated sessions of meditation, I would have to say that depends what you mean. Could you be more specific? Jon 41614 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 2:29pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up Hi Joop, Perhaps others replies are better suited with what you're looking for. I probably went too deep technically. > So kamma is made out of cittas. But what I understood till now is > that cittas are arising and falling away, even in a rather quick way: > within milliseconds. So how can the kamma-bearing-cittas travel > through time ? Kel: An example of an original act is a mahakusala citta. Then when it gives result, it's called mahavipaka citta or kamma. As others said time between them is indeterminate. It's just cause and effect relation and there IS one to one correspondence. > to the next set, it's not clear to me how these cittas can carry so > much kamma-information: billions of bits? Kel: They're not really carried as much as linked. That's how recollection of past lives work, you basically work backwards from current citta. > know your big knowledge of Abhidhamma but this sounds so > mechanical, not spiritual at all. Kel: Well to me abhidhamma is mechnical, it's just simple causal laws. If you wanted a spiritual view of kammic laws I would've said something like: The importance of current action/volition should be realized as you're bound to suffer the consequences of it for eternity. There's no benevolent God to ask for forgiveness. You do the crime, you do the time. After you have suffered enough to fit the original act then it won't hurt you anymore. > It does not resonate in me in a manner of "this > must be true" like many other parts of the Teachings (as anicca, > anatta and the three roots) do resonate. It is like kamma works Kel: A big surprise then it's included in something an ordinary person shouldn't think about? :) - kel 41615 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 3:05pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi Jon, > >Kel: From following this thread I got general questions. Why can't > >both ways work? If one is able to see paramattha dhammas directly > >then they would work with that. If not they can work with pannatti > >and work toward paramattha. > > > > Is this the message we get from reading the suttas? -- I don't think > so. No suggestion that a 2-track approach is being taught. Kel: I dunno what is being taught from suttas anymore with all the spinning going on. I just rely on what is being taught in meditation centers in tradition of different teachers. They all seem to discuss working with pannatti to reach paramattha. They also appear to give different instructions depending on the level and ability of the student. I view it not so much 2-track approach but different stages of the path? >J: the reference is always to the kusala mind-state that underlies the > outward deed. If we don't 'get' this then we will just end up > developing more akusala. Kel: In some teachers' view our natural state is akusala anyway. So if you can get a moment of kusala then you're already coming out ahead. Whether or not that's enough for enlightenment is another story I suppose. > Well, I am certainly not against a quiet time ;-)) As regards > dedicated sessions of meditation, I would have to say that depends what > you mean. Could you be more specific? Kel: I didn't want to use "formal meditation" but I guess that's the general idea. Going to a quiet place so the assault on senses are less. Kinda like a "clean room" for maufacturing computer chips or sanitary room used for surgery operations. When something is delicate, it requires more protection and nurturing. Once it's strong, it can withstand more things. So along with the theme I had above, for people at varying stages, the practice might indeed be different. I agree that real judge of progress is in how well we handle vicissitudes of life. I don't necessarily agree that normal life is a good setting to practice for everyone. People who are firmly established in practice are able to do it I'm sure. For myself I know, I'm just barely hanging on and gradually slipping when I'm back to normal life. Only in a quiet and protected environment of a retreat, I'm able to recharge so to speak. It's just a fact that I've observed about myself and others around me. - Kel 41616 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 3:55pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Tep, ---------------------- T: > This sutta deserves a careful study, Ken. If you can give the title and reference (e.g. MN, AN, or whatever, with the number) then I would be thankful. > ----------------------- I have never read it, but Robert K has quoted it here on DSG: RK: > In the Samyutta nikaya V (Sayings on stream entry p347 The great chapter Dhammadina ) 5oo rich merchants came to see the Buddha . They asked how they should live their lives. The Buddha suggested that they train themselves thus: "as to those discourses uttered by the Tathagatha, deep, deep in meaning, transcendental and concerned with the void (about anatta) from time to time we will spend our days learning them. That is how you must spend your days." > ------------- T: > My opinion based on the above quote is that merchants those days traveled a lot and did not have time (or strong saddha) to practice earnestly. Therefore, they only had to slowly and occasionally chew the Teachings (that are profound/deep in meaning/concerned with anatta) and be contented at that level of study. -------- As you know, I understand the practice to be more flexible than the way you describe it. To the extent that the Dhamma has been heard and considered, there can be practice at any time of day. Like all cittas, kusala-citta-with-panna is very fast, and there is no need to set aside a special time - quite the reverse, in fact. As for the amount of time devoted to study, that would be purely a lifestyle issue. A busy man will devote less time than a man of leisure. But that is of little consequence: in all the time we spend with our books and at DSG, it is only the occasional kusala moments that count as factors for enlightenment. If we were devoting more time than was reasonably available, that might be an indicator of lobha and wrong view. Thanks for your other kind remarks. I can honestly say I had noticed your own friendly and constructive attitude and wanted to follow your example (at least while I'm talking to you :-) ). Ken H 41617 From: Philip Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 4:01pm Subject: Re: Pilgrimage India 4 c lobha conditions anger Hello Nina, and all > The Buddha taught us that anger arises with the citta and that it has > nothing to do with the outward circumstances and other people. Anger has > become a habit, because formerly we were angry many times. We accumulated > this inclination from life to life. There are conditions for its arising, it > is conditioned by lobha, attachment. When things are not the way we would > like them to be we have aversion. It is also conditioned by ignorance of > realities. This brings to mind what TG was helping me with the other day - my question about the relationship between lobha and dosa. You say anger "is conditioned by lobha" .. "when things are not the way we would like them to be" we have aversion. Is there lobha preceding the dosa, a moment of clinging to the way you would like things to be preceding the aversion in the citta processes? Say a beggar makes you stumble. Is there a moment of lobha for the way you would like things to be before there is aversion, or is the aversion conditioned by lobha in a less proximate, less direct way? Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil 41618 From: Philip Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 4:55pm Subject: Re: Q. Pilgrimage India / Sarah Hi Sarah Thanks (as always) for you long and thoughtful reply S:When we dwell on `I was so mean?Eor `I have so much attachment?E the > clinging to self can be seen right then and there. Awareness and > understanding can't know about what's gone and it's useless to cling more > to past experiences. Only by being aware now, not just thinking, will > there be less and less attachment to signs and details as we were reminded > again and again on our trip. Ph: "Signs and details" - that comes up in the suttas, doesn't it. I think dwelling on signs and details is the condition of the hindrances and so much akusala. So we need to get at the essence of things. The elements. Easier said than done, of course. Still "useless to cling to past experiences" and useless to look at past experiences are not the same thing, I would say - or needen't necessarily be, as long as we know the looking at past experiences is conditioned, not-self. And that we shouldn't do it intentionally. If it arises, it arises. We look. And let go again. > > In the Gangtok garden discussion I mentioned last time, just this point > came up. Nina, I think it was, mentioned the difficulties we'd all > experienced and chatted about while we were sitting on long bus rides. > K.Sujin just interrupted and asked:`what about now??E I should remember this in the staff room. We take breaks between classes and sit and bitch about the students or praise them. ALways such clinging, such aversion. The air is thick with it. We have a hard job and put a lot into it, so the bitching and clinging seems like a just reward. But I should hear that voice - what about now? Quite often I do hear it and sit quietly with a kind of awareness. (only intellectualy, but still of value) > > Gradually by developing awareness, it gets used to realities, rather than > stories about past or future experiences. In this way, there will be less > agitation when there's akusala of any kind. Yes, this is happening. Awareness that stories about past and future simply generate clinging and suffering. There is more and more letting go of them. But of course it still goes on most of the time. It has been accumulated for so long. It would be wrong to believe that it can be snuffed out by will power. > The stories can be cut just like that. Well, in one moment they can. But the will surely arise again, very soon, because of the way they have been accumulated. It will take a long time but we are making progress with every moment of awareness - the danger is not appreciating these moments, which is what I fall into often enough, as demonstrated by the post that you are responded too. The bus rides, the bumps, the > difficulties, the unwholesome thinking ?Eall gone at a moment of > awareness. And then back again and again and again. It will take many lifetimes, I would guess. > We have to become more and more detached from places, people, special > routines and so on as being more suitable too, otherwise there will never > be the development of awareness and understanding of present realities. I liked what Jon asked at one point - I found it in some old discussions that I printed out. About whether cittas when we are really busy, out in the world, are in reality any different than we are at home in the quiet. We cling so much to our physical environment. This is the season that my schedule for the next school year is made and I fret about which schools (it's a chain school) I will be sent to, how many troublesome classes I will have. All this fretting when all that is important is the equanimitous (?) response I make to shifting circumstances, worldly conditions. With a fairly basic degree of wisdom, it shouldn't matter whether I am sitting in a sun-filled classroom with charming students or locked in a closet with neurotic dullards that exhaust me. But I fret and fret and suffer for it. I remember when I met Rob K and asked him how he felt about coming to bustling Tokyo from his more quiet environment and he said it's all the same wherever he was and a doubtful part of doubted this but now I am beginning to understand. I will carry on with the rest of your kind letter tomorrow. Metta, Phil 41619 From: Philip Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 5:05pm Subject: Re: Q. Pilgrimage India / typo correction Hi again It was probably clear but the doubt was mine, not Rob's. > I remember when I met Rob K and asked him how he felt about coming > to bustling Tokyo from his more quiet environment and he said it's > all the same wherever he is and a doubtful part of ME doubted this but > now I am beginning to understand. Metta Phil 41620 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 10:07pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 114 - Concentration/ekaggataa (j) 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.6 Concentration (ekaggataa)] ***** In the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Fours, Chapter V, §1, Concentration) we read about four ways of developing concentration. As to the first way, the Buddha explained that this is the development of the four stages of jhåna which leads to ‘happy living’ in this life. As to the second kind, this is the concentration on ‘consciousness of light’ which is a meditation subject of samatha. This leads to ’knowledge and insight’ which means in this context, according to the commentary (Manorathapúraùí), clairvoyance. As regards the third way of developing concentration, this leads, if developed and made much of, to ‘mindfulness and wellawareness’. We read: * "Herein, monks, the feelings which arise in a monk are evident to him, the feelings which abide with him are evident to him, the feelings which come to an end in him are evident to him. The perceptions which arise in him… the trains of thought which arise in him, which abide with him, which come to an end in him are evident to him. This monks, is called ‘the making-concentration-to-become which conduces to mindfulness and well-awareness’." * As regard the fourth way of developing concentration, this leads to the destruction of the ‘åsavas’ (defilements). We read: * "And what sort of making-concentration-to-become, if developed and made much of, conduces to the destruction of the åsavas? Herein a monk dwells observing the rise and fall in the five khandhas of grasping, thus: Such is rúpa, such is the arising of rúpa, such its vanishing. Such is feeling …such is perception …such are the activities …Such is consciousness, such is the arising of consciousness, such the vanishing of consciousness. This, monks, is called ‘the making-concentration-to-become which conduces to the destruction of the åsavas’. These are the four forms of it. Moreover, in this connection I thus spoke in ‘The Chapter on the Goal’ in (the sutta called) ‘The Questions of Puùùaka’: By searching in the world things high and low, He who has naught to stir him in the world, Calm and unclouded, cheerful, freed of longing, He has crossed over birth and old age, I say." * ***** [Ch.6 Concentration(ekaggataa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 41621 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi James (& TG), Thx for the sutta passages and your comments in this thread. Good points. --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Sarah and TG, > > Sarah: You say all dreams and fantasies and any concepts are > conditioned. Please give me your sutta quotes for this. > > James: Concepts are conditioned by the mind's tendency to mental > proliferation (In Pali: Papanca). From SN 18 "The Honeyball": > > "Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The > meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there > is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one > perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one > mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as > the source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation > beset a man with respect to past, future, and present forms > cognizable through the eye. > (…Continued for the other sense spheres). …. S: Good sutta to quote in this context. What I understand to be conditioned are the dhammas (realities) such as: 1. eye-base and forms (visible objects)- rupas 2.eye-consciousness-nama 3. contact and feelings- namas 4. perception –nama 5. thinking – nama 6. proliferations – greed, conceit and wrong view –namas 7. more thinking and proliferating about visible objects etc –namas The concepts, the objects of the proliferations are experienced or proliferated, but it is the actual realities (dhammas) above which are conditioned in the sense of sankhata dhammas (conditioned dhammas) as taught by the Buddha in an ultimate sense, such as in D.O. …. > James: The Buddha's path of liberation also includes being mindful > of concepts and consequently not being lead astray by them. From SN > 131 "A Single Excellent Night": > > Let not a person revive the past > Or on the future build his hopes; > For the past has been left behind > And the future has not been reached. > Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; 1212 > > 1212: MA: He should contemplate each presently arisen state, just > where it has arisen, by way of the seven contemplations of insight > (insight into impermanence, suffering, non-self, disenchantment, > dispassion, cessation, relinquishment). > > To my reading, "state" here doesn't necessarily apply to namas and > rupas in there raw sense, but to any state. … S: the Pali for state is dhamma. Each dhamma (nama and rupa) to be seen with insight (vipassanaa) at the present moment. …. >From the Honeyball > Sutta one can see that mental proliferations (concepts) are often > states that arise at the moment …. S: See in U.P. under ‘papanca’ (proliferations). They refer to lobha etc accompanying thinking and perception (sanna). Concepts are the objects of this. Good points to raise and discuss further. Even when there is proliferation with wrong view, the dhammas themselves of thinking, marking and wrong view are real and can be known. Thanks again for your comments. I also greatly appreciated a couple of your posts with good insights to Nina, I think. Do you have CMA now, or just access to the intro on line? I liked your questions and comments on cetasikas. Metta, Sarah ====== 41622 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Whether The Buddha spoke Pali or not > the 4th Buddhists Council recorded the teachings in Sanskript, Pali, >========== Dear Htoo, I never knew this. Do you have the reference about the bhikkhus reciting the teachings in Sanskrit. Robertk 41623 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Salesmanship: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi James, I wasn’t sure if you were wanting further feedback here or not:-/ --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: Oh Sarah, there's no storm. ;-) It's just the same old, > tired banter of me trying to get you to loosen up on your attachment > to your views, and you absolutely refusing to budge. You won't even > entertain for a second that you might be mistaken. That is some > strong attachment! I hope I am not like that- but if I am feel free > to tell me. Anyway, thanks for the compliment about `well-written' > . …. S: Perhaps it was that start to your message which might have made me wonder and hesitate.... Perhaps, like you said to Rob K about taking care of your kamma, we should all take care of our own attachments too?? …. > James: This is the dhamma according to Sarah; what about the dhamma > according to the Buddha? What `steps' does he recommend? Take for > example this sutta where the Buddha describes the stages in reverse > order: > > "In this community of monks there are monks who, with the total > ending of [the first] three fetters, are stream-winners, steadfast, > never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening: > such are the monks in this community of monks. <…> > "Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of > great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, > when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to > their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & > pursued, bring the seven factors for Awakening to their culmination. > The seven factors for Awakening, when developed & pursued, bring > clear knowing & release to their culmination. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn118.html#sangha > > James: So, the dhamma according to the Buddha begins with > mindfulness of in and out breathing. That is the first baby step > (to use your analogy) and yet you don't believe in the value of > being mindful of in and out breathing: … S: If this is the first baby step for all, why isn’t it stressed as being so in every sutta we read? Why do we read in the HoneyBall Sutta, for example, about seeing consciousness, visible objects, proliferations and so on? Why do we read about present moment dhammas to be known with insight in the Bhaddekeratta Sutta? Why isn’t it stressed in the 4 Noble Truths or the 8fold path factors? …. >"Oh, that is being selective > about the object of awareness. Oh, that reinforces the idea of > a `self' which can do something. Oh, oh, oh…" Sarah, you aren't > even taking the first baby steps, you are just talking. > I'm going to skip some of your other points because they are really > repetition of the same point. … S: Thx for giving the responses. Again. Let’s take care of our own baby steps rather than worrying about each other’s. … > Sarah: No, I'm not making difficult sacrifices or having `painful > sitting in meditation',but then I believe the development of any > kind of kusala (with calm naturally) is light, free of torment and > not about beating oneself up in anyway. The Middle Path. > > James: No, that is not the middle path- that is the self-indulgent > path. I can be self-indulgent also, but I at least admit it- and > don't confuse that with real practice. You should call a spade for > spade. … S: In your experience, can there be ‘real practice’ or development of insight into presently arisen states (dhammas) when you’re not having ‘painful sitting in meditation’ or focused on breath? Or are these pre-requisites for any awareness or understanding of any kind to develop? I’m asking because I'm sincerely interested in your view. Metta, Sarah ======= 41624 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 7:55pm Subject: Absolute Harmlessness ... !!! Friends: Friendliness means Goodwill Friendliness means Kindness Friendliness means Helpfulness Friendliness means Assistance Friendliness means Support Friendliness means Benevolence Friendliness means Concern Friendliness means Care Friendliness means Compassion Friendliness means Cooperation Friendliness means Mutual Aid Friendliness means Mutual Advantage Friendliness means Symbiosis Friendliness means Sympathy Friendliness means Basic Trust A friend who always lends a hand, a friend both in sorrow and joy, a friend who offers good counsel, a friend who sympathizes too. These are the four kinds of true friends: one who is wise, having understood, will always cherish and serve such friends just as a mother tends her only child. D III 188 As a mother even with her life protects her only child, so let one cultivate immeasurable loving-kindness towards all living beings. Bhikkhus, whatever kinds of worldly merit there are, all are not worth one sixteenth part of the release of mind by universal friendliness; in shining, glowing and beaming radiance the release of mind by infinite & endless friendliness far excels & even surpasses them all. Itivuttaka 27 He who does not strike nor makes others strike, who robs not nor makes others rob, sharing love with all that live, finds enmity with none... Itivuttaka 22 Thus he who both day and night takes delight in harmlessness sharing love with all that live, finds enmity with none... S I 208 When one with a mind of love feels compassion for the entire world -- above, below and across, unlimited everywhere. J 37 I am a friend of the footless, I am a friend of the bipeds; I am a friend of those with four feet, I am a friend of the many-footed. May not the footless harm me, may not the bipeds harm me, may not those with four feet harm me, and may not those with many feet harm me. A II 72 Among tigers, lions, leopards & bears I lived on the wood. No one was frightened of me, nor did I fear anyone. Uplifted by such universal friendliness, I enjoyed the forest. Finding great solace in silent solitude. Suvanna-sama Jataka 540 I am a friend and helper to all, I am sympathetic to all living beings. I develop a mind full of love & takes always delight in harmlessness. I gladden my mind, fill it with joy & make it immovable and unshakable. I develop the divine states of mind not cultivated by simple men. Theragatha. 648-9 Yeah, verily so !!! Friendship is really the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 41625 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: False a priori assumptions hidden in the 10 Indeterminable Questions. Dear Joop, I just wished to say that I thought the research and sutta quotes you gave on this thread were excellent and very helpful.(#41371) For someone so unorthodox and with all the other labels you give yourself, you do pretty well here;-). Your recent questions and comments on kamma are very good too. Sometimees I think that it is those who really question every aspect as you and James do, who potentially get the most benefit from the Teachings. Metta, Sarah --- jwromeijn wrote: > > I have found the "10 indeterminable question" or "10 unanswerable > questions" three times in the Suttas: 41626 From: connie Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:38pm Subject: Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Hi, Htoo, Sarah, I think the 'mandha puggala or less intelligent and if tikkha puggala or intelligent person' has to do with which roots are there at relinking... so the science wiz might have all three of the good roots, but more or less waste them feeding them math or stars or whatever instead of Dhamma. Anyway, this root business is mentioned in the SPD... if I remember right, with the same conclusion: who knows their roots. peace, connie 41627 From: connie Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:38pm Subject: Re: for James Hi, James (and Tep), Sorry about the no comment, no greeting, nothing but a quote post, James. I just ran across it while I was doing something else and for some reason I thought you'd said something along those lines - the "right concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the suttanta system" part - to Sarah and I was going to look back in the archives for it, but you see how far I got with that. Now, I'm wondering if it was even you and don't remember what exactly I had in mind. But I came across another one today from the MN: "Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors - right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness - is called noble right concentration with its supports and requisite conditions" and then it goes on thru the different factors and keeps saying "right view is the fore-runner". I guess that 'singleness of mind' is the jhana in question and it only happens when all the other factors "without effluents, transcendent" are there and not just 'any old jhana' if there is such a thing - whatever Buddha's teachers did/had. Then, I think about the sotapanna (or "whoever is endowed with this noble 8-fold path") not having to master jhanas and how satipatthana is called 'five-fold path development' because of the factors that develop together then, but not (necessarily?) during any other kind of 'meditation'. So, I think I'll just skip out on the right concentration topic because I'm sure I don't have it and look back at right view beyond some basic intellectual understanding. "And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor of Awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path." Discernment?! Well, I'm not much there, either. I can talk about nama and rupa, but what do I really know? Surely not what 'breath' is beyond repeating 'a cittaja rupa'. Man, life was so much simpler when I was told to just shut up and sit or leave. peace, connie 41628 From: connie Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:38pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up Hi, Htoo, Kel, Joop, What about ahosi kamma? Wouldn't that be kind of a 'fallen away' kind? I'm thinking about the strength of the kamma as it relates to which javana and thought the weakest kamma might 'die off' at the end of the life-span if it hadn't come to fruition by then. Or does it not 'fall away' unless and until parinibbana? I also thought if someone became sotapanna, there wouldn't be some conditions arising anymore for certain results, but I guess the kamma could just play out some other way than it would have otherwise. Does that make sense? peace, connie - with head and foot ;) 41629 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Howard & Ken O. Hi KenH, --- kenhowardau wrote: You wrote to Tep: > Yes, the end product you are talking about does require a lot of > preparation. But, even now, there can be a degree of right > understanding. To the extent that we have studied the true Dhamma, > there can, at least, be right *intellectual* understanding of the > present dhammas. I doubt a beginner like me would ever have moments > of direct understanding. They would have to be of an extremely weak > level. (I remember DSG has discussed this before, but can't > remember what we concluded. :-) ) ... S: I don't recall the conversation, but remember a similar live one with Sukin some time back. Of course any undesrstanding is weak in the beginning, but it grows as sati is aware more and more often, I think. No need to have any expectations one way or another or to think of 'this beginner'.Also, there's no need to have doubts whether that direct understanding will and does develop. I'm sure it's (any doubt that is) very fleeting in your case. You may well smile when you look back at these comments a little later. I notice that Sukin no longer questions or wonders along these lines. He may add more. Metta, Sarah p.s I laughed at your friend's dukkha breakfast;-) ====== 41630 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Hi Connie & Htoo, --- connie wrote: > > > Hi, Htoo, Sarah, > > I think the 'mandha puggala or less intelligent and if tikkha puggala or > > intelligent person' has to do with which roots are there at relinking... ... S: that's what I would have guessed, but then Htoo was referring to them in the context of enlightenment and phala cittas (as I recall). As we know, the two rooted puggalas have no chance of developing insight (vipassana nanas) or enlightenment, so that's why I wondered if he had something else in mind. To be honest, I'm behind on my reading and haven't read Htoo's latest replies to me yet, so I don't know if he's explained further. Pls do quote anything relevant (or irrelevant if it's interesting!) on this or anything else. Always good to have your input, Connie. Just hope (lots of attachment here) that both your and Phil's computers keep chugging along. Metta, Sarah p.s it's definitely not me discussing jhanas with James right now (quite enough on my plate;-)). Perhaps you're thinking of Ken O? I'll look forward to reading your discussions with them on the topic;-). 41631 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Experience of objects Dear Nina (& James), --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > J: Ps. If you tell me that cetasikas can only be differentiated from > > cittas by `insight', I would like you to explain precisely what you > > mean. Otherwise, you might as well just say "It's MAGIC"! ;-)) > >N: Sati can be aware of one dhamma at a time, and then paññaa can > gradually > know different characteristics of dhammas that appear. No need to name > citta > or cetasika, just characteristics that appear. That is the way. Later on > citta can be differentiated from cetasikas, but for me still a long way. > But > the subject is worth discussing more, perhaps Rob K, Sarah, Mike or > anyone > else can add something. I like some input to discuss further. ... Btw, Mike wrote to me a couple of weeks or so ago to say he was going on a holiday to Mexico with Rose so would be out of touch for a while. I didn't add more because I thought you already explained very well. James asked very good questions on this thread. We don't need to try to differentiate, but when there is awareness of seeing consciousness, for example, its characteristic which is that of just 'seeing' visible object, is quite different from say feeling (pleasant or unpleasant or neutral) or attachment, to put it simply. Of course, some cittas or mental factors are more obvious and more likely to be objects of awareness than others. For those which don't appear or are not obvious at all, such as phassa (contact), it's useless to try and be aware of them. For that matter, it's useless to try and be aware of the more obvious ones too. James, I think the development of awareness and insight is a little like magic as you suggest;-). Like the bunny popping out of the hat, we never know when there will be conditions for awareness or insight or what the object will be. One thing for sure, we have to read/hear and consider a lot, over and over again, for such insight to develop, I think. Metta, Sarah ============ 41632 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi from Phil Hello Hugo, I'm enjoying your extracts from different books/teachers and of course that great humour again like in your ice-cream post to Phil;-);-). --- Hugo wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > On the topics of photos, I went to a ceremony (requisites offering) > where one of the monks took pictures of us :-) > > The monks sitting on their little platform just before the ceremony > starts and all the laypeople sitting on the ground, then one of the > monks pulls out a camera and takes a couple of pictures. > > It was funny, this is the first event I have seen where the > "panelists" take photos of the "audience". ... S: I'm trying not to smile here as it may not be respectful;-). What I'd really like would be a copy of the pic they took of you in the DSG photo album... When I mentioned the pics, I'm just trying to encourage regulars like you, TG, Kel, Tep, JOOP, Cosmique, Malia and so on, to put a pic there for us all to see. How about a nice family one instead? I know, an ice-cream family one so Phil has lots of opportunities for brahma-viharas too;-). If anyone needs any assistance, Christine or James are always willing and able to help in this regard. I know that some have their own good reasons for wishing privacy in this regard. Metta, Sarah =========== 41633 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Balancing the Five Indriyas Hi Tep, As everyone else is commenting, your enthusiastic and polite feedback to all suggestions and comments is a good example for us all. I think you'd also find it interesting and helpful to read a chapter from A.Sujin's book 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas', Part 1V (or it seems to be under Part V on line),The Development of Insight, ch 1, the Factors leading to Enlightenment: http://www.abhidhamma.org/survey6.pdf I think it starts at page 186 or 187 (some difference with my hard copy which is less updated). It discusses the 3 meanings of satipatthana, the indriyas (faculties), balas (powers), enlightenment factors and so on. All the areas you're discussing with Kel and Nina. Metta, Sarah --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > > Dear Nina - > > Thank you for your suggestion. The Nyanatiloka's definition of the five > balas is that they are 'powers' of the 5 spirtual faculties (Indriya) by > the > fact "that they are unshakable by their opposites" and they > represent "the aspect of firmness in the spiritual faculties". I am not > > sure what unskable and firmness mean in the practical sense. 41634 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Thread (249) - Definition of Pali Words Hi Maya, I think it's very helpful indeed and a great idea of yours to check key PALI terms that Htoo (and any of the rest of us) use and to share your findings as you did with the ones starting with maranasanna. You can be very sure that any terms you check or read more about will be very useful to others too. Nyantiloka's dictionary is the best to use for this as you did. (For brief definitions, you may also like to use the simple Pali glossary in the DSG files). I hope we can encourage you to keep doing this. It will help others to take more interest in Htoo's series as well, I think. It's true, as he says, that he always explains terms, but many of us have minds like sieves when it comes to Pali and different kinds of reinforcement and assistance like yourse, helps a lot. Metta, Sarah --- Illusion wrote: > > > For those of you,including myself :), who do not understand the meaning > of these pali words posted by Htoo Naing in the Dhamma Thread, here are > the definitions that I looked up in the Buddhist Dictionary. Hopefully > it is beneficial. > > MARANASANNA-JAVANA: marana meaning "death" means the disappearance of > the vital faculty confined to a single life-time. But strictly speaking, > death is continuously occuring through repeated dissolution and > vanishing of each momentar physical-mental combination, so it takes > place every moment. (more info on momentary existence, see Visuddhi > Magga VIII) 41635 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 1:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Howard, Back to our 'Spring-time' discussions;-) --- upasaka@a... wrote: >>S:He stressed > that > > the knowing of the 'all' are just these paramattha dhammas... the > khandhas > > (and nibbana). > > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > When he talked to his followers about guarding the senses, and > clenching the teeth, and sitting with back straight and attention to the > fore, and > seeking out good Dhamma friends who are the whole of the holy life etc, > etc etc. > he was speaking of conventional actions. ... S: I would say, he was using conventional speech and talking about conventionally sounding actions, but without any misapprehension of the dhammas underlying them as Jon is discussing with you. For example,guarding the senses, refers to moments of satipatthana, awareness of realities, when there is awareness of visible object and so on and 'he neither adheres to the appearance as a whole, nor its parts'. As I was discussing with Phil, with the growth of awareness there is naturally less attention to signs and details and this kind of sila follows naturally. If there is a 'trying to be aware and guard the eye door kind of thing' (not that you've ever suggested that), satipatthana and indriya samvara sila (guarding of the sense doors) will never develop as I see it. .... >Those who were high ariyans > certainly understood the realities underlying all this conventional > speech, as they > did the realities underlying this entire projected world of concept, but > most of > his followers did not, nor did they need to in order to follow his > instructions. .... S: I think it's just a question of whether when we read and use conventional speech as to whether it is with any understanding of dhammas (realities) being developed or whether it's with an idea of self. If it's the latter, the message is bound to be lost and for those followers, the instructions would have been no more useful than if they had followed another teacher. We don't need a Buddha to tell us what is conventionally good and bad, do we? It's true to say, I think, that the Buddha just pointed out what's what, what's good, what's bad, what leads to what result and so on. Of course, we just gain the benefit according to our limited understanding at anytime. This is why the appreciation of the suttas grows as we learn more about anatta and paramattha dhammas. .... <...> ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes. I agree entirely. > ------------------------------------ > > > > > Yes, we use concepts and ‘operate at the conventional, conceptual > level’, > > but such ‘operating’ can be with or without wrong view about > dhammas at > > any given moment. Clearly, for the ariyans, when talking about purple > > elephants or trees in the garden, there would have been no illusion > that > > these were anything but conceptual terms used for expression. > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > I agree completely! (So, why was I only "half right"? ;-) > ----------------------------------- S: ;-)If you tell me you agree completely with my comments so far in this post, I'll give you a 'completely right' ;-). .... ***** > Howard: > Perhaps. I am aware that this is said about cittas in the > commentaries. Actually, the growth, peaking, and declining (in > intensity) of a mindstate, > like a wave, makes perfectly good sense to me, and I have no problem > with that > - in fact it appeals to me. But I don't think of that sort of change as > very > important. > When dhammas arise or cease, pa~n~natti that we project onto the > dhammic stream seem to change, but the reality of the matter is that > dhammas > themselves, don't turn into other dhammas - they don't change their > nature. When a > dhamma ceases, it is *gone*. When a dhamma arises, it is brand new - > never "on > the scene" before. It may seem that we hear a changing melody. But "the > melody" is conceptually projected upon a multitude of sounds, each of > which arises > anew and then ceases, never to repeat. There is *always* something new > under > the sun!! (My variation on a theme of Ecclesiastes! ;-) That is what I > was > alluding to. > ----------------------------------------- ... S: Well said, Howard. No disagreement here at all. Good to talk to you and hear your comments. Apologies for the delay in reply as usual. Metta, Sarah ======= 41636 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 2:10am Subject: Re: Kamma and Buddhism (was Dhamma Threade 249/ old kamma used up Dear Htoo, Nina, Kel and all After Htoo's answers (and more than that, thanks !) the "I don't understand" got smaller, the "I understand more or less" has grown. Still the "I'm agnostic about it" exists. I have not understood all the details of Htoos answer, but the big lines are clear. I have five questions: four to you and one to myself. 1 One of the principles that is to me the most important in Buddhism is that of 'anicca'. So the idea all phenomena are arising and falling away is evident to me. So why is kamma not just falling away? I sometimes got the impression the 'anatta' principle and the 'dukkha' principle are much more important in this DSG than the 'anicca' principle. 2 I was careful in my questions because I thought "where (of what 'material') is kamma made of" is one of the four 'unthinkables' (acinteyya), but I did not get the impression from your answers that that was so. Still I don't know exactly what it is: a cetasika and not a cetasika , that what I understand of Htoo in answer # 5; and also it is something the javana cittas will create continously, a "potential": so an energy in my frame of reference. Nina quotes U Narada: "a special force", a force is not a nama, I think (and 'force' not exactly the same as 'energy' in physics). Perhaps the composition of kamma is really a mystery, an unthinkable? 3 A technical question already asked to Kel. A lifetime kamma is much information, billions of bits. How can I imagine the medium on which all that information is stored: in a few cittas ? Is there a good (=modern) metaphore that can help my imagination, for example: is it a black hole ? 4 Two weeks ago I had a short discussion with Nina about het proposal I can comtemplate on the topic good/evil or kusala/akusala; the thought on that discussion came back in the question that arose now in my: how about the idea of innocence ? Is a child born innocent or with a backpack of kamma ? 'Innocence' and 'natural goodness' are not exactly the same concept but I think both do not fit in the Abhidhamma-system, is that correct ? 5 The question to myself is: is it possible to be a Buddhist, even a Theravadin, without believing in the idea of rebirth. Kamma and rebirth are in the text so interwoven that it's possible to taljk about one withpout talking about the other. Still it's possible to understand and believe the working of kamma within ones lifetime. As I said to Kel: rebirth is one of the Theravada-ideas that do not resonate in me, like for example the anicca-principle does. Metta Joop 41637 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 3:43am Subject: Adapted Buddhisms and Second - Third - Fourth Vehicle Dear Dhamma Friends, Buddhism was founded by The Buddha Gotama. Actually it is not just an ism. The Buddha Gotama preached really achievable things and He preached how to be liberated from the round of birth-rebirth-cycle or samsara. Actually 'Buddhism' the word is given by others. As there was only one and a single Buddha in His sasana or teachings, there cannot be many many Buddhisms. But some were not happy with the teachings and they tried to adapt the teachings and the vinaya or bhikkhu rules. Whether or not adapted, dhammas work in line with their own characteristics. In the polar regions, the weather is different from the equator region. For that 'should bhikkhus have their head unshaved?, should wear other dressings after removing robes? should they have 4 meals to protect cold so that the body generate heat by eating more? As soon as adapted, that already adapted condition has been made by the mind and that mind should be pure. If it is indifferent that is adaptation is made by the only reason of self-fitness then that may reveal dispect to The Buddha. The Buddha preached suitability [sappaya]. If there is no suitability then it will not work. The Buddha did not leave any message regarding adaptation. When bhikkhus were weeping and crying when they knew Bhagava was leaving for ever, Bhagava said, 'even though I will not be there after my leaving, there will be my teachings. As long as you all treat them as if 'the teaching' is me it will be fine. As soon as you alter it, then all disappear 'me and my teachings' and that is the end of my teachings [sasana]. 'Whoever dare adapt, it is them who do that and they will be responsible for their thoughts and their actions'. Bhagava will be smiling because this is just a minute portion of those who have such thoughts of adaptation. Once Devadattha asked Bhagava regarding vinayas. He asked for 10 rules to be laid down by Bhagava as vinaya or bhikkhu's rules. But Bhagava denied all 10 requests. Devadattha asked for that to adapt the teachings. Among them one is 'forest dwelling' and another is 'not to eat meat'. The Buddha denied all 10 requests including these 2 requests of forest dwelling and not to eat meat. The Buddha foresaw every pros and cons and saw possible implications. This denial was not just simple. Devadattha, when he was not allow to adapt vinaya he declared that he was going to act as The Buddha and he would pass 10 extra rules for bhikkhus, all of which were not allowed by The Buddha Gotama, and any bhikkhus who agreed with him [Devadattha] could follow him and then he left The Buddha. 1000 bhikkhus followed Devadattha because they confused that what Devadattha was talking sounded like right such as 'not eating meat, forest dwelling, not exceeding possession of 3 robes, not wandering for food, etc etc'. The Buddha knew that half of 1000 bhikkhus who followed Devadattha were highly perfected and they would soon become sotapam. To save them The Buddha instruct Sariputta to meet those 1000 bhikkhus. When Sariputta arrived at Devadattha's new monastry, he welcome Sariputta with much respect and said 'O! Son Sariputta. That is good of you to join my Sangha. Now I have adapted the teachings made by The Buddha Gotama because they were not all right. I am The Buddha Devadattha. After some preaching to 1000 bhikkhus Devadattha became tired and told Sariputta. 'O! Son Sariputta. Now continue my preaching. I have a back-ache and I am going to have a rest. This is imitation to The Buddha Gotama. The Buddha Gotama delegated Sariputta on some occasions to continue what He has been preaching and He Himslef took a rest. The Buddha Gotama never went asleep in the evenings. Instead The Buddha would stay in phala-samapatti or fruition-attainment. But unlike The Buddha Gotama, Devadattha went into deep sleep as soon as he touch the bed. The Sariputta preached the great Dhamma and the Marshal of Dhamma, Sariputta caused bhikkhus delighted and he said he was going back to The Buddha and whoever want to join could follw him. 500 good bhikkhus immediately agreed to follow the Marshal of Dhamma, Sariputta while another 500 bhikhus were confused and they dare not leave Devadattha even thought they thought The Dhamma of Sariputta was great. These 500 dare not leave because they knew that Devadattha had a great jhana power and they were afraid of his power. Devadattha made adaptation. Not very soon, he got stomach pain because of continuous preaching, not having eaten proper food, not supported by laities and soon he started to vomit blood. After several times of vomiting of blood he realised that he would not live long. Devadattha, the adaptor of teachings and vinaya, thought over what he had done. Actually, The Buddha Gotama was his blood-related 1st cousin and The Buddha Gotama had been his brother-in-law, who had married to his lovely sister, princess Yasodhara. Devadattha knew that he had done a lot of bad things to his brother-in-law. He first organised a team of archers to kill The Buddha but without any success and all archers became sotapams. He then diligently tried to harm The Live Buddha by organizing the king Ajatasattu and tried to kill The Buddha with the aid of hugh, rough, angry, intoxicated elephant. The elephant, instead of crushing The Buddha, became out of intoxication and became well tamed and sat in front of The Buddha. The third time, Devadattha himself arrange a hugh mountain-stone to be dislodged from the high top of mountain [hill] so that it came down and hurt and crush The Buddha. But this just caused bruising of The Buddha's great toe. Devadattha became regreted and he said to his 500 followers to carry him on a carrier raft to The Buddha. They carried Devadattha to The Buddha. Some bhukkhus in the monastry of The Buddha informed The Buddha, Sariputta and other Elderly that Devadattha was coming. The Buddha said, 'Don't worry. Devadattha cannot come to me and he has no more right to see me again however hard he tries.' But young bhikkhus were so worried that they reported very frequently that they [Devadattha and 500 followers] arrived at such and such place. Finally Devadattha arrived near the monastry. He instructed his followers that he would like to decend to the ground and they helped him down. As soon as the adaptor of teachings and vinaya, Devadattha touched the ground, the earth could no more bear such a wicked person on the ground and the earth became cracked and there arose a great flame and Devadattha had to sink inch by inch and finally the earth engulfed him completely. This is where adaptor, Devadattha went for his actions of adapting the teachings, adapting the vinaya, adapting the sangha and many other that is adapting to his mind's needs. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41638 From: Philip Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 4:44am Subject: Re: Absolute Harmlessness ... !!! Hello Bhikkhu Samahita, and all Thank you for this, Bhikkhu. Very inspiring. > Friends: > Friendliness means Goodwill > Friendliness means Kindness > Friendliness means Helpfulness (followed by many other wonderful passages about friendship) I would add that it's helpful to remember that we can't always be friendly. The friendliness arises due to conditions. If we think we can always be friendly, the result will be stressful and a bit sad. Let your bitchiness and grumpiness rise and fall away again! Glare at a noisy child in the train! Snap at your loved ones! It's OK. These things happen. But be aware of it, if possible. Awareness of unwholesome realities when they arise is more wholesome than hoping to always be wholesome. BTW, speaking of friends, has anyone else noticed the slight bit of schadenfreude that creeps when you hear that someone you like very much has had something bad happen to them? A co-worker I'm very fond of drank too much and crashed his bicycle and was quite badly injured. I was sad to hear about it, but also gloated slightly because I stopped drinking and don't have accidents like that anymore. (I did once.) And the way we talked about it at work was somehow thrilled. This schadenfreude seems to creep in. We sincerely feel concern, but there is also a kind of slight gleefulness about other's misfortunes. I use the "we" very loosely, but I'm sure I'm not the only one. And it's OK. These aspects of mind come and go in a way that we shouldn't hope to control and shouldn't fret about. There can't yet be pure friendliness, or absolute harmlessness, because we have accumulated unwholesome tendencies along with the wholesome ones, and both will have their way until we are much further along the path. That being said, thank you again, Bhikkhu. I will print out those passages for inspiration and fostering of more friendliness, more harmlessness. Metta, Phil 41639 From: Date: Tue Feb 1, 2005 11:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Sarah (and James and TG, and Jon as well) - It seems to me that whenever the topic is "concepts", all sorts of language-use problems come to the fore. I'll try to point out some of these in context below. In a message dated 2/2/05 2:03:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Hi James (& TG), > > Thx for the sutta passages and your comments in this thread. Good points. > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > >Hi Sarah and TG, > > > >Sarah: You say all dreams and fantasies and any concepts are > >conditioned. Please give me your sutta quotes for this. > > > >James: Concepts are conditioned by the mind's tendency to mental > >proliferation (In Pali: Papanca). From SN 18 "The Honeyball": > > > >"Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The > >meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there > >is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one > >perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one > >mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as > >the source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation > >beset a man with respect to past, future, and present forms > >cognizable through the eye. > >(…Continued for the other sense spheres). > …. > S: Good sutta to quote in this context. > > What I understand to be conditioned are the dhammas (realities) such as: > > 1. eye-base and forms (visible objects)- rupas > 2.eye-consciousness-nama > 3. contact and feelings- namas > 4. perception –nama > 5. thinking – nama > 6. proliferations – greed, conceit and wrong view –namas > 7. more thinking and proliferating about visible objects etc –namas ------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think this matter is so simple. In part there is the question of the Pali involved and its English translation. For starters, what *exactly* are "perceptions and notions"? Perceptions sound like the products of sa~n~na, which may make them (relatively) elementary ideas or proto-ideas, and notions sound like full-blown ideas, which are alleged products of sankharic processing. I personally have no problem with the idea of such mental constructs as proto-ideas and ideas any more than that of feelings and emotions. My only hesitation is that as I examine the thinking process, I never can seem to find these. I only seem to vaguely sense them. Of course this may be a defect in the degree of detail I can pick up due to lack of fineness and intensity of attention and mindfulness. Sarah, under proliferations you include wrong view as a nama. What kind of paramattha dhamma do you mean by that exactly? The usual sense of the English 'wrong view' is a kind of incorrect *concept* or *notion* or *idea*. But if these are nonexistent, then what *is* wrong view? -------------------------------------------- > > The concepts, the objects of the proliferations are experienced or > proliferated, but it is the actual realities (dhammas) above which are > conditioned in the sense of sankhata dhammas (conditioned dhammas) as > taught by the Buddha in an ultimate sense, such as in D.O. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Now here, when you speak of "the objects of the proliferations" we get close to another problem in "concept language", namely the systematic conflating of alleged mental phenomena (the momentary, mind-constructed phenomena that I have trouble finding and that Jon seems to accept but to dismiss) and the nonexistent shadow entities they seem to refer to - that they project in imagination. --------------------------------------- > …. > >James: The Buddha's path of liberation also includes being mindful > >of concepts and consequently not being lead astray by them. From SN > >131 "A Single Excellent Night": > > > >Let not a person revive the past > >Or on the future build his hopes; > >For the past has been left behind > >And the future has not been reached. > >Instead with insight let him see > >Each presently arisen state; 1212 > > > >1212: MA: He should contemplate each presently arisen state, just > >where it has arisen, by way of the seven contemplations of insight > >(insight into impermanence, suffering, non-self, disenchantment, > >dispassion, cessation, relinquishment). > > > >To my reading, "state" here doesn't necessarily apply to namas and > >rupas in there raw sense, but to any state. > … > S: the Pali for state is dhamma. Each dhamma (nama and rupa) to be seen > with insight (vipassanaa) at the present moment. > --------------------------------------- Howard: The problem with that reading, as I see it, Sarah, is that in the suttas the Buddha often uses 'dhamma' the way we informally use 'thing' in everyday English. That makes it not trivially determinable in which sense the Buddha is using 'dhamma' in a particular context. Sometime it is clear that he means khandhic elements, and sometimes not. -------------------------------------- > …. > >From the Honeyball > >Sutta one can see that mental proliferations (concepts) are often > >states that arise at the moment > …. > S: See in U.P. under ‘papanca’ (proliferations). They refer to lobha etc > accompanying thinking and perception (sanna). Concepts are the objects of > this. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Now here I see two problematical things going on. One of them is attempting to say something meaningful about a non-existent! If there are no such things as concepts, then there are no concepts that that are objects of anything. At best, this is just a (misleading) manner of speaking. If there are no concepts, then we cannot literally think about a concept or do anything else with a concept. The second of them is the conflating of an idea with what the idea allegely refers to. When one speaks of "concepts [which] are the objects of this" it is unclear whether these "objects" are mental phenomena or their referents or both. There really are some language problems here. Just to point to one: One can sit on a chair, but one cannot sit on a concept! ;-) Is a chair a concept? Are there chairs at all? Well, I say that there really are no chairs, but to speak of chairs in not meaningless - it is abbreviational, figurative language. A tougher question: Is there a *concept* of chair, and do we think of it. Jon seems to think so. I think not. I believe there are mental processes that occure which we *call* thinking of the concept of chair, but I do not think that introspection will ever reveal to us a single mental phenomenon that is "concept of chair". ---------------------------------------------------- Good points to raise and discuss further. Even when there is> > proliferation with wrong view, the dhammas themselves of thinking, marking > and wrong view are real and can be known. > > Thanks again for your comments. I also greatly appreciated a couple of > your posts with good insights to Nina, I think. Do you have CMA now, or > just access to the intro on line? I liked your questions and comments on > cetasikas. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========================= 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) 41640 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:14am Subject: Re: Kamma and Buddhism (was Dhamma Threade 249/ old kamma used up Dear Joop and All (Nina, Kel, others), You are good at production of questions. This is what it should be. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop wrote: Dear Htoo, Nina, Kel and all After Htoo's answers (and more than that, thanks !) the "I don't understand" got smaller, the "I understand more or less" has grown. Still the "I'm agnostic about it" exists. I have not understood all the details of Htoos answer, but the big lines are clear. I have five questions: four to you and one to myself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks for your kind words. As the issues are not just simple it is usual for not grasping everything. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's 5 questions: Q 1: 1 One of the principles that is to me the most important in Buddhism is that of 'anicca'. So the idea all phenomena are arising and falling away is evident to me. So why is kamma not just falling away? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Answer 1: Nibbana is not a phenomenon. It does not arise and fall away. Names are not phenomena. They do not arise and they do not fall away. Likewise kamma is not a phenomenon. So kamma does not arise and fall away. As soon as cetana cetasika arises that cetana cetasika falls away. This is anicca or impermanent. We cannot stop cetana not to fall away and we cannot cause cetana to arise. Cetana is anatta. Cetana is a phenomenon. It does arise and fall away. When we cannot control it, when we cannot fulfil our wish of what cetana to be, it is not desirable and it is dukkha. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's Q 1 continued: I sometimes got the impression the 'anatta' principle and the 'dukkha' principle are much more important in this DSG than the 'anicca' principle. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: All are important and this is my view that they are equally important. But what we need to be careful is the seriality that The Buddha taught on these 3 characteristics. It is anicca, dukkha, anatta. It is not in the order of a) anatta, dukkha, anicca b) anatta, anicca, dukkha c) dukkha, anicca, anatta d) dukkha, anatta, anicca e) anicca, anatta, dukkha Quote: Anattalakkhana Sutta ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's Question 2: Q 2: 2 I was careful in my questions because I thought "where (of what 'material') is kamma made of" is one of the four 'unthinkables' (acinteyya), but I did not get the impression from your answers that that was so. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I really did not have that impression on you. Because I felt like that you are investigating the dhammas and this is good for you and when others read these messages of your investigation they will be benefited from reading these messages. But if you touch the boundry of 'unthinkables'[acinteyya] I will let you know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Q 2 continued: Still I don't know exactly what it is: a cetasika and not a cetasika , that what I understand of Htoo in answer # 5; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I understand that you will have to confuse. Kamma is inclusive of cetana and that is why you confused. Here I will extend a bit. a)From January to December b)From January through December a) may be from 31st January to 1st December where there will be only 10 months. b) includes the whole January and the whole December. So it will be from 1st January to 31st December and there will be 12 months. [Please correct if my English was wrong.] Kamma is inclusive from the arising of cetana [uppada khana of cetana or the arising sub-moment of cetana which exists in three sub-moments of 1.arising, 2.persisting, 3.falling away] till the end of cuti citta of arahats [that is end of the third sub-moment or the last sub- moment or disappearing sub-moment or bhanga-khana of arahatta cuti citta]. After that is we call ahosi kamma or ineffectual kamma. We here means those who left still in the samsara. Again, until that time there is potential that it may give rise to its effect. But this potential is not a phenomenon. Example you borrowed $ 1 M from the world bank [:-)]. a) You return it after 80 years and you die at 80 years after b) You return it after some years and you will be living 80 years c) You have not returned it and you are appraoching 79 years after d) You return it in the same year you borrow and are still living e) You return it in the next year and you are still living f) You have not returned yet and you die after 80 years d) is like achieving the result in the same life because of 1st javana citta's cetana. e) is like achieving the result in the next life because of 7th javana's cetana. a) is like the result that was obtained by Maha Moggallana. He in his past life killed his own fathre and mother who were blind and he was beaten to death and did parinibbana. b) is like your achievement right now, your status right now. Past kamma [your past actions] has given the result of current status and you are still living in the samsara until you leave. c) is like impending coming result soon or disappearing of potential soon. f) is like ahosi kamma. The bank cannot ask $ 1 M from your corpse after 80 years. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Q 2 continued: and also it is something the javana cittas will create continously, a "potential": so an energy in my frame of reference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is wording. You may think it as energy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop continued: Nina quotes U Narada: "a special force", a force is not a nama, I think (and 'force' not exactly the same as 'energy' in physics). Perhaps the composition of kamma is really a mystery, an unthinkable? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's answer 2: Here reach a point. If you are thinking of 'composition of kamma' I would say it is unthinkable and it is better not to think any more. Why? Thinking so does not help your liberation, and it does not help your further achievement or progress in dhamma study and it does not help any other aspect of life. When there is no benefit, it is the best not to talk on that. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's Question 3: Q 3: 3 A technical question already asked to Kel. A lifetime kamma is much information, billions of bits. How can I imagine the medium on which all that information is stored: in a few cittas ? Is there a good (=modern) metaphore that can help my imagination, for example: is it a black hole ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's answer 3: It is fine whether you like this current life time or beyond that. But examplewise The Buddha already gave a good metaphore. It is like the shade of yourself. Here you may still argue that when it is completely dark what happen to the shade of yourself or when it is completely lighten from all angles of your body what happen to the shade of yourself. When you are reborn as an asannaisatta the shade disappears because it is completely dark [as there is no citta]. When you attained arahatta magga nana and then you go into nirodha- samapatti or cessation-attainment then there is no shade because there is light from all angles of yourself and there is no way to appear any shade. Otherwise you always carry your shade along with you. When youself exists there is the shade. But the shade itself does not exist on its own. Do not try to separate your shade and yourself and it is unthinkable. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's Question 4: 4 Two weeks ago I had a short discussion with Nina about het proposal I can comtemplate on the topic good/evil or kusala/akusala; the thought on that discussion came back in the question that arose now in my: how about the idea of innocence ? Is a child born innocent or with a backpack of kamma ? 'Innocence' and 'natural goodness' are not exactly the same concept but I think both do not fit in the Abhidhamma-system, is that correct ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's answer 4: From the worldly perspective any child born is innocent whether their voice is ugly or sweet, whether they are black or white, whether they bear 2 legs or 1 leg or none. All are innocent. But abhidhamma has already told that birth itself is because of kamma and abhidhamma does not decide birth is innocent or not innocent because there is nothing except nama dhamma and rupa dhamma. When there are only nama dhamma and rupa dhamma, birth-child etc etc are not dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joop's Question 5: Q 5: 5 The question to myself is: is it possible to be a Buddhist, even a Theravadin, without believing in the idea of rebirth. Kamma and rebirth are in the text so interwoven that it's possible to taljk about one withpout talking about the other. Still it's possible to understand and believe the working of kamma within ones lifetime. As I said to Kel: rebirth is one of the Theravada-ideas that do not resonate in me, like for example the anicca-principle does. Metta Joop ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's answer 5: I do not want to push you hard. If you do not believe rebirth, do not think that you do not believe 'rebirth'. It is still possible that you can discover the real dhammas. But as soon as you realize and discover the real dhamma with your own wisdom [as other would say direct knowledge] you will come to see that there is rebirth. So my kind advice will be 'do not think that you do not believe rebirth' and just leave it alone and tey to touch other dhammas. There are 62 kinds of wrong views. Leaving all except two, there are 2 wrong views or 2 kinds of miccha-ditthi. One is sassata-ditthi or 'the view of eternality'. This is quite common even among so called Buddhists. Even advanced learners of Buddhism may still have such wrong view. This view leads to believing that there are many rebirths and there are life after life. One life just jumps into another life when it dies and so on. This is easily illuded people who believe rebirth. Again there is another wrong view called uccheda-ditthi. Uccheda means 'cutting out'. This view believes that as soon as this current life dies there is nothing after death. So if you believe this second view of 'nothing after death' this is wrong view and thinking on such matter is done with vicikiccha or suspicious mind. This mind does give rise to rebirth in one of 4 woeful planes of existence and when living in any realm it gives rise to 'ahetukua akusala vipaka cittas' as results. There are 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. 5 are panca-vinnana cittas arising at bad objects and further 2 are receiving of these cittas and investigating of these cittas and retention of these cittas that is thier objects. So when you do not have a clarity in rebirth [saddha in the dhamma that there is rebirth], do not think that and instead there are many things that you can do to improve yourself like investigating the very present moment right now and then at every moment. You must learn. You must be mindful. You must consistently persistent in producing effort to investigate all phenomena that arise at each moment. You should try to be calm and settle down your mind and finally you will definitely see 'A LIGHT'. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41641 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2, oral tradition. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > This is very interesting. I also think that oral tradition is very reliable. > Think of the whole group doing it and the control they have if someone makes > a mistake. Generally people do not trust oral tradition. Can you tell us > more please about oral tradiiton and how it works? > Nina. > op 01-02-2005 19:08 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > All Buddha teachings were handed down only by oral citation until 4th > > Buddhists Council. > > > > Actually oral citations are much much more accurate than written > > equivalent. Because written scripts need voicing and timing of > > voicing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, This is my thought and opinion on oral citation. 1. It is based on voice-sound 2. It has exact spacing between words each other 3. It is reproducible as can be checked in other citers 4. It carries the whole undisturbed, unadapted, uncorrected But written scripts are just signs and they assign specific voicing for each sign or combination of signs or so. Example is 'often' the English word. I equally heard 'of-ten' and 'of-fen' from genuine native speakers that is not mixed blood or not born in other places and brought up in other places but in their own land. What I want to say is that written scripts may bear several different voicing while oral citation bears a single style if confirmed. I added 'if confirmed' because there may be a few variation among groups of disciples even though the contents are essentially the same. The person who I met reproduced the same story with exact wording several times that is over many years say about 50 years. The reason of the 5th Buddhist Council was to confirm these voicing and to standardise to one. Example the voice sound for even 'Bhagava' may a bit vary like 1. `Bhagava 2. Bhaga`va 3. Bha`gava With respect, Htoo Naing 41642 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:38am Subject: Re: for James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Htoo - > > You have offered some leading questions for further discussion. > > H: > There are times that suttas and abhidhamma should not mix. > > Example when you offer something to someone you should just offer > > conventionally. Otherwise??? > > > > T: Very good, friend. Please tell us about the examples you had in > mind. Otherwise, what? > > H: > > Nama and dhamma is holding rupa and then nama > > and rupa is offering rupa to nama and rupa. > > > > Do you recognize any sense in above sentence? > > > > T: Are you referring to a looping-back part of the Dependent > Origination : Vinnana-paccaya nama-rupam; nama-rupa-paccaya > vinnanam, or are you talking about a citta-vithi during meditation? > > Forgive my Abhidhamma inadequacy. (: =|) > > Warm regards, > > > Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep, What I said was simple thing. Offering is a good act. It is dana. When it is done just do as it is. But when one is thinking like 'I who is a combination of 5 khandhas is holding this things which is rupa to that person who is a combination of nama and rupa' then he is just meditating or thinking. There are 3 kinds of kusala. One is dana, another is sila and the third is bhavana. The example showed mixing up of dana and bhavana. While bhavana mainly involve mind only dana involve body, speech, and mind. If these 3 or at least 2 (body+mind or speech+mind) are disrupted then it is not as good as pure dana. With Metta, Htoo Naing 41643 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > > > Whether The Buddha spoke Pali or not > > the 4th Buddhists Council recorded the teachings in Sanskript, > Pali, > >========== > Dear Htoo, > I never knew this. Do you have the reference about the bhikkhus > reciting the teachings in Sanskrit. > Robertk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Robert K, I did not say 'the bhikkhus reciteing the teachings in Sanskrit'. I said 'recorded in Sanskrit'. There is no Pali writing at all but teachings were recited in Pali. With respect, Htoo Naing 41644 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:50am Subject: Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Hi, Htoo, Sarah, > > I think the 'mandha puggala or less intelligent and if tikkha puggala or > intelligent person' has to do with which roots are there at relinking... > so the science wiz might have all three of the good roots, but more or > less waste them feeding them math or stars or whatever instead of Dhamma. > Anyway, this root business is mentioned in the SPD... if I remember right, > with the same conclusion: who knows their roots. > > peace, > connie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Sarah and All, I do not agree. Everyone who are born as their last life are born with tihetuka patisandhi citta or 3-rooted-linking-consciousness. These 3 roots are alobha or non-attachment, adosa or non-aversion, and amoha or pannindriya cetasika. While both mandha and tikkha attain arahatta magga nana there is not much difference. But I have explained in detail what 'mandha' and what 'tikkha' are like. You seemed to mean 'rebirth with dvihetuka citta' or double-rooted consciousness that is with only alobha and adosa without panna. With Metta, Htoo Naing 41645 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: >Hi Jon, > >I'm not following you; can you elaborate? It might be better to say a >sign _is_ an error and it arises according to conditions. I probably >should have said 'interpretation of signs' is just a sequence of signs >that arises according to conditions. There is no interpreter. > > Signs are mental creations used to represent thing; they are used to designate how things are interpreted. As I use the term sign, it is not something that could *be interpreted*. So you and I may be at cross purposes here. Perhaps an example of what you have in mind would help. Jon 41646 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:53am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Htoo, Kel, Joop, > What about ahosi kamma? Wouldn't that be kind of a 'fallen away' kind? > I'm thinking about the strength of the kamma as it relates to which javana > and thought the weakest kamma might 'die off' at the end of the life-span > if it hadn't come to fruition by then. Or does it not 'fall away' unless > and until parinibbana? I also thought if someone became sotapanna, there > wouldn't be some conditions arising anymore for certain results, but I > guess the kamma could just play out some other way than it would have > otherwise. Does that make sense? > peace, > connie - with head and foot ;) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Please see the detail discussion between Joop and me. Sotapannahood does not abloish kamma. Even arahathood does not abolish kamma. See the example of 'hungry arahat'. Or the example of Maha Moggallana. With Metta, Htoo Naing 41647 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > > wrote: > > > > > > Whether The Buddha spoke Pali or not > > > the 4th Buddhists Council recorded the teachings in Sanskript, > > Pali, > > >========== > > Dear Htoo, > > I never knew this. Do you have the reference about the bhikkhus > > reciting the teachings in Sanskrit. > > Robertk > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Dear Robert K, > > I did not say 'the bhikkhus reciteing the teachings in Sanskrit'. I > said 'recorded in Sanskrit'. There is no Pali writing at all but > teachings were recited in Pali. ========= Thanks Htoo, Do you know why they recorded the teachings in Sanskrit? I was surprised. Robertk 41648 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Whether The Buddha spoke Pali or not > > > > the 4th Buddhists Council recorded the teachings in Sanskript, > > > Pali, > > > >========== > > > Dear Htoo, > > > I never knew this. Do you have the reference about the bhikkhus > > > reciting the teachings in Sanskrit. > > > Robertk > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ - > --- > > Dear Robert K, > > > > I did not say 'the bhikkhus reciteing the teachings in Sanskrit'. > I > > said 'recorded in Sanskrit'. There is no Pali writing at all but > > teachings were recited in Pali. > ========= > Thanks Htoo, > Do you know why they recorded the teachings in Sanskrit? I was > surprised. > Robertk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Robert K, To be honest I have no idea. But I have a thought that some commentaries were in Sanskrit even though I am not sure. With respect, Htoo Naing 41649 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: > The *experienced* object (*as* experienced object) was created at the >moment of its being experienced, with the object and the awareness of it >co-arising. > Well now you are carefully defining your use of terms. What you are saying is that the object was not an object before it was experienced, and in that sense it is created only at the moment of its being experienced. So to you 'created' means something like 'comes to be the object of experience/consciousness'. There still remains the question of whether the dhamma that is the object of experience arose before it became the object of that moment of consciousness. This is relevant to the distinction between dhammas and concepts, as I see it. Jon 41650 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:12am Subject: Re: Adapted Buddhisms and Second - Third - Fourth Vehicle --- In Triplegem@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Estes wrote: hello htootintnaing, how is it going? lemme now k? tonka, jen htootintnaing wrote: Dear Dhamma Friends, Buddhism was founded by The Buddha Gotama. Actually it is not just an ism. The Buddha Gotama preached really achievable things and He preached how to be liberated from the round of birth-rebirth-cycle or samsara. Actually 'Buddhism' the word is given by others. As there was only one and a single Buddha in His sasana or teachings, there cannot be many many Buddhisms. But some were not happy with the teachings and they tried to adapt the teachings and the vinaya or bhikkhu rules. Whether or not adapted, dhammas work in line with their own characteristics. 41651 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Cetasikas'- Concentration/ekaggataa (e) Hi Nina and Sarah A Sujin is right manodvaravajjana is just a mind door adverting, it is ahetu, kusala and akusala only happens in javana process, that is why kamma for the next rebirth also arise until it is completely cut off by enlightement. Yoniso can be said the function of two cetasikas, the manisikara as well as panna. When cetasika arise in a kusala citta, so many cetasika arise, it is like a broil, I think only Buddha and some other Arahants could pinpoint them but that also must be in another thought process because when it is arisen, the object is not the kusala javana cittas but the object of the kusala javana cittas that it is paying attention to as citta cannot cognize itself. The arisen of kusala citta must be condition by accumulations just like the arisen of akusala citta must be conditioned by latency. Ken O 41652 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: for James Hi Tep That is not the complete picture. When a it is say the four jhanas it is in reference to supramundane jhanas and not those we think as in mundane jhanas. Supramundane jhanas will happen to all who attain enlightement be it the disciple follow the dry insightor path. Ken O 41653 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi Jon In fact, all volitions that are base on kusala roots are dana by itself if one consider dana as alobha. Why is there so much debate about dana when it is implicitly implied ;-). Cheers Ken O 41654 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:31am Subject: Dhamma Thread (253) Dear Dhamma Friends, Unlike 4 apaya bhumis or 4 woeful planes of existence and 1 manussa bhumi or human realm all 6 deva realms have a stable lifespan for each bhumi or realm. In catu-maha-rajika deva bhumi, devas have a lifespan of 500 deva- years which is roughly equivalent to 9 million human years nad it sounds like that 50 human years is just a day in deva realm. That is why one deva asked a devi [female deva or god] where she went for the whole day while actually that devi died in deva realm and she was reborn in human realm and lived there for a human lifespan and again reborn in deva realm as a devi and being the wife of that same deva. Tavatimsaa deva realm's devas live four times the lifespan of catumarajika deva realm's devas and again yaamaa devas live 4 times taavatimsa devas and tusitaa devas live 4 times yaamaa devas. Nimmanarati devas live 4 times tusitaa devas and paranimmita- vassavati devas live 4 times nimmanarati devas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41655 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:37am Subject: Re: Wrong concentration (miccha samadhi)/phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > > > Does death as a meditation object refer to contemplations on > corpses etc or does it have to do with death as a release of the > khandas. When we die the conditioned factors that we have clung to > with such desperation through that lifetime vanish. What was Phil is > no longer, just like that. Is it that kind of thing, or is it more > concrete, reflecting on the worm-food left behind? > > > ========== Dear Phil, Just got back from an Onsen, nice soaking outside while the snow came down lightly. And as good as any time to contemplate that death can happen at any moment- Contemplation of death goes together with contemplation of anatta and then it is wonderfully calming and encouraging. Death is of three types - momentary (khanika) that is happening every instant, conventional - when we die to this human life. And the final death of the arahant when there is no more rebirth. With maranasati we are talking about the death which is waiting at the end of this brief human life, maybe tommorow or tonight. It goes together intimately with understanding the aggregates and khandhas because there is no self who dies, and the khandhas are like murderers waiting for their chance. It is a skill that needs time and practice and is not something to force but if you have the interest you may find it a theme that is refuge in times of trouble and a restrainer in times of exhilaration. Robertk 41656 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:45am Subject: Dhamma Thread (254) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 31 realms or 31 planes of existence or 31 bhumis. They are 4 apaya bhumis or 4 woeful planes of existence, 1 manussa bhumi or 1 human realm, 6 deva bhumis or 6 deva realm. These 11 bhumis or 11 realms are also known as sensuous planes of existence or sensuous sphere. There left 20 realms or 20 planes of existence or 20 bhumis. All these 20 are called brahma bhumis. While 6 deva realms are 'kama- deva' there 20 bhumis are for brahma-deva or celestiel being of fine material realms and non-material realms. Or simply they are called brahma bhumis or brahma realms. No one built these 20 brahma bhumis but they are there according to the result or vipaka of those beings concerned. If someone with jhana dies in jhana they will be reborn in one of these 20 brahma realms according to their specific jhana. But if someone with jhana dies not in jhana but in other kama-thoughts then they will be reborn in kama- bhumis or sensuous planes. When these things are discussed it would sound like unreal. Dhamma has its own attributes and they can be proved. One divine-eyes or deva-cakkhu (eyes of deva or god) or dibba-cakkhu develops and if these realms are targeted they all can be known direct first-hand knowledge. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41657 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 7:13am Subject: Dhamma Thread (255) Dear Dhamma Friends, There have been introduced 4 of 4-set or catu-catukka in the previous posts. These 4 of 4-set are 1. 4 kinds of patisandhi [rebirth] 2. 4 kinds of bhumi [realm] 3. 4 kinds of kamma [kamma] 4. 4 kinds of maranuppatti [death] 4 kinds of rebirth are called 'patisandhi catukka'. 4 kinds of bhumi is called 'bhumi catukka'. 4 kinds of kamma is caled 'kamma catukka'. 4 kinds of death is called 'maranuppatti catukka'. Catu means '4' or 'four' or cardinal number. Catuttha means 'fourth' '4th' that is 4 in ordinal number or 4 in terms of order. Catukka means 'things that have 4 as number'. Patisandhi is made up of 'pati' and 'sandhi'. Pati means 'again' 'another time' and sandhi means 'linking' 'joining' 'sticking'. Patisandhi overall means 'linking of the past life cuti citta with the 1st bhavanga citta of current life' and it is rebirth-consciousness. Patisandhi also means 'rebirth'. Patisandhi-catukka means 'a set of 4 kinds of patisandhi or 4 kinds of rebirth'. These 4 kinds of rebirth are 1.apaya patisandhi or woeful rebirths, 2.kama-sugati patisandhi or profitable sensuous rebirths, 3.rupa patisandhi or fine material rebirths, and 4. arupa patisandhi or non-material rebirth. Bhumi-catukka means 4 kinds of bhumis or realms. They are 1.apaya bhumis or woeful realms, 2.kama-sugati bhumis or profitable sensuous realms, 3.rupa bhumis or fine material realms, and 4.arupa bhumis or non-material realms. Bhuta means 'great' 'huge' 'large'. 'i' is related to place. Bhumi means where beings dwell. Bhummi means earth or ground but bhumi means 'place for dependence of large collection of beings or so'. Kamma means 'potential generated by actions of unenlightened beings'. Karaka means 'do' 'act' 'perform'. Kamma means 'well acted' 'well performed' 'well done' and this means already performed 'the actions'. So kamma are the potentials that is related with 'already done actions'. 4 kinds of kamma will later be discussed. Marana-uppatti or maranuppatti means 'occurance of death' 'arising of even of death' or simply 'death'. Marana means 'death' while maraka means 'kill'. Uppatti means 'arising' 'appearing' 'coming into existence'. Maranuppatti means 'coming into the state of death'. There are 4 kinds of such death and they will also be discussed later. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41658 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Larry > I follow your reasoning and agree with most of it, but I don't > think this sutta is talking about sanna vipallasa. Rather, it is talking about identifying with sanna. This is a different, but related issue. k: Interesting when you used the statement identifying with sanna. In what identified with sanna then? How do you term kusala indentification or akusala ones? > As I see it the question is, is there misperception in a kusala > citta process that arises without panna. I would say there is, but I agree that it does make sense to say sanna vipallasa only arises in an akusala process. k: During kusala behavour it is not possible for misperception of kusala behaviour as during that time there arise alobha and amoha. But after a kusala behaviour it is possible as one latency lies dormant in kusala behaviour. A misperception usually occurs to wrong view that self is permanent after one dead one gain eternal live in heaven, or one feels a need to do good things in order to have a better kamma next time etc. It is only through the knowledge of Buddha dhamma (that is anatta) one will be liberated. Just like Buddha in one of his past live teach people to practise the four immeasurable and these people are all born in the brahams, but Buddha declared that his teachings at that time is flaw as it does not lead to a cessation of birth. Ken O 41659 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 2:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/2/05 9:13:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > > The *experienced* object (*as* experienced object) was created at the > >moment of its being experienced, with the object and the awareness of it > >co-arising. > > > > Well now you are carefully defining your use of terms. What you are > saying is that the object was not an object before it was experienced, > and in that sense it is created only at the moment of its being > experienced. So to you 'created' means something like 'comes to be the > object of experience/consciousness'. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, because I am explicitly speaking of the phenomenological object. That is why I made the point of saying "experienced object (as experienced object)". I am not speaking of an alleged something underlying the experienced object. That may or may not exist, and if it does, it may or may not exist prior to the experienced object. Experienced hardness and the experiencing of it are co-occuring and mutually dependent. An alleged unexperienced hardness, if it exists, is simply unknown. I am not addressing such a thing-in-itself, as it is only the experiential object that is experienced. I am not dealing with ontological inference, but with experience. ----------------------------------------- > > There still remains the question of whether the dhamma that is the > object of experience arose before it became the object of that moment of > consciousness. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: The phenomenological object exists *only* as object of experience. As far as any other sort of object is concerned, there is no knowing of such if it exists at all. Nyanaponika Thera, in his Abhidhamma Studies, as Bhikkhu Bodhi points out, considers Abhidhamma, as philosophy, to fall under phenomenology rather than ontology. In any case, I am discussing only phenomenological (experiential) objects. ----------------------------------------- This is relevant to the distinction between dhammas and > > concepts, as I see it. > > -------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think so. I commented on that in a recent post. Your take on concepts matches my take on all dhammas, and as far as concepts are concerned, I am coming to the point of view that "there ain't no such things - not really!" The "tree concept" as idea, just isn't findable upon introspection; and trees are conventionally "encountered", but not actually encountered - we merely think we encounter trees. It is just a matter of thinking and imagining interspersed with seeing, touching, recognizing etc. ===================== 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) 41660 From: connie Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 9:20am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up Dear Connie, Please see the detail discussion between Joop and me. Sotapannahood does not abloish kamma. Even arahathood does not abolish kamma. See the example of 'hungry arahat'. Or the example of Maha Moggallana. With Metta, Htoo Naing ======== Dear Htoo, Yes, I was thinking of Maha Moggallana! But I thought that was kamma involving mistreating his parents and might be especially strong because of that. Of course, I would never know what kammas are involved in what result for me in this life-time... maybe better to say it would always be beyond my range and there's no point speculating. Nor would I have any way of knowing that certain kammas would become ahosi or when, so it is just as well to think I will be 'repaid in full' for everything. I read where you were talking about ahosi kamma being like the unpaid loan after death, but I still don't know: would you say that yes, it only becomes ahosi kamma after parinibbana or yes, some kamma will more or less 'die' at the end of each life-time? :) Or would you say something else I am missing? thank you, connie 41662 From: connie Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:12am Subject: Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Thanks, Htoo - my misunderstanding and yes, I was thinking about the double-rooted consciousness and missing your point that both the mandha and tikkha attain arahatta magga nana. metta, connie 41663 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:31am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Dear Connie, > > Please see the detail discussion between Joop and me. Sotapannahood > does not abloish kamma. Even arahathood does not abolish kamma. See > the example of 'hungry arahat'. Or the example of Maha Moggallana. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing > > ======== > Dear Htoo, > > Yes, I was thinking of Maha Moggallana! But I thought that was kamma > involving mistreating his parents and might be especially strong because > of that. Of course, I would never know what kammas are involved in what > result for me in this life-time... maybe better to say it would always be > beyond my range and there's no point speculating. Nor would I have any > way of knowing that certain kammas would become ahosi or when, so it is > just as well to think I will be 'repaid in full' for everything. I read > where you were talking about ahosi kamma being like the unpaid loan after > death, but I still don't know: would you say that yes, it only becomes > ahosi kamma after parinibbana or yes, some kamma will more or less 'die' > at the end of each life-time? :) Or would you say something else I am > missing? > > thank you, > connie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Those kamma that do not extend into next life or those kamma that end as soon as a life end is called 'dittha dhamma vedaniiya kamma'. Dittha means 'objectively' 'right' 'without delay'. Vedana means feeling and vedaniiya means 'causing feeling'. This kamma cause 'effects' in the current life where kamma are committed. As soon as this life ends, all those kamma also end and they do not follow any more. At that particular time all those kamma ended are also called ahosi kamma or ineffectual kamma. This is because the kamma was created by the weakest javana cetana. That is those kamma are created by 1st javana citta. There are 7 javana cittas in a vithi vara. As it is the first cetana in that 1st javana is not as strong as following 6 javana cetanas. That is why the result cannot follow next life and end as ahosi kamma or unpaid debt-kamma. But the follwing javana cittas are being conditioned by the 1st javana citta with a condition or paccaya called asevana paccaya or 'repeatition condition'. So they are strong and they follow as long as their debt have not been return. But when arahatta cuti citta arises all these kamma have to end and they become ahosi kamma. This is like dead person cannot sign any check any more to pay his debt. Again the last javana citta or 7th javana citta is also weak as compared to the middle 5 javana citta even though it is stronger than the 1st. Again the effect cannot extend to the third life that is at the end of second life kamma generated by 7th javana cetana in defined life end and they all become ahosi kamma. But the middle 5 javana cetana follow each and every citta as a shade as long as they have not gain their credit back. That is why even The Buddha could not avoid these vipaka dhamma (debt). The Buddha Gotama did have back-ache and He had to take a rest after long preaching when He delegate Sariputta Thera to continue His current preaching. The Buddha Gotama did have head-ache and that was also viapaka or giving back all His debt. Even when He was severely ill with passing bloody diarrhoea He became thirsty and when Ananda went to a river and took water for drinking all the water was clouded. Ananda reported and this happen three times and Bhagava saw that it was His vipaka of clouding of drinking water for His cow-mother when He was a small cow-son. Bhagava instructed Anana to take that water. So Ananda took the clouded water. Here Ananda was shocked and he greatly admired Bhagava that as soon as the clouded water was taken it was clear in the bowl and he took the water to The Bhagava. This is the result of middle 5 javana cetana and even The Buddha could not avoid vipaka. Among three rounds or 3 vatta, kilesa vatta has stopped because Bhagava eradicated all defilements. Kamma vatta also stopped because Bhagava had attained arahatta magga nana and all his javana cittas are kiriya javana cittas and they do not carry kamma effect to the next citta and kamma vatta or round of kamma also stopped. But round of vipaka cannot be stopped even with His greatest power. But as soon as cuti citta arises in any arahat including The Buddha, all existing kamma have to end and they all become ahosi kamma. It is better not to think all the debt. Because there are countless life and it is not in our range of knowledge. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 41664 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:38am Subject: Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Thanks, Htoo - my misunderstanding and yes, I was thinking about the > double-rooted consciousness and missing your point that both the mandha > and tikkha attain arahatta magga nana. > metta, > connie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, It is a matter of wording. Mandha originally means 'stupid' 'unintelligent' and it may well be ahetuka sugati patisandhi (rootless profitable rebirth), and dvihetuka sugati patisandhi (double-rooted profitable rebirth). But in the setting of magga-vithi vara it is said that mandha can only take 2 phala while tikkha can take 3 phala cittas. Because he can pass parikamma mahakusala citta without arising and so the left moment is filled by 3rd phala citta after. Again tikkha originally means 'very intelligent' or 'intelligent'. But there are current scientists who clearly understand all their scientific rules and they can apply these rules into application. But they may well be mandha. With Metta, Htoo Naing 41665 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Larry, op 01-02-2005 15:36 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: >> In the sutta reference to contact being like small creatures > nibbling on >> the flesh of a hideless cow (SNII,12), it is interesting to compare > this >> to consciousness being like a man being pierced by 300 arrows, in > the >> same sutta. This suggests to me that contact is preliminary or > subtle >> consciousness and consciousness is full blown consciousness. Does >> contact only apply to consciousness and feeling or does it apply to > all >> the cetasikas that arise? > > One of the reasons I made this association is because in a mind-door > process the object isn't present, even if the object is a memory. How > does contact function in a mind-door process? N: Cittas arising in a mind-door process also experience an object, whatever that may be. Citta does not arise without experiencing an object. That object may be rupa that has just fallen away, such as visible object, or another citta such as seeing that arose before, or a concept such as a chair. At every moment citta needs the assistance of contact which contacts the object so that it can cognize that object. We cannot pinpoint the reality of contact, in fact we know very little about the operating of citta and its accompanying cetasikas. Whatever we learn helps us to see more conditions for citta and cetasikas so that we understand at least intellectually the truth of impermanence and anatta. Nina. P.S. There is no Tiika to Vis. XIV, 136, since these cetasikas were treated earlier. The Tiika continues with 137, viriya. But if you like I can elaborate on 136, quoting the Expositor. 41666 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Cetasikas'-manasikara Dear Sarah, Thank you for your observations and discussion. op 01-02-2005 13:06 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...:> > > My question to K.Sujin was whether *yoniso/ayoniso* manasikara > (wise/unwise attention) referred to: > > a) manodvaravajjana citta (mind-door adverting consciousness) preceding > kusala/akusala cittas > b) the cetasika, manasikara in the javana process > c) a combination of cittas and cetasikas. > ... > KS: when kusala citta has arisen, yoniso manasikara must accompany it > (also for ayoniso). If it’s yoniso’ it has to be kusala.' > ... > S: So we cannot say it’s the manodvaravajjana citta? > ... > KS: We can say its yoniso’ when it’s the same mano dvara (mind > door)series including the preceding manodvaravajjana citta, but yoniso > must be kusala manasikara accompanying the citta.’ > ... > She then stressed the simile about the foolish attendant who doesn’t know > anything about the greatness of the king, referring to the > manodvaravajjana citta. Its function, she said, is just to precede the > javanas which arise by pakatupanissaya (natural decisive support > condition). N: As I read it Kh Sujin is still speaking about the manodvaaravajjana citta, not the cetasika. S: In other words, as I understand, the kusala and akusala states including > yoniso and ayoniso manasikara, arise because of accumulations, not because > of this one citta which precedes it. > ... > KS: That’s all. Yoniso must refer to kusala. Manodvaravajjana citta > doesn’t know anything about kusala or akusala. It’s ahetuka citta, quite > different from kusala. It’s just one citta, not accompanied by any > wholesome cetasikas. It’s just a condition indirectly for yoniso or > ayoniso. So it can be called yoniso condition, but the main condition is > pakatupanissaya.’ N: Manodvaravajjana citta conditions the following javanacitta by contiguity condition, and kusala citta or akusala citta is also conditioned by natural strong dependence-condition, one's accumulated kusala or akusala, as you also summarized at the end. As to the word determining consciousness, votthapanacitta (which is actually the manodvaravajjana citta in the sense-door process), this determining is different from what we mean in conventional language by determining or deciding. It is one short moment. It is kiriyacitta, not kusala citta nor akusala citta. I have more on MP3: S: So yoniso and ayoniso manasikara must refer to the cetasika?’ > ... > KS: That’s what I understand. But when there’s awareness, we cannot > pinpoint cittas and cetasikas.’ N: I have a personal observation for what it is worth (Mike would say: my two cent's worth). It is not so important. I have not found any text where it is said black on white: yoniso manasikaara is the cetasika that is kusala. Certainly, it performs its function in the wholesome way, in joining the accompanying nama dhammas on the object, but there are also sati, kusala cetana, viriya, there are alobha, adosa, and if the citta is accompanied by paññaa, paññaa plays a very important part. I also noticed that manasikara is not even specifically mentioned in the Dhammasangani when all accompanying cetasikas of mahaa-kusala citta with pañña are summed up, it is among the or-what-so-evers, yevapannakas. I find it clear that we cannot separate or single out manasikara cetasika, we cannot pinpoint citta and cetasikas, as Kh Sujin said. Anyway, I know very little about how they all operate. I went through all the texts in the Dispeller, under: bringing to mind. This may be of interest. Book of Analysis, p. 483, and the explanation of Dispeller II, p. 260: about wrong adverting. I read about abandoning through wise bringing to mind, about the development of the enlightenment factors through wise attention. Disp. I, 334: abandoning through wise attention. Only the cetasika? I would say kusala citta with paññaa. And of course also kusala manasikara performs its function. Disp. I, p. 342, about the development of the enlightenment factors. Is the cetasika manasikara much practised? I do not think so. Personally I am inclined not to give too much credit here to manasikaara cetasika, more to paññaa. Reading all those texts I am inclined to think that yoniso manasikara refers to the kusala javana cittas, ayoniso manasikara to the akusala javana cittas. The manodvaaravajjana citta itself is called manasikaara in the sense of javana patipadaka (-ka denotes an action). But before I realize it I get lost in terms instead of developing understanding of characteristics, in order to know the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa. Nina. 41667 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Pilgrimage India , metta. Dear Sarah, op 01-02-2005 10:17 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > In the Gangtok garden discussion I mentioned last time, just this point > came up. Nina, I think it was, mentioned the difficulties we’d all > experienced and chatted about while we were sitting on long bus rides. > K.Sujin just interrupted and asked:what about now?’. N: I like your observations. S: We have to become more and more detached from places, people, special > routines and so on as being more suitable too, otherwise there will never > be the development of awareness and understanding of present realities. (snip) > It reminds me of an occasion a while back when I started to ask K.Sujin > about developing metta. She just jumped in before the question was > finished with clinging to self’. It was the best bitter medicine at the > time. She meant that just by asking the question, it was apparent that it > was motivated by attachment and she was right of course. N: We want the self to be so good. But I would like to add something for those who do not know Kh Sujin: she wrote books on Metta (being the foot of the world), on the ten bases of wholesome deeds, on the perfections. Some peop[le may htink that she does not encourage kusala. She said to me: if you do not think of yourself you are more attentive to others. True we cling less to our own comfort, are not lazy to help others. This needs a degree of renunciation. S: She also stressed at this time about developing wise attention of visible > object and other realities. Viriya (right effort) is there already. N: Here we have it again, should manasikara cetasika be developed or kusala citta with paññaa? Nina. 41668 From: nina Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Pilgrimage India, 4 d Pilgrimage India, 4 d We cling to insignificant dhammas that do not last, not even a splitsecond. It is beneficial to learn their true nature of anattå, non-self. When we do not cling to people and are not absorbed in situations there are more opportunities for the Brahma vihåras of mettå, karuna (compassion), muditå (sympathetic joy) and upekkhå (equanimity). When mettå arises, we do not expect kindness from other people. If they do not like our generosity or help, we should not mind. Understanding of realities is the foremost condition of seeing the disadvantage of akusala and the benefit of kusala, and it helps us not to take kusala and akusala for self. When there is awareness and right understanding we are not troubled by any situation. We can understand any situation, as only citta, cetasika (mental factors accompanying citta) and rúpa (physical phenomena). The more we read and consider the teachings, the more we come to understand that dhammas arise because of their own conditions, that they are anattå. We cling to mettå and take it for ³my mettå², but it should be understood as a conditioned dhamma. If we had not heard about the characteristic of true mettå we could not think about it or develop it. Acharn Sujin had arranged for the giving of food to beggar children outside the gates of the Jeta Grove. All the children lined up very peacefully and we shared out the packedges of food that were brought from Thailand. This was a happy occasion to develop mettå and dåna naturally and spontaneously. When mettå arises, there are no conditions for aversion about other people¹s contrarious behaviour, we do not harm or hurt others, but we see them as true friends. The four Brahma Vihåras are the fundamentals of a peaceful society. We see many poor people in India and instead of aversion about their condition there can be compassion and also equanimity. Equanimity, upekkhå, is another brahma vihåra. This is not indifferent feeling but it is the sobhana cetasika evenmindedness, tatramajjhattatå. We are not always able to help other people who suffer from a loss of dear ones or a calamity. When we remember that nobody can prevent kamma from producing its appropriate result, kusala citta arises instead of aversion. When we have anxiety because of the sorrowful events that occur in the world, we should remember that whatever happens is conditioned. Kusala citta can motivate us to speak consoling words with kindness and compassion. We may have worry and anxiety about someone else¹s health, but understanding of the truth of kamma and vipåka can condition evenmindedness instead of anxiety. Mettå and upekkhå are also qualities that are perfections, påramís. Each time we are on pilgrimage in India, we reflect on the perfections the Buddha had to accumulate during countless lives before he became the Sammåsambuddha. The perfections are an unique, unsurpassed, unequalled set of moral and spiritual ideas, covering all aspects of human behaviour. Acharn Sujin said that it is of no use to cling to the names of the perfections, but that all of them have to be developed at this moment. When there is an opportunity for kusala through body, speech or mind, we should not delay the performance of kusala and at such moments the perfections are developing. ****** Nina 41669 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pilgrimage India 4 c lobha conditions anger Hello Phil, op 02-02-2005 01:01 schreef Philip op plnao@j...:> > You say anger "is conditioned by lobha" .. "when things are not the > way we would like them to be" we have aversion. Is there lobha > preceding the dosa, a moment of clinging to the way you would like > things to be preceding the aversion in the citta processes? Say a > beggar makes you stumble. Is there a moment of lobha for the way you > would like things to be before there is aversion, or is the aversion > conditioned by lobha in a less proximate, less direct way? N: This is hard to say. We have accumulated lobha and many times it arises. I want to walk in comfort and safety, and already lobha conditions the moving of my feet. Any posture I assume is likely to be motivated by lobha. Often it is not accompanied by pleasant feeling but by indifferent feeling. In fact, it was dark where I went and I had stayed behind, and then a sudden fright, I was afraid to fall down. He was crawling and pushing my leg. I do not see so well in the dark. I cannot pinpoint when exactly lobha arises, but it is always latent, ready to condition akusala citta. Ignorance and clinging make the cycle of life continue. In an earlier post you were wondering about the many names for lobha, like craving, tanhaa, etc. They are all lobha cetasika but different aspects. I conclude with Dhammapada, vs 212: < Affection begets sorrow, affection begets fear. For him who is free from affection there is no sorrow; how can there be fear for him?> Nina. 41670 From: nina Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:52am Subject: Vis. XIV, 135 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 135 and Tiika 135. (ii) It wills (cetayati), thus it is 'volition' (cetanaa); it collects, is the meaning. N: As to the expression, it collects, abhisandahati, this means, it puts together, prepares. It coordinates the accompanying dhammas on the object (Vis. Ch XI, note 2). As we read, with reference to Vis. 132 in T.A. (p. 56) which follows the Expositor: < Volition (cetanaa) is what wills; it directs itself and associated dhammas onto the object, or it achieves the task of forming what it formed.> Text Vis: Its characteristic is the state of willing. N: The Tiika explains, Text Vis: Its function is to accumulate. It is manifested as coordinating. It accomplishes its own and others' functions, as a senior pupil, a headcarpenter, etc., do. N: The Tiika explains that it arranges (vicaara.na.m, sa.mvidhaana.m) and that while it occurs as accumulating it is engaged with its own task and also with the task of all other accompanying dhammas. N: The Tiika elaborates: the senior pupil, while it exhorts the other pupils to recite he also recites. When the chief carpenter undertakes his carpentry work, also the others are doing it. Vis. text: But it is evident when it occurs in the marshalling (driving) of associated states in connexion with urgent work, remembering, and so on. N: The Tiika explains that it is concerned with its own work and that of others. As to the word Œdriving¹, in Pali the word ussahana is used. Ussaha implies effort or energy. The Tiika explains that here this word is not used in connection with viriya or effort, but that it refers to accumulation. The Expositor (p. p. 148) states:< It has directing as manifestation. It arises directing associated states, like the chief disciple, the chief carpenter, etc., who fulfill their own and others¹ duries.... It is also evident that it arises by causing associated states to be energetic in such things as recollecting an urgent work, and so forth.> The proximate cause is not mentioned, but we read in Vis. XIV, 132, about the proximate cause of the khandha of formations: Volition is sankhaarakkhandha and it cannot arise without the other three naama-khandhas, citta, feeling, saññaa and the accompanying cetasikas of sankhaarakkhandha. Remark: Volition is different from what we mean by Œwill¹ in conventional language. The meaning of volition will be clearer when we remember that it can be of four jaatis: kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya. We are inclined to have an idea of Œmy will power¹, but volition arises because of conditions and then falls away immediately. It is different all the time, and it is beyond control. Reviewing the beginning of the khandha of formations: There is a connection or combination of all these cetasikas included in sankhaarakkhandha. Cetanaa is the chief, but when it motivates a deed, sobhana cetasikas or akusala cetasikas, and also the universals and particulars, they all cooperate in performing a deed that can bring result later on. Cetana coordinates them all. We should not forget that such a combination is very momentary. There is constant change. All the time there are different combinations. The conditions have to be just right for such or such combination. The Dhammasangani states with regard to the first type of mahaa-kusala citta of the sensesphere: and then sums up the accompanying cetasikas. The Expositor (p. 76) explains the word samaya as time, occasion, concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result: We cling to the idea of our own will that can direct dhammas, but this is not according to reality. Volition, be it wholesome, unwholesome or indeterminate, is only a conditioned element. *** Nina. 41671 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 11:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sahajata Paccaya and mutuality condition. Dear Sara, I have typed up to nissaya paccaya or dependent condition in the pages of 'Patthana Dhamma'. So far there have been 74 pages. With respect, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Dear Htoo, Nina & Steve, I thought your discussion on these conditions was very helpful. A good post from Htoo and excellent qus from Stever and clarifications from Nina. Look forward to more joint efforts. I agree with Nina, U Narada's Guide to Conditional Relations (PTS)is an extremely helpful book and not too difficult to follow at all. Metta, Sarah 41672 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: for James Hi Friend Ken O. - Thank you for making a comment about the four jhanas. It all started with Connie's mail : From the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary summary ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma--VII, 30 "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, right view (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in understanding the Four Noble Truths. ... ... Right concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta system." T (message #41590): This commentary summary is very concise and should be read over several times so that confusions concerning the true meanings of the Path factors will be put to rest. Ken O. (message #41652): That is not the complete picture. When it says the four jhanas, it is in reference to supramundane jhanas, and not those we think as mundane jhanas. Supramundane jhanas will happen to all who attain enlightenment, be it the disciple following the dry insightor path (or not). T: Please forgive me for editing your message in order to make it a little bit more understandable. Look, Ken, this commentary summary does not need any correction, addition, or explanation beyond what it is. In my opinion, it is "the complete picture". Indeed, Right Concentration is well defined in the Suttanta Pitaka, e.g. Maha- satipatthana Sutta [DN 22] in terms of the four jhanas. And it clearly is supramundane(lokuttara). "And what, bhikkhus, is Right Concentration? Here (in this teaching), bhikkhus, a bhikkhu being detached from sensual desire and unwholesome states attains and dwells in the first jhana which has vitakka and vicara; and rapture (piti) and sukha born of detachment (from the hindrances). With the subsiding of vitakka and vicara, a bhikkhu attains and dwells in the second jhana, with internal tranquility and one-pointedness of mind, without vitakka and vicara, but with rapture and sukha born of concentration. Being without rapture, a bhikkhu dwells in equanimity with mindfulness and clear understanding, and experiences sukha in mind and body. He attains and dwells in the third jhana; that which causes a person who attains it to be praised by the Noble Ones as one who has equanimity and mindfulness, one who abides in sukha. By becoming detached from both sukha and dukkha and by the previous cessation of gladness and mental pain, a bhikkhu attains and dwells in the fourth jhana, a state of pure mindfulness born of equanimity. This, bhikkhus, is called Right Concentration". [Translated by U Jotika & U Dhamminda] http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/mahasati18.htm Unfortunately, the confusion has not yet been put to rest. Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Tep > > That is not the complete picture. When a it is say the four jhanas > it is in reference to supramundane jhanas and not those we think as > in mundane jhanas. Supramundane jhanas will happen to all who attain > enlightement be it the disciple follow the dry insightor path. > > > > Ken O > 41673 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 1:20pm Subject: Re: for James Hi Connie (James, Ken O.,...) - T: In your earlier message you quoted MN 117: C: "Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors - right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, and right mindfulness - is called noble right concentration with its supports and requisite conditions" and then it goes on thru the different factors and keeps saying "right view is the fore-runner" T: And you went on to say: C: I guess that 'singleness of mind' is the jhana in question and it only happens when all the other factors "without effluents, transcendent" are there and not just 'any old jhana' if there is such a thing - whatever Buddha's teachers did/had. Then, I think about the sotapanna (or "whoever is endowed with this noble 8-fold path") not having to master jhanas and how satipatthana is called 'five-fold path development' because of the factors that develop together then, but not (necessarily?) during any other kind of 'meditation'. So, I think I'll just skip out on the right concentration topic because I'm sure I don't have it and look back at right view beyond some basic intellectual understanding. T: I think you are right to say that right concentration is not the 'old jhana', and that it was taught only by our Lord Buddha. The sutta MN 117 further states as follows: "To one with right concentration arise right knowledge. To one with right knowledge arise right release. Thus the trainer has eight factors and the perfect one has ten factors.". So it is very clear to me that we have a proof which states that any Ariya who has attained the right concentration (which is defined in terms of the four rupa-jhanas in Maha-satipatthana Sutta, for example) is a trainer (sekha = a sotapanna, a sakadagami or an anagami), and beyond the right concentration, the 8th Path factor, is the Arahat who has attained the two additional factors. Kindest regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, James (and Tep), > > Sorry about the no comment, no greeting, nothing but a quote post, James. > I just ran across it while I was doing something else and for some 41674 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 1:23pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up Hey Htoo, good answers here. I was going to respond with the javana cittas as you did to Joop originally but I thought that might be too detailed. I think it clearly illustrates what drops away and what doesn't. Buddha and both chief disciples paid their last kamma (strongest) debts right before cuti citta. - kel > But round of vipaka > cannot be stopped even with His greatest power. > > But as soon as cuti citta arises in any arahat including The Buddha, > all existing kamma have to end and they all become ahosi kamma. 41675 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 1:58pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Friend Ken H. - I am pleased that we have got along fine, even though there is a big difference concerning our practices that you have succinctly described as follows: KH: As you know, I understand the practice to be more flexible than the way you describe it. To the extent that the Dhamma has been heard and considered, there can be practice at any time of day. Like all cittas, kusala-citta-with-panna is very fast, and there is no need to set aside a special time - quite the reverse, in fact. T: You know, I'd very much like to be more flexible in my practice too. The main trouble I have right now is that if the Teachings can be practiced by those rich merchants who were surrounded with things of sensual pleasures, then what I have learned is completely wrong. Please comment on the following practice that I have used as a guidance. Is it wrong or not? "A disciple of the noble ones is consummate in virtue, guards the doors to his sense faculties, knows moderation in eating, is devoted to wakefulness, is endowed with seven qualities, and obtains at will -- without trouble or difficulty -- the four jhanas that constitute heightened awareness and a pleasant abiding in the here-&-now. ...Then he is called a disciple of the noble ones who follows the practice for one in training, whose eggs are unspoiled, who is capable of breaking out, capable of awakening, capable of attaining the supreme rest from the yoke ". ' The noble warrior is the best among people when judging by clan. But a person consummate in clear-knowing & conduct, is the best of beings human & divine.' [MN53: Sekha-patipada Sutta] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn053.html Note: The "seven qualities" are described in the sutta. Warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > ---------------------- > T: > This sutta deserves a careful study, Ken. If you can give the > title and reference (e.g. MN, AN, or whatever, with the number) then > I would be thankful. > > ----------------------- > > I have never read it, but Robert K has quoted it here on DSG: > RK: > In the Samyutta nikaya V (Sayings on stream entry p347 > The great chapter Dhammadina ) 5oo rich merchants > came to see the Buddha . They asked how they should > live their lives. The Buddha suggested that they train > themselves thus: > "as to those discourses uttered by the Tathagatha, > deep, deep in meaning, transcendental and concerned > with the void (about anatta) from time to time we will > spend our days learning them. That is how you must > spend your days." > > 41676 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 2:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Howard's suttas, 2. Sutta no 3. Nina Many thanks for the commentary material and your own supplement. I find it very inspiring. As you say, it is actually tallking about the ariyan, as appears from the verse, and is an exhortation to us all to develop those same qualities. Here is the verse from the BB translation, for comparison: The wise prescribe giving, Harmelssness, self-control and taming, Service to one's dear parents And to those who live the holy life. These are the kinds of deeds T which the wise person resorts. The noble one, possessed of vision, Passes to an auspicous world. A footnote to the verse reads: 'It seems that in the verse, the "going forth" is represented by "harmlessness, self-control and taming", since these are the practices undertaken by those who go forth. "Service to those who live the holy life" must be included under service to parents.' Thanks again for the commentary. Jon nina wrote: >Hi Howard, Jon and all, > >PTS Vol 1,p134. 'Duties' > >BB's transl, 'Prescribed by the Wise' > >"Three things are prescribed by the wise: giving, going forth into >homelessness, service to one's parents." > >Verse (P.T.S. translation): >Giving and harmlessness and self-restraint, >Control of sense and service to the parents >And holy ones who live the righteous life,- >If anyone be wise to do these things >By good men favoured, an Ariyan >Clear-sighted, will attain the world of bliss. > >N: the Co states as to prescribed: what the wise prescribe, declare, exhort >to. Prescribe: the word paññatti, which can mean regulation, is used here. >Thus, these are strong wordings. > > 41677 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 3:04pm Subject: Re: Balancing the Five Indriyas Hi Sarah, DSG is a very good example for all Buddhist discussion groups (congratulations to you and Jon for your success). Therefore, I have nothing but great respect for our group, and that respect conditions my "enthusiastic and polite feeedback" toward everyone. You know, so far you have given me a lot of homework to study! These stuffs are exceptional and most interesting. I'll do my best to go through all of the "reading assignments", bit by bit. Thank you very much, Sarah. Kindest regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, > > As everyone else is commenting, your enthusiastic and polite feedback to > all suggestions and comments is a good example for us all. > 41678 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 4:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: for James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Friend Ken O. - > > Thank you for making a comment about the four jhanas. It all started > with Connie's mail : From the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation > and commentary summary ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual > of Abhidhamma--VII, 30 "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold > Path, right view (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in > understanding the Four Noble Truths. ... ... Right concentration is > defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta system." > > T (message #41590): This commentary summary is very concise and > should be read over several times so that confusions concerning the > true meanings of the Path factors will be put to rest. >============= Dear Tep, Usually in Theravada when we refer to 'commentaries' it means those by Buddhaghosa and Dhammapala etc. Comments made by modern writers are fine but should be acknolwdged as such. Someone new to Buddhism reading your post might think the passage you quote was from the tika to the Abhidhammathasangaa. RobertK 41679 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 4:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Ken, Thinking that I am perception or perception is mine are views rather than sanna vipallasa because thinking is involved. The immediate recognition of "Larry" as me is sanna vipallasa. These are very similar, only a slight difference. An example of misperception with kusala consciousness would be perceiving a gift as desirable and the recipient of the gift as a real person. Correctly perceived generosity would be emptiness flowing into emptiness like pouring water into the ocean. Larry 41680 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Jon, I've lost the thread. I don't know what either one of us is talking about. Maybe we should start over. Larry --------------------- Jon: "Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: Hi Jon, I'm not following you; can you elaborate? It might be better to say a sign _is_ an error and it arises according to conditions. I probably should have said 'interpretation of signs' is just a sequence of signs that arises according to conditions. There is no interpreter. J: "Signs are mental creations used to represent thing; they are used to designate how things are interpreted. As I use the term sign, it is not something that could *be interpreted*. So you and I may be at cross purposes here. Perhaps an example of what you have in mind would help. Jon" 41681 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Nina, The object of consciousness isn't a present reality. The present reality is the consciousness and its cetasikas. That is why dualistic notions of consciousness experiencing an object with contact brokering this exchange are untenable, imo. Larry 41682 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:24pm Subject: Re: for James Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, James (and Tep), > > Sorry about the no comment, no greeting, nothing but a quote post, James. No problem. Just wanted to know what this quote meant to you. > I just ran across it while I was doing something else and for some reason > I thought you'd said something along those lines - the "right > concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the suttanta > system" part - to Sarah and I was going to look back in the archives for > it, but you see how far I got with that. Now, I'm wondering if it was > even you and don't remember what exactly I had in mind. Yeah, it was me. You remembered correctly. Thanks for the quote. But I came across > another one today from the MN: Metta, James 41683 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 5:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 135 and Tiika Vism: "But it is evident when it occurs in the marshalling (driving) of associated states in connexion with urgent work, remembering, and so on." Hi Nina, This suggests to me that remembering is slightly different from recognition. Perception doesn't need volition to recognize a dhamma. Are we still saying that sanna is what does the remembering (recollection)? Larry ---------------- ps: Yes, a comment on 136 would be appreciated. L. 41684 From: Waters Illusion Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 2:46pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up:Joop Hi Joop, The way I look at kamma, which I hope will help you understand better, is like a habit pattern since the literal meaning of kamma is "action/volition". Suppose you are given a pen and paper, what would you instinctively do? Use the pen and write on the paper, simple right? Well, how do you know that? Because when you were little you were taught to do so. YOu were trained to do so and even in your dream, subconsciously if you were given a paper and pen, you'd instinctively write on the paper w/ the pen. The same is true with kamma and citta, or at least from my point of view. Suppose in this life you have done nothing but good deeds, those actions, good will has been built up in your mind subconsciously that it has become your nature to do wholesome deeds. so therefore, at the time of death, that is the very thing that you remember because that's all you've been doing all your life: doing good deeds. Based on your own actions, that's been stored up in your citta, you will recieve the result that you deserve. During the time of death, the realm that you are reborn into will be determined by your own citta, what you were thinking during the time of death...all the past memories arise naturally...its nature's law, you reap what you sow. I hope that is clearer...well it makes sense to me at least :) ~Maya 41685 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 0:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/2/05 8:17:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Nina, > > The object of consciousness isn't a present reality. The present reality > is the consciousness and its cetasikas. That is why dualistic notions of > consciousness experiencing an object with contact brokering this > exchange are untenable, imo. > > Larry > ========================= You write "The object of consciousness isn't a present reality." And I ask why you say that! When I am aware of hardness, why is that hardness unreal or not present? 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) 41686 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:02pm Subject: Salesmanship: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi Sarah (and Phil and All), Sarah: I wasn't sure if you were wanting further feedback here or not:-/ James: Wasn't necessarily wanting feedback, but not opposed to receiving feedback either. Sarah: Perhaps, like you said to Rob K about taking care of your kamma, we should all take care of our own attachments too?? James: We have no choice but to `take care' of our own attachments. No one else can take care of them for us. But I believe it is okay for dhamma friends to point out to each other where they believe attachments may lie. Granted, a forum like this may not be the best place, but I often have in mind that I am not addressing just you. Attachment to views (even views of dhamma) is not healthy, in my opinion (and I speak from experience because I know I can get rather militant. Actually, it was Phil writing to me off-list about this attachment which made me settle down, and still working on that. He was right! It was like I was becoming some kind of self-made Dhamma Avenger! LOL! Thanks Phil! ;-) I try to learn from my mistakes. Spiritual progress is really about making one mistake after another and learning from each mistake.) Sarah: If this is the first baby step for all, why isn't it stressed as being so in every sutta we read? Why do we read in the HoneyBall Sutta, for example, about seeing consciousness, visible objects, proliferations and so on? Why do we read about present moment dhammas to be known with insight in the Bhaddekeratta Sutta? Why isn't it stressed in the 4 Noble Truths or the 8fold path factors? James: Actually, I think the first baby step is the perfection of sila; but then the Buddha recommends mindfulness of breathing (You read the sutta I quoted. What do you have to say about that sutta in particular?). It was what his son, Rahula, first began to practice as a child. It isn't listed in every sutta because every sutta serves a different purpose and is for a different audience. Sarah: Thx for giving the responses. Again. Let's take care of our own baby steps rather than worrying about each other's. James: Okay, I won't tell you anything anymore. However, I want you and everyone here to feel free to tell me whatever they want- either on-list or off-list. I'm here to learn, not to teach. Sarah: In your experience, can there be `real practice' or development of insight into presently arisen states (dhammas) when you're not having `painful sitting in meditation' or focused on breath? Or are these pre-requisites for any awareness or understanding of any kind to develop? I'm asking because I'm sincerely interested in your view. James: This is a very nice question. Thank you! From my understanding, traditionally the process goes like this: Sila -> Panna -> Samadhi. One must first perfect sila, then build the seven path factors lead by right view, and finally develop Samadhi (jhana). This is the most direct route to enlightenment, which the monks practiced. However, householders are not on the fast track to enlightenment and should develop whatever path factors as they can. In other words, even a meat butcher or fisherman (wrong livelihood) can do his/her best to develop samadhi, and the other path factors, in this lifetime in order to reach sotapanna. Does this answer your question? Metta, James 41687 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 6:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: for James Dear RobertK (and Connie), In message #41678 you expressed a concern on the referencing of the "commentary summary" I got from Connie's message #41576. Let me paste Connie's whole message for you to look at: Message # 41576: from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary summary ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma-- VII, 30 "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, right view (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in understanding the Four Noble Truths. Right intention (sammasmakappa) is the cetasika of initial application (vitakka) directed towards renunciation, good will, and harmlessness. Path-factors (3)-(5) are identical with the three abstinences. Right effort is the same as the four supreme efforts. Right mindfulness is the same as the four foundations of mindfulness. Right concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta system." [end of passage] The matter of fact is, I just quoted from the above passage without any clue about the name of the writer. Perhaps, Connie can tell you better. Kind regards, Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Friend Ken O. - > > > > Thank you for making a comment about the four jhanas. It all > started > > with Connie's mail : From the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation > > and commentary summary ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual > > of Abhidhamma--VII, 30 "Of the eight factors of the Noble > Eightfold > > Path, right view (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom > exercised in > > understanding the Four Noble Truths. ... ... Right concentration > is > > defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta system." > > > > T (message #41590): This commentary summary is very concise and > > should be read over several times so that confusions concerning > the > > true meanings of the Path factors will be put to rest. > >============= > Dear Tep, > Usually in Theravada when we refer to 'commentaries' it means those > by Buddhaghosa and Dhammapala etc. Comments made by modern writers > are fine but should be acknolwdged as such. Someone new to Buddhism > reading your post might think the passage you quote was from the > tika to the Abhidhammathasangaa. > > RobertK 41688 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 7:02pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Howard & Ken O. Hi Sarah (and Sukin), --------------------- S: > I don't recall the conversation, but remember a similar live one with Sukin some time back. Of course any understanding is weak in the beginning, but it grows as sati is aware more and more often, I think. No need to have any expectations one way or another or to think of 'this beginner'. Also, there's no need to have doubts whether that direct understanding will and does develop. I'm sure it's (any doubt that is) very fleeting in your case. > -------------------- Your comments always contain valuable suggestions, although, in this instance, I'm not sure I entirely get the point. It might take a little time. ---------------- S: > You may well smile when you look back at these comments a little later. I notice that Sukin no longer questions or wonders along these lines. He may add more. ----------------- I'd like to say I will smile and move on, but, judging from past performances, I will probably cringe and agonise over it. :-) But don't let that stop you (or you, Sukin) - I need all the help I can get. ----------------- S: > p.s I laughed at your friend's dukkha breakfast;-) ------------------------------- I've always told him he wouldn't know a paramattha dhamma if it popped up in his corn flakes. We'll never hear the end of this! :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi KenH, > > --- kenhowardau wrote: > You wrote to Tep: > > > Yes, the end product you are talking about does require a lot of > > preparation. But, even now, there can be a degree of right > > understanding. To the extent that we have studied the true Dhamma, > > there can, at least, be right *intellectual* understanding of the > > present dhammas. I doubt a beginner like me would ever have moments > > of direct understanding. They would have to be of an extremely weak > > level. (I remember DSG has discussed this before, but can't > > remember what we concluded. :-) ) > ... 41689 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 7:44pm Subject: Re: Balancing the Five Indriyas Dear Nina - You have been very kind and patient in explaining the Higher-dhamma principles to me. The difficulty I have experienced is perhaps caused by my own strong belief that still is too firm to change. Such belief is based on 20+ years of the Suttanta Pitaka study (yet, some wrong views still remain). Although your time and patience cannot last forever, I hope you won't become impatient too soon. With your permission, I hope to continue to discuss the Dhamma with you until we can resolve the difficulty, or you tell me to stop! I promise you; there will be no hard feeling if you tell me so. N: The 4 foundations of mindfulness as objects of sati and paññaa are nothing else but nama and rupa appearing one at a time through the six doors. As I see it, there is no need to think : is this mindfulness of body, that mindfulness of feeling. The question is: what characteristic appears now. The satipatthanasutta reminds us that whatever we are doing, whatever posture we assume, wherever we are, there are only nama elements and rupa elements and these can be object of awareness. We may be distracted and heedless, but this sutta brings us back to reality. T: I need a real-world example to help me understand what you said. Say, now you are walking on a street. How do you take a nama element or a rupa element as the object of awareness in every moment while walking? How do you know when a characteristic appears now (how does it become manifest)? Do you think about the 3 characteristics of the object of awareness, or do they appear by themselves one at a time ? How do you contemplate the rapid arising or passing away of the object of awareness? How do you deal with distracted thoughts or thinking that interferes with the satipatthana? N: I heard this morning:< When we are touching something it seems that hardness was there all the time, but when it appears it has just before arisen and it falls away. Also the rupa that is body-door at that moment: it seems that it is there all the time, but it has just arisen. > T: I really like this logical explanation of hardness. It helps me understand the illusion of continuity that fools us to think that "it is there all the time". But how do I experience the phenomena of rising and falling away of a "body-door" at a given moment? I only "see" the process by logical deduction. So, how do I train the mind so that it actually sees the arising-and-falling-away phenomena with mindfulness and right understanding? N: I did not answer your Q how the powers become manifest in satipatthana. When there is unshakable confidence that this is the right way: mindfulness and understanding of whatever appears now. When there is firm understanding of what the right Path is. T: When I asked "how", I meant the actual working of powers with the application of satipatthana. Your answer only tells me about the conditions, or factors that are the requisites for sati-bala to arise. This answer begs for more questions like "how do we practice for the unshakable confidence and the firm understanding of the right Path?", etc. Do I need to go back to the suttas to help me out? Kindest regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep, > op 30-01-2005 20:53 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > The Nyanatiloka's definition of the five > > balas is that they are 'powers' of the 5 spirtual faculties (Indriya) by the > > fact "that they are unshakable by their opposites" and they > > represent "the aspect of firmness in the spiritual faculties". I am not > > sure what unskable and firmness mean in the practical sense. > N: the indriyas have been developed more, so that they have gained in > strength. 41690 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 9:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Howard, H: "You write "The object of consciousness isn't a present reality." And I ask why you say that! When I am aware of hardness, why is that hardness unreal or not present?" L: The hardness is both real and present but not an object of consciousness. Rather, it IS consciousness, body consciousness. Abhidhamma can be construed as saying the object of body consciousness is a nonexperientially manifesting rupa (a rupa that is not an experience). I know this doesn't jive with your views, but take a mind-door object of consciousness. Say, dislike of bodily feeling (vedana). Bodily feeling is the object of dislike but it isn't a present reality when dislike arises. Before dislike arises the bodily feeling was a present experienced feeling. My contention is that that feeling conditioned the arising of dislike via latent tendencies without dislike actually co-existing with the feeling at any time. Abhidhamma substantiates this in that the object of consciousness is not present in a mind-door process. I would say it is also not present in a 5-door process, but that's a bit of a heresy. This theory also presents some difficulties for satipatthana and its objects of mindfulness, but I think these are just linguistic difficulties. You may say,"Aha! I can detect a difference between awareness and hardness." I would say this awareness is attention or some such co-arising cetasika. In fact there are numerous co-arising cetasikas and, as such, co-arising simultaneous experiences. Also, your awareness of awareness is a reviewing process that is a little too complicated for me to sort out. Possibly it is just the manifestation of perception (sanna). Larry 41691 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 4:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 12:05:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > H: "You write "The object of consciousness isn't a present reality." And > I ask why you say that! When I am aware of hardness, why is that > hardness unreal or not present?" > > L: The hardness is both real and present but not an object of > consciousness. Rather, it IS consciousness, body consciousness. > --------------------------------- Howard: Nah! ------------------------------ > Abhidhamma can be construed as saying the object of body consciousness > is a nonexperientially manifesting rupa (a rupa that is not an > experience). I know this doesn't jive with your views, but take a > mind-door object of consciousness. Say, dislike of bodily feeling > (vedana). Bodily feeling is the object of dislike but it isn't a present > reality when dislike arises. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Uh, for clarity, lets not speak of vedana but of an unpleasant bodily sensation (rupa). When the sensation is present, it is the object of consciousness. Afterwards, it is no longer the object of consciousness, but an emotion of aversion (nama) is the object of consciousness. And through a thought process, that aversion is associated with (the remembered) unpleasant sensation. That's how I see it. --------------------------------- Before dislike arises the bodily feeling> > was a present experienced feeling. My contention is that that feeling > conditioned the arising of dislike via latent tendencies without dislike > actually co-existing with the feeling at any time. > ----------------------------- Howard: I have no problem with that formulation. I agree that the dislike did not occur at the same time as the disliked sensation. First there was the sensation as object, and then, in reaction to its unpleasantness, and conditioned by ignorance, there arose aversion as content of consciousness. ---------------------------- Abhidhamma> > substantiates this in that the object of consciousness is not present in > a mind-door process. > -------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand. Are you saying that mind-door cittas are without arammanas? -------------------------------- I would say it is also not present in a 5-door> > process, but that's a bit of a heresy. This theory also presents some > difficulties for satipatthana and its objects of mindfulness, but I > think these are just linguistic difficulties. > > You may say,"Aha! I can detect a difference between awareness and > hardness." I would say this awareness is attention or some such > co-arising cetasika. In fact there are numerous co-arising cetasikas > and, as such, co-arising simultaneous experiences. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I take awareness of hardness to be nothing more or less than the (experiential) presence of hardness. But we've been through this discussion before - quite recently, in fact. ------------------------------------- > > Also, your awareness of awareness is a reviewing process that is a > little too complicated for me to sort out. Possibly it is just the > manifestation of perception (sanna). > ------------------------------------ Howard: Could you please remind me? I don't recall talking about awareness of awareness. In fact, I don't believe in such a thing except after the fact, in which case the object of consciousness is a memory. The eye doesn't see itself, a knife doesn't cut itself, and awareness is not self-aware. ------------------------------------ > > 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) 41692 From: connie Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:37pm Subject: Re: for James Dear Robert, Tep and Ken O, Yes, my carelessness. The quote came from the "explanatory guide" - not 'commentary' or 'commentary summary' - part of the CMA. Thanks for making me look, Robert. What it guides us back to is translated from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha proper as: "There are eight path factors: (1) right view, (2) right intention, (3) right speech, (4) right action, (5) right livelihood, (6) right effort, (7) right mindfulness, (8) right concentration." [Attha maggangaani: sammaaditthi, sammaasankappo, sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaa-aajiivo, sammaavaayaamo, sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi.] There is also a reference "(see D.22/ii,313)" after the 'guidance' that "right concentration is defined in terms of the four jhaanas of the Suttanta system". I usually see 'The Guide' credited to Bhikkhu Bodhi alone, but the cover page says "Introduction and explanatory guide by U Rewata Dhamma and Bhikkhu Bodhi". Still true enough that it "does not need any correction, addition, or explanation beyond what it is", but what it isn't quite what my original post made it seem. apologies all around, connie 41693 From: connie Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:37pm Subject: thanks, Htoo Dear Htoo, Thank you for your patience and further explanations. peace, connie > Those kamma that do not extend into next life or those kamma that end as > soon as a life end is called 'dittha dhamma vedaniiya kamma'. > in the setting of magga-vithi vara it is said that mandha can only take > 2 phala while tikkha can take 3 phala cittas. 41694 From: Date: Wed Feb 2, 2005 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Howard, L: "Abhidhamma can be construed as saying the object of body consciousness is a nonexperientially manifesting rupa (a rupa that is not an experience). I know this doesn't jive with your views, but take a mind-door object of consciousness. Say, dislike of bodily feeling (vedana). Bodily feeling is the object of dislike but it isn't a present reality when dislike arises." ------------------------------------ H: "Uh, for clarity, lets not speak of vedana but of an unpleasant bodily sensation (rupa). When the sensation is present, it is the object of consciousness. Afterwards, it is no longer the object of consciousness, but an emotion of aversion (nama) is the object of consciousness. And through a thought process, that aversion is associated with (the remembered) unpleasant sensation. That's how I see it." /////////////////////////// Larry: This does't clarify. There are no unpleasant rupas. There are, however, undesirable rupas. ///////////////////////////// L: "Before dislike arises the bodily feeling was a present experienced feeling. My contention is that that feeling conditioned the arising of dislike via latent tendencies without dislike actually co-existing with the feeling at any time." ----------------------------- H: I have no problem with that formulation. I agree that the dislike did not occur at the same time as the disliked sensation. First there was the sensation as object, and then, in reaction to its unpleasantness, and conditioned by ignorance, there arose aversion as content of consciousness. ---------------------------- L: "Abhidhamma substantiates this in that the object of consciousness is not present in a mind-door process." -------------------------------- H: "I don't understand. Are you saying that mind-door cittas are without arammanas?" ////////////////////////////// L: The object is not present experience in the mind-door process. /////////////////////////////// L: "I would say it is also not present in a 5-door process, but that's a bit of a heresy. This theory also presents some difficulties for satipatthana and its objects of mindfulness, but I think these are just linguistic difficulties. You may say,"Aha! I can detect a difference between awareness and hardness." I would say this awareness is attention or some such co-arising cetasika. In fact there are numerous co-arising cetasikas and, as such, co-arising simultaneous experiences. ------------------------------------- H: "I take awareness of hardness to be nothing more or less than the (experiential) presence of hardness. But we've been through this discussion before - quite recently, in fact. ////////////////////////////////////// L: Sorry, I misread some of your recent posts. Suffice it to say I can detect a difference between 'consciousness' and hardness but I would call this 'consciousness' attention, the cetasika. Recognition of attention could be characterized as awareness of awareness. This might work with satipatthana. Or one may possibly account for this so called "awareness of awareness" in other ways, not sure. /////////////////////////////// L: "Also, your awareness of awareness is a reviewing process that is a little too complicated for me to sort out. Possibly it is just the manifestation of perception (sanna)." ------------------------------------ H: "Could you please remind me? I don't recall talking about awareness of awareness. In fact, I don't believe in such a thing except after the fact, in which case the object of consciousness is a memory. The eye doesn't see itself, a knife doesn't cut itself, and awareness is not self-aware." ////////////////////////// L: What do you mean "see"? Larry 41695 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:15am Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Tep, Thanks for your question: ------------------------ T: > Please comment on the following practice that I have used as a guidance. Is it wrong or not? ------------------------ I don't think we need to single out any particular practice as a guidance, nor to decide what is the right or wrong practice for us. There is no "us" so it can't be necessary for us to choose - conditions take care of that. In the sutta you have quoted, Ananda was told by the Buddha to, "speak about the person who follows the practice for one in training." So it is about the person more than the practice. The person spoken of is a disciple of the noble ones, so he is at least a sotapanna (but not yet and arahant). Furthermore, Ananda begins with the words, "There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones is . . .," so he is not describing every disciple of the noble ones. I think he is describing the case of the most esteemed disciple - the one who practises jhana and vipassana in tandem. The Satipatthana sutta is similar: it begins with the case of that same elite of monks - the monk who takes breath as the object of jhana and then takes jhana citta as the object of satipatthana. Then the sutta describes the more common objects of satipatthana that are experienced by all disciples. So, in summary, I think this sutta describes certain monks who have already attained enlightenment. It is not a description of the preliminary practice. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > [MN53: Sekha-patipada Sutta] > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn053.html > > 41696 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 1:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: for James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Usually in Theravada when we refer to 'commentaries' it means those > by Buddhaghosa and Dhammapala etc. Comments made by modern writers > are fine but should be acknolwdged as such. Someone new to Buddhism > reading your post might think the passage you quote was from the > tika to the Abhidhammathasangaa. > > RobertK Dear RobertK I made that observation too; and I think it's a bad habit In the first place it's typically incrowd-behavior, and makes a clear distinction between the "we" and the "they" who don't know who the socalled "commentaries" are. In the second place it gives nearly automatically a big authority to the text named "commentaries", and your proposal gives automatically a bigger autority to the texts of Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala etc then modern texts. My problem with the texts of for example Buddhaghosa is that's not a pure explanation of the Teachings of the Buddha, but partly interpretation. Nothing against interpretation, we hardly can do without; especially we (or: I) can do without modern explanations who bridge the gap in culture (India 2500 years ago) and time between the Teachings of the Buddha and the conventional reality of today. And I like to know who gives an interpretation because I like some schools of interpretation more than other ones. So my proposal to the DSG-participants: never say just "commentaries" but give the name of the author and/or the text. Metta Joop 41697 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 3:57am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (249) / old kamma used up:Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Waters Illusion" wrote: > > > Hi Joop, > > The way I look at kamma, which I hope will help you understand > better, is like a habit pattern since the literal meaning of kamma > is "action/volition". ... Hallo Waters Illusion (if you want to be called with that name) Your explanation about kamma is rather clear, it does help my understanding. Still I have some problems: - You talk about receiving "the result that you deserve". A property of the ethics connected with the kamma-concept is that is future- directed, it's about the effects of my intentional behavior in the future. But I don't behave in a ethical way because of some effect, I do it because of my conscience, of the memory that I have taken the five precepts. I try to live in the here and now and not being interested in the future of me (or I get better say: 'of somebody' because who is me?). - You talk about "actions … stored up in your citta". As I said in another message: how does that work, how can billions of bits of intentions technically been stored in a citta, a volatile phenomena ? - You talk about "the realm that you are reborn". I don't know if that happens, but that's not a topic of understanding, it's a topic of (not)believing: in rebirth. Metta Joop 41698 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 5:10am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 115 - Concentration/ekaggataa (k) 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.6 Concentration (ekaggataa)] ***** When there is right mindfulness of a nåma or rúpa which appears, without trying to focus on a particular object, there is also right concentration which arises at that moment because of the appropriate conditions and performs its function. When right understanding develops it penetrates the arising and ceasing of the five khandhas and eventually there will be the destruction of the åsavas at the attainment of arahatship. ***** [Ch.6 Concentration(ekaggataa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 41699 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 1:45:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Larry: This does't clarify. There are no unpleasant rupas. There are, > however, undesirable rupas. > ==================== My understanding is that Abhidhamma says there *are* unpleasant rupas. 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) 41700 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 1:45:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > ---------------------------- > L: "Abhidhamma substantiates this in that the object of consciousness > is not present in a mind-door process." > -------------------------------- > H: "I don't understand. Are you saying that mind-door cittas are without > arammanas?" > ////////////////////////////// > > L: The object is not present experience in the mind-door process. > ======================= Larry, just repeating your statement doesn't explain it to me. :-( With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 41701 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 1:45:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > H: "Could you please remind me? I don't recall talking about awareness > of awareness. In fact, I don't believe in such a thing except after the > fact, in which case the object of consciousness is a memory. The eye > doesn't see itself, a knife doesn't cut itself, and awareness is not > self-aware." > ////////////////////////// > > L: What do you mean "see"? > =================== With regard to the eye, I was speaking colloquially. My point was to analogically point out that awareness is awareness f something other than itself. For example, awarenesss of hardness is awareness of *hardness*, and not of awareness. 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) 41702 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard I'm not sure I follow you here, so let me try putting it another way... upasaka@a... wrote: > Jon, everything that arises does so only momentary. Moreover, >everything that arises does so due to conditions, and mental construction is just a >category of condition. On the basis of what you have written, names and meanings >seem no less real than anything else! > > At moments of thinking about names and meanings, the thinking arises but there is not 'thing' of names and meaning that arises, there is only the thinking. That is to say, when we talk about thoughts as the object of thinking, there is no 'object' but just the thinking 'about' something. Jon 41703 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Howard, What don't you understand? No, there are no objects in mind-door process; there are no unpleasant rupas; mindfulness or recognition of consciousness could be characterized as 'awareness of awareness'. Btw, how do you know rupa is different from consciousness? Larry --------------------------------- Howard: "Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 1:45:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: ---------------------------- L: "Abhidhamma substantiates this in that the object of consciousness is not present in a mind-door process." -------------------------------- H: "I don't understand. Are you saying that mind-door cittas are without arammanas?" ////////////////////////////// L: The object is not present experience in the mind-door process. ======================= Larry, just repeating your statement doesn't explain it to me. :-( With metta, Howard" 41704 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 6:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, TG TGrand458@a... wrote: >Analysis of Sentence One: Names and meanings are not merely mind created. >Names and meanings have been learned and conditioned through contacts of all >the sense bases. When we go to school, we use eyes and eye objects, and ears >and ear objects to learn things from teachers. Those contacts condition the >mind and become objects for the mind. The mind does not "create names and >meanings." Names and meanings (thoughts) are conditioned by "external and internal" >conditions. The other senses are all used to learn things as well of course. > > OK, I think I can see where we are at cross-purposes here. I agree that thinking is influenced (= conditioned) by previous experiences. No doubt about that at all. But it is the consciousness that thinks that is the conditioned dhamma here, and that is itself a dhamma. Whatever the mind thinks, by virtue of those conditioning factors, that thought is thought about. The thinking consciousness is a dhamma, but not what is thought about. >Analysis of Sentence Two: As I read your message (the reading a conditioned >skill/memory), light from the monitor is making contact with patterns that >have been learned and are recognizable (words). This conditions a variety of >memories that follow in sequence to the words you typed. These memories follow >my experiences, not yours. So what you say has to be interpreted based on my >experience. If I haven't had the same general experiences as you have, I won't >be able to follow what you are saying. I.E., the meaning won't arise because >it won't have a condition that can support it. (Unless I can be "led" to >understand it based on "my experiences.") The thoughts are not just "being >created," they are being conditioned by so many things. > > I agree with most of what you say here, and specifically that your thinking can only 'read' my message if all the necessary conditions are fulfilled. But as I understand the Abhidhamma, it is the thinking consciousness that is crucial here, not the thoughts (names/meanings that are thought about). They are what is thought about by thinking consciousness. Are we any closer on this? Jon 41705 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/3/05 9:17:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > At moments of thinking about names and meanings, the thinking arises but > there is not 'thing' of names and meaning that arises, there is only the > thinking. That is to say, when we talk about thoughts as the object of > thinking, there is no 'object' but just the thinking 'about' something. > > Jon > =================== Okay. I think I follow you, and I actually agree with the sense of it! There is just the process of thinking, and it *seems* to be "about something," but with that "something" not an actual object. However, it still remains true, does it not, that every mindstate has an object or objective content? It just may be that during thought processes we may not be all that clear on what the actual objects are. 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) 41706 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 7:11am Subject: Anicca as characteristic Dear all Nyatiloka: "anicca: 'impermanent' is the first of the three characteristics of existence. It is from the fact of impermanence that, in most texts, the other two characteristics, suffering (dukkha) and not-self anattá), are derived. Impermanence of things is the rising, passing and changing of things, or the disappearance of things that have become or arisen. The meaning is that these things never persist in the same way, but that they are vanishing dissolving from moment to moment. Impermanence is a basic feature of all conditioned phenomena, be they material or mental, coarse or subtle, one's own or external: All formations are impermanent. That the totality of existence is impermanent is also often stated in terms of the five aggregates, the twelve personal and external sense bases, etc. Only Nibbána, which is unconditioned and not a formation, is permanent." "Only Nibbana is permanent", so Kamma is not permanent seems a logical conclusion, I made yesterday. In the 'Useful posts' of DSG the term 'impermanence' has 17 entries, and anatta more then the triple of it. Why ? In a discussion about the concept "emptiness" some weeks ago Kel said: "some really like anicca and some anatta" (to contemplate); some DSG members are rather into anatta. And then one gets into explaining and expounding everything based on that preference." I agreed with him and concluded that it is also partly a question of personality which principle is taken central. I never had a big ego so the dichotomy atta - anatta doesn't play an important role in my contemplations. My little theory: people fighting against their strong ego prefer anatta aspects of emptiness, people fighting against a need of ontology prefer anicca aspects of emptiness. And I have a big need of ontology. That's why I studied particle physics and astrophysics after my retirement. And that why I like to study Abhidhamma now: the ultimate reality existing of 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas, 28 rupas and some laws governing their interactions. And that's why I like the remarks of Howard, in his discussion with Jon, about phenomenology, as a medicine against that ontological need of me. But there is one law, at the same time one of the rupas, that works as a kind of anarchistic element in this beautiful ontological building: anicca. Sometimes I think: the principle of anicca is a virus, secretly put in the software of the Pali Canon by some Mahayanists (Madhyamakanists). Metta Joop 41707 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 2:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 9:30:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > What don't you understand? No, there are no objects in mind-door > process; there are no unpleasant rupas; mindfulness or recognition of > consciousness could be characterized as 'awareness of awareness'. > ------------------------------------ Howard: 1) I believe that every citta has an object (or objective content), and I understand that to be a basic premiss of Abhidhamma. 2) I believe that every rupa is, in itself, either pleasant, unpleasant, or affectively neutral, and I understand that to be a basic premiss of Abhidhamma. 3) Mindfulness and recognition are certainly cognitive operations, but by 'awareness' I understand "vi~n~nana", and I do not believe that an instance of vi~n~nana can take itself as object. ----------------------------------------- > > Btw, how do you know rupa is different from consciousness? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: That's how it appears to me. Also, given what I mean by 'consciousness', namely the experiential presence of a dhamma, it is *definitionally* clear to me. To me it is straightforward that the occurrence or presence of something is not the same as that thing. The presence of a thought is not the thought. The presence of anger is not the anger. But they are inseparably co-occurring. ----------------------------------------- > > Larry ===================== I've based some of what I have said on this topic on what I *believe* Abhidhamma to assert. Of course, my knowledge of Abhidhamma is miniscule, and yours, Larry, is far greater. I would love to have some other folks, more knowledgeable than I, weigh in on this, because it would help me to distinguish my own beliefs from what I think, quite possibly mistakenly, to be Abhidhammic positions. 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) 41708 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 5:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/3/2005 6:36:58 AM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: OK, I think I can see where we are at cross-purposes here. I agree that thinking is influenced (= conditioned) by previous experiences. No doubt about that at all. But it is the consciousness that thinks that is the conditioned dhamma here, and that is itself a dhamma. Whatever the mind thinks, by virtue of those conditioning factors, that thought is thought about. The thinking consciousness is a dhamma, but not what is thought about. But as I understand the Abhidhamma, it is the thinking consciousness that is crucial here, not the thoughts (names/meanings that are thought about). They are what is thought about by thinking consciousness. Are we any closer on this? Jon Hi Jon You seem to be saying that the "thinking consciousness" is one thing (a real thing) and that thoughts are another thing (a not real thing). I can't differentiate them in this way. In my thinking, they are mutualy dependent states and one is just as actual as the other and neither can arise without the other (as thinking consciousness). TG 41709 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 10:12am Subject: Dhamma Thread (256) Dear Dhamma Friends, 4 kinds of 4-set was introduced again in the previous post. They are 4 rebirths, 4 realms, 4 kammas, and 4 deaths. 4 kammas and 4 deaths will be deferred at a later time. Rebirth and realms are now going hand in hand. There are 4 rebirths or 4 patisandhi. They are apaya (woeful), kama sugati (sensuous profitable), rupa (fine material), arupa (non-material) rebirth. Regarding realms they have the same 4. That is apaya bhumi or woeful realms, kama sugati bhumi or sensuous profitable realms, rupa bhumi or fine material realms, arupa bhumi or non-material realms. Patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness or linking consciousness for apaya bhumis is 'ahetuka akusala santirana citta'. Regarding woeful realms they are 4 and they have been discussed in the previous posts. Regarding sensuous profitable realms and their rebirth- consciousness or linking consciousness have been discussed in the previous posts. There are 2 further patisandhis and 2 further bhumis. They are rupa patisandhi and arupa patisandhi for rebirth and rupa bhumi or fine material realms and arupa bhumis or non-material realms for planes of existence. These rupa and arupa bhumis or realm are collectively called brahma bhumis. Brahmas are non-sensuous deva and they are celestiel beings of fine material and non-material body. There are 20 brahma bhumis or 20 brahma realms. 16 realms are fine material realms and 4 are non- materials realms. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41710 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 5:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/3/2005 7:04:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/3/05 9:17:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > At moments of thinking about names and meanings, the thinking arises but > there is not 'thing' of names and meaning that arises, there is only the > thinking. That is to say, when we talk about thoughts as the object of > thinking, there is no 'object' but just the thinking 'about' something. > > Jon > =================== Okay. I think I follow you, and I actually agree with the sense of it! There is just the process of thinking, and it *seems* to be "about something," but with that "something" not an actual object. However, it still remains true, does it not, that every mindstate has an object or objective content? It just may be that during thought processes we may not be all that clear on what the actual objects are. With metta, Howard Hi Jon and Howard For consciousness not to have an actual object to be "conscious of" is impossible according to Sutta or Abhidhamma as far as I know. During thinking, consciousness has an "actual object." One needs to figure out what it is and how it operates ... so that dependent origination principles are more clearly seen. This is what Howard is alluding to I believe. TG 41711 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 10:59am Subject: Dhamma Thread (257) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 16 fine material realms and 4 non-material realms where brahmas live. 16 fine material realms or 16 rupa brahma bhumis are a) 5 pure abode or 5 suddhavasa brahma bhumis or realms of ariyas 5.akanittha bhumi (brahma with panna-bala or wisdon-power) 4.sudassi bhumi (brahma with samadhi-bala or concentration-power) 3.sudassaa bhumi (brahma with viriya-bala or effort-power) 2.atappaa bhumi (brahma with sati-bala or mindfulness-power) 1.avihaa bhumi (brahma with saddha-bala or confidence-power) b) 2.asannasatta bhumi (non-percipient or consciousnessless brahma) 1.vehapphala bhumi (4th jhana bhumi) These 7 bhumis or 7 realms are called 4th jhana bhumis. The first 5 bhumi or realms are where ariya brahmas dwell. c) 3 tatiya jhana bhumis or 3 3rd jhana bhumis 3.subhakihnaa bhumi (extremely beautiful radiant brahma) 2.appamaanasubhaa bhumi (beautiful limitless radiant brahma) 1.parittasubhaa bhumi (beautifully radiant brahma) d) 3 dutiya jhana bhumis or 3 2nd jhana bhumis 3.abhassaraa bhumi (extra-radiant brahma) 2.appamaanabhaa bhumi (radiant brahma) 1.parittaabhaa bhumi (weakly radiant brahma) e) 3 pathama jhana bhumis or 3 1st jhana bhumis 3.mahaabrahmaa bhumi (great brahma) 2.brahmapurohita bhumi (minister brahma) 1.brahmaparisajja bhumi (serving brahma) So there are 7 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 16 rupa brahma bhumis or 16 fine material realms. The first top 5 realms or uppermost 5 realms are called pure abodes or 5 suddhavasa bhumis and they are where all are ariya brahmas. In their immediate past life they were anagams and so in these 5 realms they are anagams and if they develop further enlightenment they are arahatta brahmas. They all will in the course of their life become arahats if they have not attain arahatta magga nana. After those 5 realms comes asannisatta brahmas. They are brahmas who do not have any consciousness. They just have physical body with physical life called jivita rupa. They are reborn in that realm with rupa-patisandhi and when they are still there they will be in rupa- bhavanga and they die with rupa-cuti. This bhumi is 4th jhana bhumi. In their previous life they attained 4th rupa jhana and they dispassionate sanna or perception and because of the power of their jhana there does not develop any sanna or perception and so they are called non-percipient beings or asannisatta. After that realm is vehapphala bhumi. When asannisatta die they have to reborn in 4th rupa jhana bhumi called vehapphala bhumi. In that realm if they still consider that sanna is not profitable then they will dispassionate sanna and again they will be reborn in asannisatta bhumi again. When human beings or deva beings develop 4th jhana and when they are dying they still can develop 4th rupa jhana then they will be reborn as vehapphala brahmas in vehapphala bhumi. c) and d) and e) are 3rd rupa jhana, 2nd rupa jhana, and 1st rupa jhana bhumis. There are 3 bhumis in each jhana because the power in each jhana are different. Some develop 1st jhana in the weakest form. It is called hiina-1st jhana and they will be reborn as brahmaparisajja or working-brahma or serving brahma. If 1st jhana is develop to proficient level then jhana practitioners will be reborn in mahaabrahma bhumi or great brahma bhumi. It is paniita-jhana. If 1st jhana is in the middle or it is majjhima-1st jhana then they will be reborn as brahmapurohita brahma bhumi. By the same token other 2nd and 3rd jhana bhumis all have 3 bhumis in each. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41712 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:14am Subject: Dhamma Thread (258) Dear Dhamma Friends, 16 rupa brahma bhumis have been discussed in the previous post. These 16 are rupa bhumis. Regarding rupa patisandhi there are 5 rupa patisandhi cittas. They are all rupavipaka cittas. They are corresponding rupa jhana cittas of kusala origin but they all are now vipaka because they are resultant cittas. There are 16 rupa brahma bhumis. But there are only 5 rupa patisandhi cittas. In the first 3 brahma bhumis or 3 1st jhana bhumis the beings there are reborn with 1st jhana rupavipaka citta. If it is weak jhana it will be in brahmaparisajja bhumi or serving-brahma realm and if jhana is the middle one then it will be reborn in brahmapurohita bhumi or minister-brahma realm and if 1st jhana is most powerful one it will be reborn in mahaabrahmaa bhumi or great brahma realm. In the 3 2nd jhana bhumis the beings there are reborn with 2nd or 3rd jhana rupavipaka citta. This is because some practise 2nd jhana with vicara and some do not practise 2nd jhana with vicara. If they do not have vicara their patisandhi citta will be 3rd jhana rupavipaka citta and they will be reborn in 2nd jhana bhumis. There are 3 realms and they depend on weak, middle, and powerful jhana status. In the 3 3rd jhana bhumis all beings there are reborn with 4th jhana rupavipaka citta and their bhumi is called 3rd jhana bhumis. There are 3 bhumis or realms because their power of jhana are not the same and according to power there are difference in bhumi and difference in lifespan. Vehapphala brahmas are reborn with 5th rupa jhana rupavipaka citta and their bhumi is called 4th jhana bhumi. Asannisatta brahmas are also 4th jhana brahmas. But they do not have any sanna or perception and so they do not have any citta or any consciousness and they are non-percipient beings. They are reborn with rupa-patisandhi and they will be in the same position of body when they last die in their immediate past life. Examples are if sitting they will be sitting through out their lifespan and if standing they will be standing and if lying they will be lying through out their life span. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41713 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Five Indriyas, what is sati. Dear Tep, op 03-02-2005 04:44 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: .... With your permission, I > hope to continue to discuss the Dhamma with you until we can resolve > the difficulty, or you tell me to stop! N: There is no problem here. I only delay because of lack of time. That was the reason I did not read that article you gave. I always have to attend to Visuddimagga, and I also want to spend more time on Sutta and Commentary. So much to read and study in this field. You have excellent and inspiring questions, useful for all of us. Very good you ask for examples. It is a real pleasure to discuss with you, Tep. You are so openminded. T: N: The 4 foundations of mindfulness as objects of sati and paññaa are > nothing else but nama and rupa appearing one at a time through the > six doors. I need a real-world example to help me understand what you said. > Say, now you are walking on a street. How do you take a nama > element or a rupa element as the object of awareness in every > moment while walking? N: Sati arises or it does not. If we think of having to take a nama and rupa, at every moment, it seems to me like an idea of: I am directing sati or sati has to arise without interruption. Elements arise because of conditions and we should learn to see them as without a self directing them. Otherwise we shall not understand anatta. L: How do you know when a characteristic appears now (how does it become manifest)? N: Excellent question. Only one dhamma at a time appearing through one doorway at a time is the object of sati. We could say, one characteristic of nama or rupa appears to sati and there is no need to think of it or to name it. But it is not easy to explain, precisely because I find it very difficult myself. Hardness may appear and be experienced through body-consciousness. But this is not sati. First we have to know when there is sati and when not. We listen to the Dhamma and consider it, and then without trying or planning, sati can arise unexpectantly. The conditions are listening and considering. As soon as we are thinking about sati, there is thinking, not direct awareness. This may not answer your question completely. It is helpful for all of us to know what is not sati but thinking. We may notice this difference: we go along with our usual tasks and think only of persons, places, things we touch such as dishes, books, etc. We are quite absorbed in all those things. But sometimes, without planning, sound may appear without thinking of the meaning of sound, or hardness, without thinking of the hardness *of* a thing. Discussing this helps me. I had to do some chores, and was still thinking about what I wrote just now, and this reminded me for a few moments to be aware in between the thinking of stories about the dishes and so on. The Buddha praised Dhamma discussions, and also enlightened monks had discussions. So, let us continue to discuss. T: Do you think about the 3 > characteristics of the object of awareness, or do they appear by > themselves one at a time ? N: No, they do not and I do not think of them. Because first the different characteristics of nama and rupa (visesa lakkhana) have to be known by insight. Take the first stage: directly realizing the difference between the characteristics of nama and of rupa. This is difficult enough for me. There has to be awareness over and over again of seeing, hearing, hardness, feeling, etc. Many different characteristics. Only later on the three characteristics will become clearer, but not by thinking. But if hardness can be realized as rupa, for example, it is a step towards anatta. It is rupa, not a thing or person. It is rupa, that means, it is anatta. Anatta can become just a little bit clearer. T: How do you contemplate the rapid arising or passing away of the object of awareness? N: This is the first stage of principal insight. Not yet. It is too far away for me. T: How do you deal with > distracted thoughts or thinking that interferes with the satipatthana? N: There is mostly thinking and very little awareness, but that does not matter. Thinking does not interfere, we should not try not to have thinking, then there is again an idea of self who directs. It is reality and it can be known as such. As soon as we mind it shows clinging. We really should not mind what arises, we should remember that it is conditioned. T: N: I heard this morning:< When we are touching something it seems > that hardness was there all the time, > T: I really like this logical explanation of hardness. It helps me > understand the illusion of continuity that fools us to think that "it is there > all the time". But how do I experience the phenomena of rising and > falling away of a "body-door" at a given moment? I only "see" the process by logical deduction. So, how do I train the mind so that it > actually sees the arising-and-falling-away phenomena with mindfulness and right understanding? N: By beginning at the beginning, not expecting to reach a later stage of insight before the first beginning stage of tender insight: directly understanding nama as nama and rupa as rupa. T: N:When there is unshakable confidence that this is the right > way: mindfulness and understanding of whatever appears now. When > there is firm understanding of what the right Path is. > T: When I asked "how", I meant the actual working of powers with the > application of satipatthana. Your answer only tells me about the > conditions, or factors that are the requisites for sati-bala to arise. N: I think of all the powers together. But before they become unshakable powers they are indriyas, faculties. I am inclined to consider first a beginning stage. I am always inclined to think of indriyas and powers in connection with each other, pañña being the leader. T:This answer begs for more questions like "how do we practice for the > unshakable confidence and the firm understanding of the right Path?", > etc. N: By beginning to be mindful of nama and rupa without an idea of self trying. It is difficult to detect the idea of self who is directing, because we are used to this idea our whole life, and countless lives before. It all proceeds with ups and downs. We make mistakes, we are deluded. This is to be expected, it is natural. T: Do I need to go back to the suttas to help me out? N: The Tipitaka is always excellent, it is the Dhamma that is our teacher after the Buddha's passing away. An exhortation to satipatthana is implied in all the suttas, and they also remind us not to forget our duties such as serving parents, helping others, and this together with satipatthana. Nina. 41714 From: nina Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Pilgrimage India 4 e Pilgrimage India 4 e The perfections of generosity, síla, renunciation, wisdom, energy, patience, truthfulness, determination, mettå and upekkhå are all connected with each other. When mettå arises, the citta is humble and gentle and at such a moment one also observes síla, one does not hurt others. Síla is one of the perfections. When we attend to the needs of others, we renounce our own comfort, we develop the perfection of renunciation. We should remember the Sutta of the Divine Messengers, which is an exhortation not to be negligent in performing kusala through body, speech and mind when we see an old person or a sick person. We may regret our negligence later on, we are also subject to old age, sickness and death. Paññå is the leader of all perfections, it supports all levels of kusala, and without right understanding of dhammas the perfections cannot be developed. The perfections are means to become purified of akusala. It is not beneficial to cling to an idea of ³my resolve for mettå² and the other perfections. Kusala is not ³I² or ³mine², but a dhamma arising because of conditions. Paññå is the leader of all perfections, it supports all levels of kusala, and without right understanding of dhammas the perfections cannot be developed. The purpose of the teachings is detachment from the idea of self and from all realities, even from kusala. There is no specific time for the development of the perfections, it can gradually become one¹s nature to develop them. When we see someone, can there be friendliness or compassion? Patience, khanti, is one of the perfections, but we may easily take for patience what is not patience but akusala citta. When someone else speaks disagreeable words to us and we do not answer back, we may believe that we are patient, wheas in reality we may keep silent with akusala cittas. Or we have an idea of ³my patience² and cling to it. Patience does not mean indolence and despair. When we have patience we are courageous and we persevere in the development of understanding and all kinds of kusala, even though we do not notice a rapid progress. Acharn Sujin reminded us of the Buddha¹s words about patience, courage and cheerfulness. We should be happy and grateful that we can still listen to the Buddha¹s teachings, even though he passed away many centuries ago. Acharn Sujin said that the perfections wash away the dust from the citta. They lead to detachment. Our goal should be more understanding and less attachment. ******* Nina. 41715 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sutta about merchants Dear Tep and Ken H, Robert, I just comment on the sutta I like very much. op 02-02-2005 22:58 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > T: You know, I'd very much like to be more flexible in my practice too. > The main trouble I have right now is that if the Teachings can be > practiced by those rich merchants who were surrounded with things of > sensual pleasures, then what I have learned is completely wrong. N: On Streamwinning. Dhammadinna. To spend the days learning the teachings, regularly, always. The Thai has this, but the English has: from time to time. The English is weaker. The Buddha knew that they were sotapannas and encouraged them to develop further. It is said that it was difficult for them to put up with the task. They lived their daily life with all the sense pleasures. But they could be mindful naturally and develop understanding. This sutta encourages us and illustrates that satipatthana can be developed even one enjoys all the pleasant things of life. The Co states that several suttas were mentioned to them for study: the K.S. IV, about the unconditioned, and this is about the development of all the enlightenment factors. Beginning with mindfulness of the body. Actually, mindfulness of the body includes understanding of nama and rupa, not only rupa. Further the Moneyyasutta, Gradual Sayings I, 273, about the perfection through body, speech and mind. The last one is the attainment of arahatship. The sotapanna has perfected sila and the anagami has perfected samadhi, he naturally lives without sense pleasures, and thus he has great calm. The virtues of the ariyans lead to concentration. Thus, these sotapannas who had virtues untarnished, were encouraged to continue to develop understanding until arahatship. Nina. 41716 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Howard's suttas, 2. Sutta no 3. Dear Jon, Thank you very much for the verse, BB translation. It helped me, I can add something now. See below. op 02-02-2005 23:05 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jsabbott@n...: > Here is the verse from the BB translation, for comparison: > The wise prescribe giving, > Harmelssness, self-control and taming, > Service to one's dear parents > And to those who live the holy life. > These are the kinds of deeds > T which the wise person resorts. > The noble one, possessed of vision, > Passes to an auspicous world. > > A footnote to the verse reads: > 'It seems that in the verse, the "going forth" is represented by > "harmlessness, self-control and taming", since these are the practices > undertaken by those who go forth. N: Taming, the Thai Pali had thama, in Pali dama, and now I see: taming, subduing. The Co adds: uposatha sila, and also in the Punnovaadasutta: khanti, patience, and also paññaa in the Alavakasutta. Thus, taming includes several qualities, patience and wisdom. Harmlessness, self-control and taming are virtues of the recluse. He lives a life of non-violence. Also laypeople can develop those virtues. Nina. 41717 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Larry, op 03-02-2005 02:12 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > The object of consciousness isn't a present reality. The present reality > is the consciousness and its cetasikas. That is why dualistic notions of > consciousness experiencing an object with contact brokering this > exchange are untenable, imo. N: When someone thinks by way of subject/object and dualism, it may be difficult to understand that object, aaramma.na, in the Abhidhamma is a different notion. Object is what is experienced by citta and cetasikas. Howard gives the example of hardness, a rupa, which has not fallen away. That rupa is only an object when it is experienced by citta. That rupa has arisen before citta can experience it, because rupa is weak at its arising moment, it cannot be object of citta. Thus, rupa is there, but not experienced, and then it is not an object. As to past rupa that has fallen away long ago, when citta thinks of it, it is an object of citta. A concept of a chair: when citta thinks of it, it is an object. No need to wonder about it whether a dhamma has fallen away or not. At the moment it is experienced it is an object. This can be verified right now. Citta experiences objects through the six doorways and also without being dependent on a doorway in the case of rebirth, bhavanga, dying-consciousness. : broker: buying and selling goods for others? Contact is merely an assistant of citta that experiences an object. You write to Howard: L: ... I know this doesn't jive with your views, but take a mind-door object of consciousness. Say, dislike of bodily feeling (vedana). Bodily feeling is the object of dislike but it isn't a present reality when dislike arises. Before dislike arises the bodily feeling was a present experienced feeling. N: It does not matter. What is past can still be object of citta. Object, aaramma.na: support, footing, anything to be depended upon, condition, ground, basis for the working of the mind, PED says. Citta depends on an object. L: My contention is that that feeling conditioned the arising of dislike via latent tendencies without dislike actually co-existing with the feeling at any time. N: The javanacittas maybe cittas with aversion and dislike arising in the same sense-door process. But they arise after the body-consciousness with painful feeling. L: Abhidhamma substantiates this in that the object of consciousness is not present in a mind-door process. I would say it is also not present in a 5-door process, but that's a bit of a heresy. This theory also presents some difficulties for satipatthana and its objects of mindfulness, but I think these are just linguistic difficulties. N: No problems. When a dhammas has just fallen away, its characteristic can still appear to sati. The processes are so fast. This can be verified. Hearing falls away, but its characteristic of nama experiencing sound can be the object of mindfulness, arising shortly afterwards. L: You may say,"Aha! I can detect a difference between awareness and hardness." I would say this awareness is attention or some such co-arising cetasika. In fact there are numerous co-arising cetasikas and, as such, co-arising simultaneous experiences. N: I think that Howard meant by awareness cognizing an object, not sati. As you say, there are numerous co-arising cetasikas and, as such, co-arising simultaneous experiences. They all share the same object with citta. Contact also shares it, while it performs its function of contacting the object, thereby assisting citta and the other cetasikas. Nina. 41718 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 135 and Tiika Hi Larry, op 03-02-2005 02:23 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > Vism: "But it is evident when it occurs in the marshalling (driving) of > associated states in connexion with urgent work, remembering, and so > on." > This suggests to me that remembering is slightly different from > recognition. N: The Expositor's translation seems to be clearer: The Pali has: accaayika/ kamm/aanussara.na/adiisu urgent/ work/ remember/ and so on in remembering an urgent work. One may be forgetful that there is urgent work to do, such as lazy labourers but the chief makes them work. Evenso volition, the coordinator, sets the associated cetasikas in motion. It stirs or drives them to do their work. The cetasika saññaa is quite different, it marks and remembers, recognizes what was marked. L: Perception doesn't need volition to recognize a dhamma. N: It does, because cetanaa coordinates the work of the accompamying cetasikas, and thus also the work of saññaa. We should not think of volition as we use it in conventional language. It helps to think in the way of functions. L:Are we still saying that sanna is what does the remembering (recollection)? N: Yes. See above. Nina. 41719 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134, pleasant, unpleasant object. Hi Howard and Larry, op 03-02-2005 14:39 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> Larry: This does't clarify. There are no unpleasant rupas. There are, >> however, undesirable rupas. >> > ==================== Howard: My understanding is that Abhidhamma says there *are* unpleasant rupas. N: let us go to the Pali to solve this. Rupas experienced by citta are either a desirable object, i.t.thaaramma.na or an undesirable object, ani.t.thaaramma.na. Thus: i.t.tha: pleasant, dear desirable, agreeable. Piya (dear) ruupa. Or the opposite: ani.t.tha. It does not matter what English word you guys use. It amounts to the same. Nina. 41720 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 7:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only two reactions - equanimity and craving? In a message dated 2/1/2005 5:59:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: This threefold craving is not the same as the threefold craving for sensual pleasures, becoming and annihilation, right? Is there any parallel between them? (I've never really understood what the craving for annihilation means.) But we know that at the time of aversion, there are cittas rooted in moha and dosa, right? There isn't lobha at that time. So again I'm thinking chronoligically and getting confused. Are there also cittas with all three roots? You're saying that "craving for discontinuance" *is* aversion, right? Again, that confuses me, because aversion is dosa and craving is lobha. (or is craving tanha, which is different from lobha?) Do lobha and dosa arise together in the case of 3) above. That's not possible, is it? Sorry for the jumble of questions. I really should look at these kind of things in the morning. Sleepy now. Metta, Phil Hi Phil The three types of craving I suggested are indeed parallel to the traditional 3 types of craving: for sensual pleasures, becoming and annihilation. I prefer the method of analysis I posted because I believe it ties the process more directly to "feeling" than the traditional interpretation does. Re: the traditional interpretation and putting sensual pleasure craving aside... the craving for existence occurs in minds that see existence as pleasurable. This applies to most of us. The craving for anihilation would occurs in minds that see existence as unpleasurable. This is what causes suicide. However, I don't think the traditional interpretation gets to the root of the matter. It seems to miss the direct correlation to feeling. Feeling is the cause for craving according to the 12 Fold Chain. Yes, I am saying that "craving for discontinuance" is aversion. Craving is a very subtle and initial stage of wanting a result. If pain is experienced...the mind wants it to end. That wanting to end is aversion. The fact that I put "want" in that description perhaps does indicate its association with lobha. These states of craving are all mutually supported and ultimately based on ignorance of conditionality. The main thing is to see them as states that arise, alter, and cease in accordance with conditions. This makes the mind see states as conditioned, impermanent, no-self, and to realize that attachment to THAT, is just a cause of suffering. TG 41721 From: Tep Sastri Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 1:33pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Ken H. - I am glad that you gave the Sekha-patipada Sutta a good look before responding to my message. [Note: Sekha = trainer, or Ariya below the Arahat level. Patipada = road, path.] KH (in #41695): In the sutta you have quoted, Ananda was told by the Buddha to, "speak about the person who follows the practice for one in training." So it is about the person more than the practice. The person spoken of is a disciple of the noble ones, so he is at least a sotapanna (but not yet and arahant). So, in summary, I think this sutta describes certain monks who have already attained enlightenment. It is not a description of the preliminary practice. T: Good points, although not totally convincing! We should carefully notice that the discourse was given at the time when the Kapilavatthu Sakyans (lay Buddhists) were still in the hall with the bhikkhus( who were probably sekhas and/or arahats). "Then the Blessed One -- having spent most of the night instructing, urging, rousing, & encouraging the Kapilavatthu Sakyans with a Dhamma talk -- said to Ven. Ananda, 'Ananda, speak to the Kapilavatthu Sakyans about the person who follows the practice for one in training. ...' " Question #1: Were these lay-people sekha already? I don't think so, Ken. Otherwise, the sutta would have stated so. I think the Buddha knew that after He gave them the basic "Dhamma talk", these lay-Buddhists were then ready for the Sekha Patipada. So He asked the Venerable Ananda to proceed. T: Further, if the patipada was supposed to be for disciples who were already sekha, then why did the Venerable Ananda talk about several mundane requisites below the Ariya's lokuttara level such as the following: 1) "There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones has conviction, is convinced of the Tathagata's Awakening" 2) "... knows moderation in eating, is devoted to wakefulness..." 3) " He feels shame at [the thought of engaging in] bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct". 4) "He feels concern for [the suffering that results from] bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct". 5) "He is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago." Question #2: Based on the above evidence, isn't it reasonable for us to be self-confident enough to think that the Sekha Patipada is also a great path for lay-Buddhists with strong conviction (like us) to follow ? ((:>|) Warm regards, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > Thanks for your question: > > ------------------------ > T: > Please comment on the following practice that I have used as a > guidance. Is it wrong or not? > ------------------------ > > I don't think we need to single out any particular practice as a > guidance, nor to decide what is the right or wrong practice for us. > There is no "us" so it can't be necessary for us to choose - > conditions take care of that. > > In the sutta you have quoted, Ananda was told by the Buddha > to, "speak about the person who follows the practice for one in > training." So it is about the person more than the practice. The > person spoken of is a disciple of the noble ones, so he is at least > a sotapanna (but not yet and arahant). Furthermore, Ananda begins > with the words, "There is the case where a disciple of the noble > ones is . . .," so he is not describing every disciple of the noble > ones. I think he is describing the case of the most esteemed > disciple - the one who practises jhana and vipassana in tandem. > > The Satipatthana sutta is similar: it begins with the case of that > same elite of monks - the monk who takes breath as the object of > jhana and then takes jhana citta as the object of satipatthana. Then > the sutta describes the more common objects of satipatthana that are > experienced by all disciples. > > So, in summary, I think this sutta describes certain monks who have > already attained enlightenment. It is not a description of the > preliminary practice. > > Ken H > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > > > [MN53: Sekha-patipada Sutta] > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn053.html > > > > 41722 From: Philip Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 3:59pm Subject: Re: Anicca as characteristic Hi Joop, and all. Thanks for this post. It got me thinking about anatta which is always good. Thinking about anatta conditions a deeper understanding of anatta (hopefully!) > Nyatiloka: > "anicca: 'impermanent' is the first of the three characteristics of > existence. It is from the fact of impermanence that, in most texts, > the other two characteristics, suffering (dukkha) and not-self > anatt?E, are derived. Yes, in many suttas the Buddha starts by asking "Is form permanent on impermanent." But does this necessarily mean that the others are "derived" from impermanence? I can see how suffering comes from impermanece - there cannot be lasting satisfaction in that which is impermanent. But does annata follow in the same way? In the suttas the Buddha asks if is it fitting to take that which is impermanent and suffering and think 'this is mine, this is what I am, this is my self." The monk says no, it is not a fitting. But does that begin to get at what anatta is? I don't think so. Perhaps that's why we find that two of the five books (vaggas?) of Samyutta Nikaya are devoted to the khandas and to the six sense bases. The khandas and the six sense bases are all about anatta. Abhidhamma is all about anatta, isn't it? What is the study of cetasikas, for example, except to develop our understanding that there is no self. And anatta is so subtle and difficult to penetrate that different approaches, different classifications are all ways at helping. Isn't impermanence perhaps easier to understand to begin with, thus it comes first in those suttas? (Of course, impermanence isn't as easy to understand as it might appear. "We wish to ignore impermanence" is a line I wrote down from somewhere.) (snip) > In the 'Useful posts' of DSG the term 'impermanence' has 17 entries, > and anatta more then the triple of it. Why ? See above. Perhaps it's of less import to discuss impermanence because even though it is not as easy to understand as we might think, it is also not as profound and subtle an issue as anatta? Understanding of it comes and goes, it's so fleeting. So we talk and talk about it, never able to get at it in words, but having faith that discussing it can condition deeper understanding. > In a discussion about the concept "emptiness" some weeks ago Kel > said: "some really like anicca and some anatta" (to contemplate); > some DSG members are rather into anatta. And then one gets into > explaining and expounding everything based on that preference." > I agreed with him and concluded that it is also partly a question of > personality which principle is taken central. This is interesting. I wouldn't say "personality", but I know what you mean. In "Roots of Good and Evil" Nanamoli Thera writes (or quotes a passage, I forget which) about how in people different roots (hetus) are predominate based on the rebirth citta (?) Some people are more strongly rooted in greed and less rooted in hatred, for example, and any number of permutations based on the 6 roots. He also quotes from the Atthasalini about the nature of the wholesome roots - when there is alobha (non-greed) there is likely to be better understanding of impermanence, and vice-versa. When there is amoha (wisdom) there will be better understanding of not-self, and vice versa. So our interest in the characteristics might be conditioned by the preponderance within the roots we are born with? Something like that? Oops. Gotta run. Hi in passing to Sarah, Nina, Rob K and TG. Wanted to respond to your posts today but can't. Thanks for your helpful feedback. Metta, Phil 41723 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 4:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Larry: "Btw, how do you know rupa is different from consciousness?" ---------------------------------------- Howard: " That's how it appears to me. Also, given what I mean by 'consciousness', namely the experiential presence of a dhamma, it is *definitionally* clear to me. To me it is straightforward that the occurrence or presence of something is not the same as that thing. The presence of a thought is not the thought. The presence of anger is not the anger. But they are inseparably co-occurring." Hi Howard, Is anger an experience and presence another exerience? What is anger without presence, subconscious anger? Larry ps: Sorry I was so short on the other questions. I was in a rush and hoping that Nina would weigh-in with the voice of authority. Is there anything else to discuss? I still maintain the views I expressed. Larry 41724 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 4:06pm Subject: Vism.XIV,136 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 136. (iii)-(v) What should be said about 'applied thought', 'sustained thought' and 'happiness' has already been said in the commentary on the first jhana in the Description of the Earth Kasina (Ch. IV,88-98). 41725 From: Tep Sastri Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 5:00pm Subject: Re: the Five Indriyas, what is sati. Dear Nina, Your golden message (# 41713) is very special to me -- the best ever. The idea (view, ditthi) of the 'self' who "directs sati" and the subtle, but wrong view that "sati has to arise without interruption" have become clear to me for the first time. [Well, now I realize that I wasn't 'that impossible' to be taught!] T: > Say, now you are walking on a street. How do you take a nama > element or a rupa element as the object of awareness in every > moment while walking? N: Sati arises or it does not. If we think of having to take a nama and rupa, at every moment, it seems to me like an idea of: I am directing sati or sati has to arise without interruption. Elements arise because of conditions and we should learn to see them as without a self directing them. Otherwise we shall not understand anatta. T: Very well said, Nina, very well said! After I had finished reading the above wise remarks of yours, there was no thought for a moment. Some deep contemplation went on for a while without any thinking in words -- it was, maybe, just a clear understanding that arose. Quite possibly, this first understanding of anatta has shortened a few million future rebirths from the remaining samsara. Thank you very much, Nina. T: >How do you know when a characteristic appears now (how does it > become manifest)? N: First we have to know when there is sati and when not. We listen to the Dhamma and consider it, and then without trying or planning, sati can arise unexpectantly. The conditions are listening and considering. As soon as we are thinking about sati, there is thinking, not direct awareness. This may not answer your question completely. It is helpful for all of us to know what is not sati but thinking. T: I have passed the first test on "there is no 'I' who directs sati". But the second test as given above is more difficult : sati has to arise "unexpectantly" through "listening and considering". In other words, "sati is not thinking about sati; sati is direct awareness". Let's get back to the walking example again. Many times when we walk we may not be mindful of the walking -- i.e. a sati with the walking (leg movements) as its object does not arise. Now, suppose that suddenly while walking with no sati, we realize that we should be mindful of the walking. That realization is a sati (recollection), but it is not the kind of sati we would want in walking meditation. To condition the right kind of sati to arise, I would take my awareness from any outside preoccupations (wandering thoughts) and 'place' a focused attention on the walking. Sometimes, by "comprehending" the rupa (materiality) during walking as stated in the Visuddhimagga is useful for continuously sustaining sati and sampajanna on the leg movements. But it seems to me that there is a large degree of thinking involved in the Ven. Buddhaghosa's method. Let me present a few quotes to support my point. " Next he divides a single footstep into six parts as 'lifting up', 'shifting forward', 'shifting sideways', 'lowering down', 'placing down', and 'fixing down'. " VM XX, 62 "He attributes the three characteristics to materiality according to 'disappearance of what grows old in each stage' by means of these six parts into which he has thus divided. ... ... wherever they arise, there they cease stage by stage, section by section, term by term, each without reaching the next part: therefore they are impermanent, painful, not-self " VM XX, 64-65. I would appreciate your thought on the VM's method above: is there sati with such walking meditation? Or is there only thinking and comprehending? N: Because first the different characteristics of nama and rupa (visesa lakkhana) have to be known by insight. Take the first stage: directly realizing the difference between the characteristics of nama and of rupa. ... ... But if hardness can be realized as rupa, for example, it is a step towards anatta. It is rupa, not a thing or person. It is rupa, that means, it is anatta. Anatta can become just a little bit clearer. T: I think the VM's example above is a practice for conditioning an insight about the materiality's characteristics to appear. I believe this walking meditation is also useful as "a step toward anatta" like you said. Do you think so too? T: > How do you deal with > distracted thoughts or thinking that interferes with the satipatthana? N: There is mostly thinking and very little awareness, but that does not matter. Thinking does not interfere, we should not try not to have thinking, then there is again an idea of self who directs. T: I understand now that we "should not try not to have thinking" in order to avoid the wrong idea of self. But don't you think that thinking does interfere with the walking meditation in the VM's example? When a thought occurs, then the attention will slip from the sati's object of awareness. And we will have to condition sati to arise and stay with the object again. N: The Tipitaka is always excellent, it is the Dhamma that is our teacher after the Buddha's passing away. An exhortation to satipatthana is implied in all the suttas, and they also remind us not to forget our duties such as serving parents, helping others, and this together with satipatthana. T: Absolutely, Nina, absolutely! Thank you for all the great answers you have given, and I also greatly appreciate your kind words at the beginning of the mail. Kindest regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep, > op 03-02-2005 04:44 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > .... With your permission, I > > hope to continue to discuss the Dhamma with you until we can resolve > > the difficulty, or you tell me to stop! 41726 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 0:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 7:17:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Larry: "Btw, how do you know rupa is different from consciousness?" > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > " That's how it appears to me. > Also, given what I mean by 'consciousness', namely the experiential > presence of a dhamma, it is *definitionally* clear to me. > To me it is straightforward > that the occurrence or presence of something is not the same as that > thing. The presence of a thought is not the thought. The presence of > anger is not the anger. But they are inseparably co-occurring." > > Hi Howard, > > Is anger an experience and presence another exerience? What is anger > without presence, subconscious anger? ------------------------------------- Howard: Anger is an experience and its experiential presence is a distinguishable but co-occurring event. There is no anger without its presence (and no presence of anger without the anger). But at the time that anger is present (i.e., experienced), only the anger is experienced, not the experiencing of the anger. The experiencing is not, itself, experienced. The sword does not cut itself. The consciousness of the anger is an event that is not known until immediately after the fact through the mind door when we recall that there just was anger. It is only then, with that fresh memory, that we realize that anger had been experienced. But that realization is not a direct experiencing of consciousness. In fact, I suspect that there may not be any direct experiencing of consciousness. ----------------------------------- > > Larry > ps: Sorry I was so short on the other questions. I was in a rush and > hoping that Nina would weigh-in with the voice of authority. Is there > anything else to discuss? I still maintain the views I expressed. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I think this is a very difficult matter. I'm really not at all sure of what the status of consciousness is. Consciousness seems to me to be almost nothing. It seems to me that there are just experiences arising and ceasing. Each arising of an experience we can *call* the experiencing of it, the "being conscious of it". There may not be anything more to say than that. --------------------------------------- > > 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) 41727 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 7:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Howard: "Anger is an experience and its experiential presence is a distinguishable but co-occurring event. There is no anger without its presence (and no presence of anger without the anger). But at the time that anger is present (i.e., experienced), only the anger is experienced, not the experiencing of the anger. The experiencing is not, itself, experienced. The sword does not cut itself. The consciousness of the anger is an event that is not known until immediately after the fact through the mind door when we recall that there just was anger. It is only then, with that fresh memory, that we realize that anger had been experienced. But that realization is not a direct experiencing of consciousness. In fact, I suspect that there may not be any direct experiencing of consciousness." Hi Howard, I don't know what you mean by "presence" but in abhidhamma anger is a consciousness. Could presence be a cetasika? Basically we could say experience is nama, with nibbana being an unknown factor. That is why in saying hardness is consciousness all I am saying is hardness is experience. There could also be an unexperienced materiality that conditions the arising of this experience. Who knows? I think the crux of our problem is in determining the status of referencing. Say I pinch my finger and aversion arises. Aversion arises in reference to pinch. Dislike dislikes pinch, in some sense. Possibly millions of mind-door processes could arise in reference to this one pinch. I've been trying to get rid of reference as a legitimate reality but suppose we keep it. Vive le reference! What do we have? Emptiness. That's fine with me. I had forgot that in the end all there is is conventional reality and its absolute emptiness. Larry 41728 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 2:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/3/05 10:35:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "Anger is an experience and its experiential presence is a > distinguishable but co-occurring event. There is no anger without its > presence (and no presence of anger without the anger). But at the time > that anger is present (i.e., experienced), only the anger is > experienced, not the experiencing of the anger. The experiencing is not, > itself, experienced. The sword does not cut itself. The consciousness of > the anger is an event that is not known until immediately after the fact > through the mind door when we recall that there just was anger. It is > only then, with that fresh memory, that we realize that anger had been > experienced. But that realization is not a direct experiencing of > consciousness. In fact, I suspect that there may not be any direct > experiencing of consciousness." > > Hi Howard, > > I don't know what you mean by "presence" but in abhidhamma anger is a > consciousness. Could presence be a cetasika? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: You don't know what I mean by 'presence', and I don't know what you mean by consciousness! ;-) Are you saying that dosa is a form of vi~n~nana in Abhidhamma? That doesn't seem right to me. By 'presence' I mean existing as an experiential phenomenon. When hardness arises it is present, when it ceases it is not. When it is present, we say that we are aware of it. Awareness of an experience is not much of anything - it is just the momentary existing of the experience. --------------------------------------- > > Basically we could say experience is nama, with nibbana being an unknown > factor. That is why in saying hardness is consciousness all I am saying > is hardness is experience. There could also be an unexperienced > materiality that conditions the arising of this experience. Who knows? > ------------------------------------- Howard: I don't get it, Larry. What, then, are rupas? If hardness and warmth and sights and sounds etc are namas, then "Where have all the rupas gone? Long time passing." ;-)) -------------------------------------- > > I think the crux of our problem is in determining the status of > referencing. Say I pinch my finger and aversion arises. Aversion arises > in reference to pinch. Dislike dislikes pinch, in some sense. Possibly > millions of mind-door processes could arise in reference to this one > pinch. > > I've been trying to get rid of reference as a legitimate reality but > suppose we keep it. Vive le reference! What do we have? Emptiness. > That's fine with me. > > I had forgot that in the end all there is is conventional reality and > its absolute emptiness. > > 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) 41729 From: Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 9:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Howard: "Awareness of an experience is not much of anything - it is just the momentary existing of the experience." Hi Howard, I agree. I wouldn't even say "awareness of" except in the sense of "perception of" (sanna). As for dosa being a consciousness maybe Nina could say something. I've changed my mind about rupa. However anyone wants to think about it, I'm agreeable. Convention is an agreement and agreement makes a convention. And convention is wonderfully empty. Larry 41730 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 9:29pm Subject: Re: for James --- > Thank you very much for this contribution. > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > > =========== > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie > wrote: > > > > from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary > summary > > ('Guide') known as Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma--VII, 30 > > "Of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, right view > > (sammaaditthi) is the cetasika of wisdom exercised in understanding > the > > Four Noble Truths. Right intention (sammasmakappa) is the > cetasika of > > initial application (vitakka) directed towards renunciation, good will, > > and harmlessness. Path-factors (3)-(5) are identical with the three > > abstinences. Right effort is the same as the four supreme efforts. > Right > > mindfulness is the same as the four foundations of mindfulness. > Right > > concentration is defined in terms of the four jhanas of the Suttanta > > system." =============== In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Connie (and Ken O., Htoo) - > > This commentary summary is very concise and should be read over > several times so that confusions concerning the true meanings of the > Path factors will be put to rest. > ========= Dear Tep and Connie, I am not sure if the comments by Venerable Bodhi should be considered so highly in this case. The section he is writing about in the Abhidhammathasangaha is detailing various momentary phenomena. It is true that one type of samma samadhi is mundane jhana but I see nowhere in the section to indicate that Anuruddha was restricting samma samadhi to this. In fact it seems unlikely he would be. The expositor PTS (translator :pe maung tin). P58. Triplets in the Matika "'leading to accumulation' are those states which go about severally arranging births and deaths in a round of of destiny like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer in a wall." "..leading to accumulation are those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth" It then defines these causes as "moral or immoral states". i.e akusala AND kusala. It notes that the way leading to dispersion is the Ariyan path (eightfactored path). There is then several chapters (total of 140 pages) that gives much details about the various types of kusala (wholesome consciousness). The last two chapters in this section explain all the different types of mundane Jhanas. Thus the mudane jhanas - although classified as samma samadhi are also classified as leading to accumulation (of rebirth). The start of the next chapter is where it discusses the eight-fold path that leads out of samsara. The Discourse on lokuttara (transendental). "He cultivates the Jhana means that he evolves, produces the ecstatic jhana of one momenatry flash of consciousness. because it goes forth from the world, from the round of rebirths, this is jhana called going out...This is not like that which is known as 'leading to accumulation' which heaps up and increases rebirths by the moral(kusala) consciousness of the three planes[. This type of jhana arises only for a flash and it is entirely different from mundane jhana. Part of the confusion about this subject is that many suttas are addressed to those monks who had mastery of jhana, they could enter and exit at will, many levels of jhana. They were the cream of the Buddha's disciples. And of these ones they can - immediately after exiting jhana- have awareness of the factors of teh various jhanas they were in. And so use jhana as a base for development of teh eightfold path leading out of samsara. According to the texts these most developed disciples can no longer exist. Another commenst on venerables Bodhi's translation of sammasankappa as right INTENTION. All these pali terms do not have exact english equivalents so there are always problems, but Intention seems an unfortunate choice of term for sankappa. Sankappa is the mental factor (cetasika) vitakka and Bodhi translates it as 'initial application' at times . So why use Intention? For cetana he uses volition. What is the difference between volition and Intention? RobertK 41731 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 10:47pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 116 - Concentration/ekaggataa (l) 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.6 Concentration (ekaggataa)] ***** Questions i Are ekaggatå and samådhi the same cetasika? ii Can there be samådhi with akusala citta? iii What is the difference between sammå-samådhi in samatha and sammå-samådhi in vipassanå? iv If we try to concentrate on sound is that the way to know sound as it is? ***** [Ch.6 Concentration(ekaggataa)finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 41732 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:15pm Subject: photo album and gmail accounts Hi Friends, Kel, thank you for putting your friendly pic in the photo album. I hope you don’t mind, but we’ve moved it into the album of members. Perhaps Kel can inspire others to follow his example. The album can be found on the homepage. http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst In a message of Christine’s, with her usual wit, she gives further information/advice: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/33141 She ends by saying: “We'd all love to see you! The albums remind me of the metta sutta ... "Whatever breathing beings there may be. No matter whether they are frail or firm, With none excepted, be they long or big Or middle-sized, or be they short or small Or thick, as well as those seen or unseen, Or whether they are dwelling far or near" .... we're all here in the dsg photo album! Come and join us! “ Metta, Sarah p.s “gmail.com” offer .............................. Hugo sent us a note off-list which I’m tagging on here – pls contact him OFF-LIST for any more info or an invitation. His add here should read 'at' gmail.com. Thx Hugo, for thinking of us. "Hugo" eklektik@g... >I have a few GMAIL invitations available and I would like to offer them to members of DSG. I think that GMAIL is an excellent tool to manage email conversations, specially for list as active as DSG. <…> More info: http://gmail.google.com/gmail/help/start.html The service is free, but you can not sign up, you need to be invited. If you think that it is proper to make this offer to the mailing list, please forward it to DSG, if not, no problem, no hard feelings (.....mmmmmm...what is hard?.....what are feelings?....., but I digress).< ======== 41733 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 11:30pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Tep, You asked if I thought a certain practice was right or wrong. I didn't make my answer clear enough. --------------------------- T: > Good points, although not totally convincing! Question #1: Were these lay-people sekha already? I don't think so, ----------------- I wanted to point out that the Dhamma was not a set of instructions we are expected to carry out. The audience to the Sekha-patipada Sutta were given a description of a certain type of ariyan learner and his accomplishments. Their role was to listen and learn. Some of them may have subsequently followed the way of samatha-vipassana and attained the psychic powers and insights described in the discourse. Others may have become 'liberated by wisdom alone' and so attained just the insights. In either case, they had to understand that there was no self at the helm - there were only conditioned dhammas. Some suttas describe the qualities of the Tathagata and the way of the Bodhisatta. Obviously, we are not expected to treat them as a set of instructions. I feel sure the same applies equally (but less obviously) to all suttas. --------------- T: > Further, if the patipada was supposed to be for disciples who were already sekha, then why did the Venerable Ananda talk about several mundane requisites below the Ariya's lokuttara level such as the following: --------------- As I have been trying to explain, I don't think it matters who the audience was. However, I like the points you have set out: -------------------------- > 1) "There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones has conviction, is convinced of the Tathagata's Awakening" --------------------------- Needless to say, you can't have conviction by deliberately choosing to have it. It comes with understanding. ----------------------------------- > 2) "... knows moderation in eating, is devoted to wakefulness..." ---------------------------------- These are not things that greedy, sleepy people can deliberately know and be devoted to. True moderation is an attribute of people who are established in virtue and who understand the benefits of moderation. --------------------------- > 3) " He feels shame at [the thought of engaging in] bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct". 4) "He feels concern for [the suffering that results from] bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, mental misconduct". 5) "He is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago." --------------------------- How can we control what we feel and what we remember? This is clearly not a set of instructions. ------------------------------- Question #2: Based on the above evidence, isn't it reasonable for us to be self-confident enough to think that the Sekha Patipada is also a great path for lay-Buddhists with strong conviction (like us) to follow ? -------------------------------- I am tempted to say that the way of bare insight would suit me better, but that brings in the idea of self. The key is to understand the Dhamma: the rest will follow naturally. Ken H 41734 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Cetasikas'- Concentration/ekaggataa (e) Hi Ken O, I think you give a very good summary here – just as I understand: --- Ken O wrote: > > Hi Nina and Sarah > > A Sujin is right manodvaravajjana is just a mind door adverting, it > is ahetu, kusala and akusala only happens in javana process, that is > why kamma for the next rebirth also arise until it is completely cut > off by enlightement. Yoniso can be said the function of two > cetasikas, the manisikara as well as panna. When cetasika arise in a > kusala citta, so many cetasika arise, it is like a broil, I think > only Buddha and some other Arahants could pinpoint them but that also > must be in another thought process because when it is arisen, the > object is not the kusala javana cittas but the object of the kusala > javana cittas that it is paying attention to as citta cannot cognize > itself. > > The arisen of kusala citta must be condition by accumulations just > like the arisen of akusala citta must be conditioned by latency. … S: Well put. There’s wise (yoniso) attention with all kusala cittas. In the context of satipatthana or vipassana, panna is definitely there too as you say. Metta, Sarah ======== 41735 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 134 and Tiika Dear Nina, This set of notes with all your extra comments and detail on phassa (contact) was very good - especially as there has been so much discusion on this topic. The similes are very helpful too: --- nina wrote: > > Vis. XIV, 134 and Tiika > The Tiika refers to a simile taken from the ŒQuestions of Milinda¹ (I, > 60) > about two hands that are clapping against each other, comparing their > collision with contact. The Expositor (p. 144) elaborates on this, > stating > that one hand represents the eye, the other hand visible object and > their > collision contact. It also mentions the simile of two rams that fight > and > two cymbals that are struck. These similes illustrate that contact has > the > characterisits of touch and the function of impact when it arises in a > sense-door process. The Expositor explains that contact arising in a > mind-door process only has the characteristic of touch, not the function > of > impact. In the mind-door process there is not the impact of ruupa on > another > ruupa, the sense-base. > We have to remember that phassa is mental, no matter whether it arises > in a > sense-door process or a mind-door process. The Tiika adds that contact > of > the citta with the object should be seen as only cetasika dhamma. Thus, > phassa is cetasika, it is mental. .... S: I particularly like the one about the two hands clapping - representing the eye-base and the visible object and the contact as they come together. Also the two rams fighting. As you stress, it's important to remember that the contact in the Tipitaka always refers to *mental* contact, the cetasika accompanying the seeing consciousness (and other cittas) which experience the visible object in this case. Lots of good reminders in your India series from the discussions too: "The purpose of the teachings is not to stop thinking, clinging to persons or worrying about them, but to understand such moments as dhammas arising because of their own conditions." Metta, Sarah ======== 41736 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Pilgrimage India / Sarah Hi Phil, All the comments in your reply to me were right on target too, I thought. Always a pleasure to read your posts. --- Philip wrote: > > Ph: "Signs and details" - that comes up in the suttas, doesn't it. > I think dwelling on signs and details is the condition of the > hindrances and so much akusala. So we need to get at the essence of > things. The elements. Easier said than done, of course. ... Hope you get the 'sun-filled classromm with charming students' for the next session. I can relate very easily to your examples;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 41737 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Howard (James & All), You raised many good points in your post to me on the Honeyball Sutta. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > It seems to me that whenever the topic is "concepts", all sorts > of > language-use problems come to the fore. … S: I think so too. Lots of tangles and overgrowth to clear before one can see what the fundamental differences (if any) really are. .... > > >James: Concepts are conditioned by the mind's tendency to mental > > >proliferation (In Pali: Papanca). From SN 18 "The Honeyball": > > >"Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The > > >meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there > > >is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one > > >perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one > > >mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as > > >the source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation > > >beset a man with respect to past, future, and present forms > > >cognizable through the eye. > > >(…Continued for the other sense spheres). … > > S: Good sutta to quote in this context. > > > > What I understand to be conditioned are the dhammas (realities) such <…> > > Howard: > I don't think this matter is so simple. In part there is the > question > of the Pali involved and its English translation. For starters, what > *exactly* > are "perceptions and notions"? … S: I’m referring to notes given by the Nanamoli/Bodhi transl: ‘perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferations’ (papa~nca-sa~n~na-sankhaa). “The commentaries identify the springs of this proliferation as the three factors-craving, conceit, and views- [S: wrong views of course here] on account of which the mind ‘embellishes’ experience by interpreting it in terms of ‘mine’, ‘I’, and ‘my self’.” S: In other words, we are again referring to the perversions of sanna, citta and ditthi. Such thinking with perverted remembrance and view, such as taking what is not self for self, what is impermanent for permanent and so on refer to various cittas and cetasikas. As the translators point out, papa~nca is close in meaning to ma~n~nanaa (conceiving) which we read about in the Mulapariyaya Sutta. “The Pali verb ‘conceives’ (ma~n`nati), from the root man, ‘to think,’ is often used in the Pali suttas to mean distortional thinking – thought that ascribes to its object characteristics and a significance derived not from the object itself, but from its own subjective imaginings……According to the commentaries, the activity of conceiving is governed by three defilements, which accounts for the different ways it comes to manifestation – craving (ta.nhaa), conceit (maana), and views (di.t.thi). “MA paraphrases this text (M1) thus: ‘Having perceived earth [S: the rupa, pathavi (hardness/solidity/earth] with a perverted perception, the ordinary person afterwards conceives it – construes or discriminates it – through the gross proliferating tendencies (papa~nca) of craving, conceit, and views, which are here called ‘conceivings’…He apprehends it in diverse ways contrary [to reality].” Back to the expression, ‘perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferations’ (papa~nca-sa~n~na-sankhaa), apparently ‘MA (the commentary) glosses ankhaa by ko.t.thaasa, ‘portion’, and says that sa~n`naa is either perception associated with papa~nca or papa~nca itself.’ I can’t comment further on the Pali terms, but I certainly understand that the sutta is discussing various paramattha dhammas …. H: >Perceptions sound like the products of > sa~n~na, which may make them (relatively) elementary ideas or > proto-ideas, and > notions sound like full-blown ideas, which are alleged products of > sankharic > processing. … S: The perceptions are definitely referring to sa~n~na itself. From a note in Nanamoli’s ms: “…Feeling and perception are inseparable (MN43:9). What is perceived as ‘this’ is thought about in its differences and is thus diversified from ‘that’ and from ‘me’. This diversification – involving craving for form, wrong view about permanence of form, etc, and the conceit ‘I am’ – leads to preoccupation with calculating the desirability of past and present forms with a view to obtaining desirable forms in the future.” … H: >I personally have no problem with the idea of such mental > constructs as > proto-ideas and ideas any more than that of feelings and emotions. My > only > hesitation is that as I examine the thinking process, I never can seem > to find > these. I only seem to vaguely sense them. Of course this may be a defect > in the > degree of detail I can pick up due to lack of fineness and intensity of > attention and mindfulness. …. S: Good points. Even if there is no awareness of sanna or no differentiation of sanna and thinking, we know it must be there, arising with each citta and marking its object, whether in a wholesome or unwholesome way or neither, such as when there is seeing or hearing and it just marks the visible object or sound. As I mentioned to Phil, if there’s just a moment or two of awareness,a t that moment (whether of seeing, visible object or thinking, for example) the attending to ‘signs and details’ and all the various stories and proliferations about past, future and so on, stop momentarily. And then, as he said, it continues again as usual;-). …. H:> Sarah, under proliferations you include wrong view as a nama. > What > kind of paramattha dhamma do you mean by that exactly? The usual sense > of the > English 'wrong view' is a kind of incorrect *concept* or *notion* or > *idea*. But > if these are nonexistent, then what *is* wrong view? … S: In the texts, wrong view is usually just referred to as di.t.thi. It’s a mental factor that arises with some cittas rooted in lobha (attachment). It’s eradicated at the stage of stream-entry. It grasps its object wrongly. For example, when we think we really see a computer, there is wrong view arising at that moment as well as perversion of sanna and citta. If we just feel attached to the computer but without any view about it, then no wrong view arises with the attachment and other perversions. [see ‘wrong view’ in U.P. for more] > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Now here, when you speak of "the objects of the proliferations" > we get > close to another problem in "concept language", namely the systematic > conflating of alleged mental phenomena (the momentary, mind-constructed > phenomena <…> > --------------------------------------- S: For example, the concept of computer is the object of thinking at such a moment. This is regardless of whether or not there are a bunch of rupas which make up what we call computer. What is seen is visible object, what is touched is hardness, what is thought about or imagined is a computer, with or without any wrong view, attachment or conceit. …. > > >131 "A Single Excellent Night": > > > > > >Let not a person revive the past > > >Or on the future build his hopes; > > >For the past has been left behind > > >And the future has not been reached. > > >Instead with insight let him see > > >Each presently arisen state; 1212 <..> > > S: the Pali for state is dhamma. Each dhamma (nama and rupa) to be > seen > > with insight (vipassanaa) at the present moment. > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > The problem with that reading, as I see it, Sarah, is that in the > > suttas the Buddha often uses 'dhamma' the way we informally use 'thing' > in > everyday English. That makes it not trivially determinable in which > sense the Buddha > is using 'dhamma' in a particular context. Sometime it is clear that he > means > khandhic elements, and sometimes not. > -------------------------------------- S: I agree it depends on the context. But whenever it’s in the context of vipassanaa or satipatthana, it always refers to dhammas (realities or paramattha dhammas) which is usally the case. [See ‘Dhamma-meanings in U.P. for more perhaps] Interestingly, as this sutta is also being discussed, in a continuation of Nanamoli’s note above to the Honeyball Sutta, he adds: “Perhaps the key to the interpretation of this passage (quoted above by James) is Ven Mahaa Kaccaana’s explanation of the Bhaddekeratta verses in MN133. There too delight in the elements of cognition plays a prominent role in causing bondage, and the elaboration of the verses in terms of the three periods of time links up with the reference to the three times in this sutta.” S: Wahtever we read, the stress is on understanding and being aware of present namas and rupas, khandhas, dhatus (elements) etc. These are the only *existing* dhammas. This is why concepts about the past or future can never be the object of insight. … > Howard: > Now here I see two problematical things going on. > One of them is attempting to say something meaningful about a > non-existent! If there are no such things as concepts, then there are no > concepts that > that are objects of anything. … S: In an absolute sense, nothing meaningful can be said about concepts as they are non-existent or merely thought about. Whatever is imagined, it is only the thinking and accompanying mental factors that are real at such a time and can be directly understood. This post is already long and I have to go out. So I’ll leave it here, but please repost any of your further comments if they haven’t been addressed. Metta, Sarah ====== 41738 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Thu Feb 3, 2005 10:36pm Subject: The Cause of Enlightenment ... !!! Friends: Step by Step Towards Mental Perfection: Question: What is the Cause of perfect Enlightening Release through Knowledge ? Answer: Understanding is the Cause of Enlightening Release through Knowledge ! Question: What then is the Cause of this profound & discriminating Understanding ? Answer: The Seven Links to Awakening is the Cause of such deep Understanding ! Question: What then is the Cause of these advantageous Seven Links to Awakening ? Answer: The 4 Foundations of Awareness is Causing the Seven Links to Awakening ! Question: What then is the Cause of these essential Four Foundations of Awareness ? Answer: The 10 acts of Right Mental, Verbal, & Bodily Behaviour is the proximate Cause of these fundamental Four Foundations of Awareness ! Question: What then is the Cause of such Right Mental, Verbal, & Bodily Behaviour ? Answer: Control of the Senses is Causing Right Mental, Verbal, & Bodily Behaviour ! Question: What then is the capable Cause of such powerful Control of the Senses ? Answer: Awareness & Clear Comprehension is such Cause of Control of the Senses ! Question: What then is the Cause of such acute Awareness & Clear Comprehension ? Answer: Rational Attention is the Cause of this Awareness & Clear Comprehension ! Question: What then is the Cause of Rational Attention towards the origin of phenomena ? Answer: The Faith & Confidence of Conviction is the Cause of such Rational Attention ! Question: What then is the Cause of the Faith & Confidence of such solid Conviction ? Answer: Hearing & Reading this True & Exact Buddha-Dhamma is Causing such Faith ! Question: What then is the Cause of access to such very True & Exact Buddha-Dhamma ? Answer: Following that Very Good Man is the Cause of Hearing such Buddha-Dhamma ! Yeah, following that Very Man is thee cause... Source: The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha: Anguttara Nikaya V [114-5] http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=204050 Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma Dhamma-Questions sent to my email are quite Welcome. 41739 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 5:09am Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Ken H. - > > KH: > > How would you have responded had you been one of the merchants > > mentioned in the suttas (I think I can find the exact sutta if you > > want): They asked the Buddha how they should live their lives, and > > his answer was, ""As to the teaching of the Tathagata, profound, > > deep in meaning, concerned with anatta . . ., from time to time we > > shall spend our days learning it." That is how you should live your > > lives > > T: This sutta deserves a careful study, Ken. If you can give the title and > reference (e.g. MN, AN, or whatever, with the number) then I would be > thankful. My opinion based on the above quote is that merchants those > days traveled a lot and did not have time (or strong saddha) to > practice earnestly. Therefore, they only had to slowly and occasionally > chew the Teachings (that are profound/deep in meaning/concerned > with anatta) and be contented at that level of study. > ============= Dear tep, The 500 Merchants were all sotapanna and praised by the Buddha 'It is well gained by you, Dhammadina!You have gained the fruit of stream entry'. In fact when the Buddha suggested that they should study such profound suttas the leader Dhammadina protested that this was difficult 'it is not easy for us dwelling in a home crowded with chidren, enjoying sandlwood (perfumes) , ..receiving gold and silver to from time to time to enter and dwell uopn those discourse that are deep, deep in meaning..' RobertK 41740 From: Philip Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 5:17am Subject: Re: Q. Pilgrimage India /Nina Hi Sarah, and all Continuing with your kind post, Sarah. > We may feel discouraged or fear that without taking special actions that > we will just become meaner and have less metta or even really 'go to the > dogs', so to speak. I think the opposite is true. With less thought or > concern about oneself or one's mental states and more understanding about > all dhammas, there is the development of higher sila, generosity, metta, > understanding of others and so on in addition to satipatthana. We learn > more and more about what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'. "We learn more and more about what is 'right' and 'wrong.'" I like that. It takes such a very long time, but the understanding arises. We don't need to panic and fight off unwholesome mental states - we can see them for what they are. (I always use "we" so loosely. I think of people in general to take the focus off myself.) THere should be abandoning of them, of course - it's one of the right efforts. But it's not a matter of responding with revulsion and flinging them away whenever they arise. We'll never learn that way. The lotus grows in the mud and produces a beautiful, pristine flower eventually. > [We read in a sutta somewhere that it's only by living closely with > someone for a long time that one will really know their sila. In this > regard I'm very fortunate to live with a model example of someone who has > never even hinted at the need for any special intentions or efforts to > `do?Eanything and yet who has always kept excellent sila in all regards > since I've known him with great confidence in all kinds of kusala.] Interesting! Have you introduced this fellow to Jon? haha Seriously, it's interesting. Sila that has arisen consistently in a person without any intentional effort or practices. Who knows why this happens? I always say "accumulations" because I don't know the proper technical language any deeper than that, but it is interesting. If there is no self, and no control over cittas, why do some people have such consistently wholesome characters? For about 15 years I have again and again and again and again and again (X500) made resolutions and tried to break unwholesome habits and have made such marginal progress. Whereas this fellow you live with has fallen into consistent sila without quite as much effort. Of course, this is not to disparage myself or praise him. In absolute terms, there is just nama and rupa. And there is no saying that there is not past kamma that will see him reborn as a ferret and me as a Deva King! But interesting how some people are consistently wholesome and others stuggle in vain to be. Seeing how it is really beyond my control helps me to relax, and relaxing will help in conditioning kusala. Not too much relaxing, of course. But not straining to achieve sila either. Middle way. BTW, this could again relate to the hetus (roots), as I mentionned in a post to Joop about annica. How (as I learned in "Roots of GOod and Evil") some people are more strongly rooted in greed (lobha) for example. I think that's the case for me, thus my efforts to kick unwholesome greed-related habits is so hard, so futile. For the fellow you live with, perhaps not as hard, and that could have to do with predominances in hetus? Metta, Phil 41741 From: Philip Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 5:31am Subject: Re: Wrong concentration (miccha samadhi)/phil Hi Rob > Just got back from an Onsen, nice soaking outside while the snow > came down lightly. > And as good as any time to contemplate that death can happen at any > moment- > Contemplation of death goes together with contemplation of anatta > and then it is wonderfully calming and encouraging. Yes, I know what you mean. Because there is confidence at those moments. But I often think that it is one think to contemplate death and anatta when one is having a pleasant time, and is healthy, and it would be different if one were in a hospital bed suffering from a painful terminal disease. That would be the test to see if could still be calming. I think it would be for you. I sensed such strong confidence in you when we met and talked. For me, not yet. > Death is of three types - momentary (khanika) that is happening > every instant, conventional - when we die to this human life. And > the final death of the arahant when there is no more rebirth. Interesting. I didn't know that there was a term for this momentary death. Understanding - even in theory - that there is this momentary death puts the conventional death in perspective. There is already less clinging. I like in something Nina wrote the other day - when there is hearing, life is a moment of hearing. And so on. It really is very liberating. > With maranasati we are talking about the death which is waiting at > the end of this brief human life, maybe tommorow or tonight. > It goes together intimately with understanding the aggregates and > khandhas because there is no self who dies, and the khandhas are > like murderers waiting for their chance. This reminds me that I have come to have a somewhat better understanding why these similes are used for the khandas - you might remember that I wondered why we bother with such dramatic similes. > It is a skill that needs time and practice and is not something to > force but if you have the interest you may find it a theme that is > refuge in times of trouble and a restrainer in times of > exhilaration. Well said. Metta, Phil 41742 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 2/4/05 12:25:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "Awareness of an experience is not much of anything > - it is just the momentary existing of the experience." > > Hi Howard, > > I agree. I wouldn't even say "awareness of" except in the sense of > "perception of" (sanna). As for dosa being a consciousness maybe Nina > could say something. > > I've changed my mind about rupa. However anyone wants to think about it, > I'm agreeable. Convention is an agreement and agreement makes a > convention. And convention is wonderfully empty. > > Larry > ======================= Interesting, Larry. I wouldn't *quite* say that I've changed my mind on this matter, at least not in the sense of expressing my perspective in different words, but what is very true is that what you have put forward has had a subtle effect on my perspective, and has enabled me to see what is what perhaps a bit more clearly. In a way, I think our takes on this matter are actually very close if we could only get past the matter of formulation! ;-)) 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) 41743 From: Andrew Levin Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 8:23am Subject: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Reply to Message 41118 of 41267 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messagesearch/41162? query=abhidhamma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > <..> > > So is self view necessarily wrong view, that is, it comprises wrong > > view with whatever type of citta there is? > …. > S: Self view and associated wrong views just arise with particular kinds > of cittas rooted in attachment. Like all other cittas, they arise > momentarily, in this case with a wrong idea or marking of the object, and > then fall away. I must agree with another posted who said that the notion of self is so ingrained in our pycho-physical organism that we operate based on it, and that attempts to cultivate sati can be successful even while using it. I am assuming that the wrong views you are talking about are less significant than the self-nature we operate day by day by. It is good to recognize there is no self, but if we use the term 'one' or 'person' we should clarify as to how far one can cultivate sati from 'normal self-view' as I will call self-view that stays until supramundane paths, or how much one has to give up control completely and merely wait for the conditions for sati to arise, or to step back with detachment on it. If one of the conditions is to read, study, or discuss dhamma, I would say that that's still operating with normal self-view, and that's on par with cultivating sati intentionally. I haven't tried detachment and allowing sati to arise on its own, instead, any (or most all) sati, or non-conceptual awareness, I've had has been cultivated through the practise of meditation. I am still somewhat interested in how we can work with consciousnesses not rooted in the 'lower' self-view but I still think there can be progress with the ones that are -- if you study dhamma, are you doing it with the idea "I should study dhamma to support conditions for sati" or "This is (my/Sarah's) book."? It seems we can generate the conditions for sati, but I'd like to hear your take on whether or not it is mostly uncontrollable (if it is uncontrollable, why do we, who are interested in the BuddhaDhamma experience it, but others do not? It seems only because of what we actually do, same with the paramis IMO.) This may seem like a hard- line stance but it is in accordance with my experience. Still, I would like to hear about cittas with wrong view of self and their significance in how our practise unfolds. > > As Nina just wrote: > "Our accumulated lobha, attachment, and wrong view, ditthi, cause us to > cling to wrong practice." > > …. > S: If we understand that particular conditions will lead to the arising of > wholesome states such as sati, this is right. If we really think that > `we', Andrew and Sarah can cultivate or develop sati, then it's wrong. Let > me know if I've missed part of your question here. Can't "we" or "you" do anything to put in place the conditions to cultivate sati, even if you do it without a lower level self belief (consciousness with wrong view), or even with consciousness without wrong view? In other words, can't we practise sati still with the higher self-view, to say nothing of the lower self-view. > >Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you're trying to have > > view of one nama or rupa at a time, you still think of yourself as a > > 'person,' or 'Sarah Abbott' that goes through day to day recognizing > > one nama, one rupa. > …. > S: You're right. When you or I are trying to do anything or trying to have > a particular view or to understand one nama or rupa at a time, it's till > `me', `Sarah' or `Andrew' at work, a lurking wrong view conditioned by > attachment and ignorance. It's really good (imho) that this is making > sense. So at these moments, that trying or thinking or attachment can be > known. That is the present nama. But what about ultimate realities? Can't these be legitimately known, too? Also, which type of wrong view do you assert for this occasion? I'd be really interested to know. > …. > >Similarly I think I can get to understand how the > > four foundations of mindfulness are properly practised, and practise > > them. I don't see why this can't be practised with 'right view' that > > there is no self if this is to be understood. Maybe you could > > describe exactly what wrong view of self is, if you still disagree. > …. > S: Self-view can be very subtle and can sneak in anytime. One moment, > there can be awareness naturally of a nama or rupa appearing and the next > moment a trying to repeat it, trying to understand or label or practice, > all with an idea of self. Anytime there's the idea that it's `my' > awareness or that "I' can be aware, or this body is mine and so on, it's > self view. (See in U.P. under `sakkaya-ditthi' for much more). It has to > be the object of awareness and understanding to be seen for what it is. > > Let me know if you want me to say more. I can give lots of examples, like > anytime there is an idea of following a practice….!! Yes, please. In particular this bit came to my attention: SN 22-01 "There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well- versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration. Now I know there is a sutta out there, or in somewhere,, that discusses knowing the three types of feeling, and abandoning the underlying tendency to lust, aversion, and ignorance respectively in pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling. This to me seems a direct way to practise that is in accord with the satipatthana method of practise.. it reminds me too, of Joe Goldstein's 'One Dharma' in which he talked about contemplation of feeling for ending agitation and realizing nibbana, and exercises in a practise guide I have for observing feelings one day at a time that occur at each of the six sense doors, presumably, as they occur. This is in accord with my understanding of how to practise. > …. > > OK, now talk to me on a level of how you start out with wrong view of > > self, what this is superficially at the top level, and how you get > > down to eliminating it as a fetter completely. > …. > S: OK: Top Level:"If I sit and concentrate on the breath or body, > awareness, calm and understanding will grow". And you are saying this institutes wrong practise? If this can logically be expected to work (that is, it is sound instruction), I see nothing wrong with it. I have had at least awareness, and possilby calm grow from doing precisely that (concentrating on breath while sitting). > > Another Top Level: "I have to be aware and control my life so that later > Self will be eliminated" So youre saying self-view can't lead to eradication of self-view. But perhaps it can? Can we bring out some more examples here of how this might or might not work? Perhaps you have it right that one shouldn't try to control one's own life but if one 'goes with the flow' and tries to develop understanding of ultimate realities which he will later experience this can lead to benefits of practise. > > Another one: "You and I can eliminate this fetter". > > As I say, by understanding dhammas when they are experienced, firstly as > namas and rupas, not people or things, gradually the fetters will be > lessened and eventually eradicated, but without any Self's intervention. > Such understanding has to be with detachment which doesn't mind at all > what is experienced right now. Mhm detachment. Not minding what is experienced. These are for the good, but they can still be done with the idea of person. A person can understand that painful feeling isnt to be reacted to, that there is merely painful feeling or aversion, without identifying with the pain, just knowing its sensation, no? Personally, I am thinking I want to understand the different types of realities that can be understood so I can recognize them in, well, daily life. But this is only the course of my practise right now. I still like to follow a practise guide or the Maha-satipatthana sutta to sort of have a gameplan for which and when each reality is to be understood. Bordering here on control, there's an e-book on Buddhanet.net called "Knowing and seeing" wherein the author gives suggestions for doing meditation on the four elements based on identifying one segment of the body as made up of a certain element and then trying to identify that element throughout other parts of the body. He then says that this is only an outline of practise, real practise is deeper still. [vinnana skahndha] > … > > Ooh. Makes sense. So citta is the object of citta at moments where > > there is a lack of hearing, seeing, etc, and the consciousness that > > adverts it to the appropriate sense door. > … > S: Through the sense doors (i.e seeing, hearing and the following cittas), > the object is always a rupa, eg visible object, sound etc. Through the > mind-door (i.e when there is no seeing, hearing and following cittas etc), > the object can be either a) the same rupa just experienced through the > sense door, b) the citta which has just fallen away, c) a cetasika which > has just fallen away or d) most commonly, a concept or idea. > > When we are talking about satipatthana, the object can only be a reality, > i.e a), b) or c) above, but not d). I suggest you don't get too bogged > down in the Abhidhamma details. It's enough to know that there can be > awareness now of any reality appearing by conditions. Seeing is real, > hearing is real, like, dislike and so on are real and can be directly > known. I know understand what vinnana is. Is the latter similar to contemplating on the six external and internal sense bases? > …. > > Man, it's been so long since I've had the sati to be aware of > > thinking. That kind of sati required hours a day of meditation. > … > S: No. It doesn't require hours of anything. Right now, as we speak, there > is thinking. It's not you or me, it's just a conditioned nama. Awareness > can arise anytime and then gone. Nothing to cling on to or to try and have > arise. Very, very ordinary. The Buddha talks about how a monk possesses mindfulness and full awareness in all postures whether talking or remaining silent, going forward or backwards, even attending to calls of nature. How are we supposed to acheive this if we can't cultivate sati or awareness? It's fleeting otherwise. [snip] > So, let sati develop naturally by understanding what namas are and what > rupas are in the first place. Intellectual understanding of the general concepts or the ability to recognize each nama or rupa for what it is? > …. > > Man, I am all for non-conceptual awareness. It's been what is lacking > > in my life for over a year now. Now what is the characteristic of > > awareness, what conditions it? > …. > S: Not just a year. It's been lacking for aeons of lifetimes. I think it > shows some understanding to even see how it's lacking. Mostly we take > conceptual awareness for being sati, when it's merely thinking. > > If we've never heard about these dhammas, the khandhas , the namas and > rupas, there is no possibility for awareness to develop. Awareness has the > characteristic of just being aware momentarily of one of these realities > when it appears. At that moment, there is no idea of `me' doing anything > or trying or of any label or body or thing. Just `seeing' or `hearing' or > `feeling' or `sound' or any other dhamma. > > In the beginning it's bound to be so weak and infrequent and it's bound to > be followed by doubt, attachment, wrong view and other unwholesome states. > Gradually understanding can begin to know when awareness arises and what > its characteristic is, so that it can really develop, but not by any > wishing or wanting. I wish I could understand this, but it still seems conditioned by other factors. For example, in Ayya Khema's "Who is My Self?" she talks about this section of Potthapada Sutta (DN 9): <<(Mindfulness & Alertness) "And how is a monk possessed of mindfulness and alertness? When going forward and returning, he acts with alertness. When looking toward and looking away... when bending and extending his limbs... when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe, and his bowl... when eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting... when urinating and defecating... when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, and remaining silent, he acts with alertness. This is how a monk is possessed of mindfulness and alertness. >> She then lists the four foundations of mindfulness in short, that is, being aware of your step "both figuratively and literally" [that is, body and mind], using clear comprehension of whatever one is doing, whether it is beneficial, speaking with clear comprehension. She then says putting mindfulness on the body and exercising it in daily life is key to having mindfulness in meditation. If there is none in one, there is none in the other, the two go hand in hand. So, she says, just putting one's attention can create mindfulness and awareness. I have had that mindfulness of the body and it felt like a great burden was lifted at the end of the day, sort of the opposite of how people talk about how they feel like the have a big hole in themselves to fill, well I felt a great burden had been lifted off my chest. I cannot get constant mindfulness and full awareness though. My awareness comes through very strongly at certain times, even lighting up everything in the visible parts of the room, when I am sitting at my desk. I would say this means mindfulness and awareness can be cultivated to an extent, but perhaps there is also some truth in your statement that knowing nama and rupa can condition further sati, because that is what she suggests, knowing body, mood, emotion, thinking processes, all nama and rupa. If only I could have it in all postures at all the time. One of my friends suggests taht it appears when I am not wrapped up in something.. it can come in at some very odd times. Anyway, your take on this would be appreciated. > …. > > Well, I've tried (to cultivate it in one session), and had it manifest > > itself throughout the day, but I'm not sure of this point. It seems > > like I could have had more knowledge or mindfulness of the parts of > > the 'chariot' as its functions as a whole began to slow down. But > > maybe you are right? > … > ;-). The obstacle is this `trying to cultivate it', because it's motivated > by attachment and self-view. But that's Ok, they can be seen for what they > are when they arise too. When we appreciate that really any dhamma can be > known and can be the object of awareness, a huge burden (of wrong view) is > lifted and we can really begin to see that awareness can develop anytime > without any special efforts or sessions. Just of one nama & rupa at a time, or can knowing more nama and rupa condition even more mindfulness and awareness? It seems to me that the Buddha meant mindfulness and awareness for the monk to be present with every step he takes. > > Trying to slow down cittas or the arising of conditioned dhammas would be > another Top Level kind of self-view as I see it, with an idea of Self > being in charge which can only lead to dismay and great disturbance when > Self doesn't get his/her way. > Eh it wasn't even intentioned to do that, it's just something I noticed. You're right though, it didn't create more sati or awareness, but it felt like it would/could have. > Please ask for any clarifications and let me know if these comments make > sense to you. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s I'll also be glad to hear any feedback or different views from others > of course. Sorry for the long time between posts, will try to do better in the future. -a.l. 41744 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:24am Subject: Dhamma Thread (259) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 kinds of rebirth or 4 kinds or patisandhi. One is rupa- patisandhi or 'rebirth in fine material realms'. And there are 4 kinds of bhumi or 4 kinds of realm or 4 kinds of plane of existence. One is rupa bhuumi or fine material realms. These 4 patisandhis or 4 rebirths have the same names of 4 kinds of bhumi or 4 kinds of realm or 4 kinds of plane of existence. So there are rupa bhumis (fine material realms) and rupa patisandhi or rebirth in these fine material realms. Even though there is similarity in name there is a difference. That is there are 16 rupa bhumis or 16 fine material realms while there are 6 rupa patisandhi or 6 rebirths in fine material realms. These 6 patisandhi or 6 rebirths are 5 rupavipaka cittas ( so there are 5 rupa nama-patisandhi ) and 1 rupa rupa-patisandhi. This rupa- patisandhi is rebirth with material only and there is no mental component at all. Other 5 rupa nama-patisandhi or 5 fine material percipient-rebirths are rebirth with 5 rupavipaka cittas. 5th jhana rupavipaka citta is the rebirth consciousness or linking consciousness of vehapphala realm and 5 pure abodes. 4th jhana rupavipaka citta is the rebirth consciousness or linking consciousness of 3 realms of 3rd jhana rupa bhumi. 3rd jhana rupavipaka citta and 2nd jhana rupavipaka citta are patisandhi cittas or rebirth consciousness or linking consciousness of 3 realms of 2nd jhana rupa bhumis. 1st jhana rupavipaka citta is patisandhi citta or rebirth consciousness or linking consciousness of 3 realms of 1st jhana rupa bhumi. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41745 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:40am Subject: Dhamma Thread (260) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4th rebirth or 4th patisandhi and 4th bhumi or 4th realm or 4th plane of existence left. All other patisandhi or rebirths and all other realms or planes of existence have been discussed. The 4th patisandhi or 4th rebirth is rebirth in non-material realms or arupa patisandhi. There are 4 kinds of arupa patisandhi or 4 kinds of non-material rebirth. They are 4.n'eva-sanna-nasanna-ayatana patisandhi or 'neither-perception-nor-non-perception rebirth' 3.aakincinna-ayatana patisandhi or 'nothingness rebirth' 2.vinnananca-ayatana patisandhi or 'boundless-consciousness rebirth' 1.aakaasananca-ayatana patisandhi or 'boundless-space rebirth' They are nothing but vipaka cittas that are resulted from arupa jhana. There are 4 arupa jhanas. They are 1.akasanancayatana arupa jhana (boundless-space) 2.vinnanancayatana arupa jhana (boundless-consciousness) 3.akincinnayatana arupa jhana (nothingness) 4.nevasannanasannayatana arupa jhana(neither perception-nor- nonperception) These 4 arupa jhanas are called arupa kusala cittas when they are being developed by beings as javana cittas or mental impulsive consciousness. Because of these mental actions of arupa jhanas there have to arise as arupavipaka citta. When these arupavipaka cittas arise as the first time in a life they are called patisandhi citta and later they are called bhavanga cittas and when they last arise they are called cuti citta in arupa brahma. These vipaka cittas cannot arise in other beings except non-material beings or arupa brahmas. Again as there are 4 arupa patisandhis or rebirths there have to be 4 arupa bhumi or 4 arupa realms or 4 non-material realms or 4 non- material plane of existence. They are 4. nevasanna-nasanna-ayatana bhumi or realm of neither-perception nor-non-perception. 3. akincinnayatana bhumi or realm of nothingness 2. vinnanancayatana bhumi or realm of boundless-consciousness 1. akasanancayatana bhumi or realm of boundless-space May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41746 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 11:47am Subject: Re: for James Dear Robertk and Tep, Thanks for the Expositor quotes, Robert. To go back to MN 117 / Great Forty, it also says that there are both the mundane and noble factors or "twenty factors siding with skillfulness, and twenty with unskillfulness". That is, as I read it, even kusala kamma is bricklaying and no kamma is noble kamma. Some bricks are higher quality but they're still basically dirt with various kinds and amounts of impurities. I don't know why the Venerable Bodhi uses 'intention' for sankappa / vitakka / 'initial application' but guess cetana / volition is the volatile element that fires up the other mental factors / cetasikas to come together in our brick making and vitakka is in charge of 'intending' the focus or direction of the heat but that it's for naught if isn't applied to some effort or purpose. MN 117 (ATI) again: "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort" and "In one of right view, wrong view is abolished. The many evil, unskillful qualities that come into play with wrong view as their condition are also abolished, while the many skillful qualities that have right view as their condition go to the culmination of their development." I don't see any factor called 'choice' but I try to make one anyway and it seems that right view, beginning with the mundane intellectual variety, must be the foundation. Or, wimpy hod carrier I am, it's only that cornerstone I really need to concern myself with and the rest will just fall into place like magic; the sutta does say they all just "run and circle around" each other and "right view is the forerunner". When it ever gets to the point that my view turns into the super-right 'view' of the arahant, I'll really see how all compounded things are impermanent when all the defilements are finally exhausted and the whole structure collapses for the last time. That the other bricks just fall into place depending on view, right or wrong, seems much the same as saying satipatthana or 5-fold development is the 'only' or 'direct' way, I think. Like anything else, the jhana factors will develop along the same lines as my understanding or whatever 'practice' / lifestyle I follow. For sure, they'll be there in their transcendent form to whatever extent they're needed whenever there's any ariyan bridge to cross. peace, connie 41747 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Dear RobertK, Nina and Ken H. - Thank you all for the background information you gave me on "the 500 Merchants". It was amazing how our Lord Buddha's Dhamma talks to them were so powerful that they all became sotapanna. (I wish I were that lucky!) RobertK: In fact when the Buddha suggested that they should study such profound suttas the leader Dhammadina protested that this was difficult 'it is not easy for us dwelling in a home crowded with chidren, enjoying sandlwood (perfumes) , ..receiving gold and silver to from time to time to enter and dwell uopn those discourse that are deep, deep in meaning..' Tep: So Dhammadina was in disbelief (like me) that the profound Dhamma would be transparent to them worldling merchants. But, without any doubt, they must already be endowed with unwavering confidence in the Triple Gem at the beginning. Nina (#41715): The Buddha knew that they were sotapannas and encouraged them to develop further. It is said that it was difficult for them to put up with the task. They lived their daily life with all the sense pleasures. But they could be mindful naturally and develop understanding. The Co states that several suttas were mentioned to them for study: the K.S. IV, about the unconditioned, and this is about the development of all the enlightenment factors. Beginning with mindfulness of the body. Actually, mindfulness of the body includes understanding of nama and rupa, not only rupa. Further the Moneyyasutta, Gradual Sayings I, 273, about the perfection through body, speech and mind. The last one is the attainment of arahatship. The sotapanna has perfected sila and the anagami has perfected samadhi, he naturally lives without sense pleasures, and thus he has great calm. The virtues of the ariyans lead to concentration. Thus, these sotapannas who had virtues untarnished, were encouraged to continue to develop understanding until arahatship. Tep: These Merchants must be the very rare kind of trade people (whose main concern is not money, money, and money) because the qualification "perfected sila" couldn't be achieved by just listening to the Great Sage: they had to earnestly train themselves for some time. And on top of the perfected sila foundation, they must have to develop the seven enlightenment factors and see through the Four Noble Truths! Kindest regards, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > 41748 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134, Howard. Hi Howard, op 03-02-2005 16:24 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Howard: > 1) I believe that every citta has an object (or objective content), > and I understand that to be a basic premiss of Abhidhamma. N: Yes. We do not have to call it Abhidhamma, it is real, we can verify it. H: 2) I believe that every rupa is, in itself, either pleasant, > unpleasant, or affectively neutral, and I understand that to be a basic > premiss of > Abhidhamma. N: Here we have to differentiate rupa and rupa as object. This may be difficult for phenomenologistici, I know. It is said of an *object* experienced by citta that it is pleasant (desirable) or unpleasant (undesirable), not neutral, even though it may seem so at times. When we just touch something that is not so hard, not so cold, we just do not know whether it is pleasant or not. Also when just seeing now, we cannot find out. but why should we? H: 3) Mindfulness and recognition are certainly cognitive operations, but > by 'awareness' I understand "vi~n~nana", and I do not believe that an > instance of vi~n~nana can take itself as object. N: I understood rightly that you mean by awareness viññaa.na, and that is O.K. Yes, 3 is correct. A citta cannot know itself, seeing cannot know, I am seeing, it just sees. It only experiences visible object. L: Btw, how do you know rupa is different from consciousness? > Howard: > That's how it appears to me. ... (snipped) > I've based some of what I have said on this topic on what I *believe* > Abhidhamma to assert. N: Yes, it is clear what you say. Sometimes you use a different wording to explain something, but when you elaborate on what you mean by your words, it is clear. Like'consciousness', namely the experiential presence of a dhamma', it is unusual for my ears, but I know what you mean. We can verify that there are different dhammas appearing, but when there is no direct awareness yet of an element that experiences it is still "I' who is seeing, and we do not distinguish it from the rupa that appears. Nina. 41749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134 Hi Larry, Howard, op 04-02-2005 06:22 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > As for dosa being a consciousness maybe Nina > could say something. N: dosa is a cetasika, accompanying akusala citta. This was dealt with under the khandha of consciousness. Nina. 41750 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 8:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134, Howard. Hi, nina - In a message dated 2/4/05 3:09:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > It is said of an *object* > experienced by citta that it is pleasant (desirable) or unpleasant > (undesirable), not neutral, even though it may seem so at times. ------------------------------------ Howard: With regard to body sense, I understand that. But are not all visual objects neutral in feel, with subsequent mind-door objects possibly having non-neutral feel? ----------------------------------- > When we just touch something that is not so hard, not so cold, we just do > not know whether it is pleasant or not. > -------------------------------- Howard: Sure. This is a matter of confusion. --------------------------------- Also when just seeing now, we cannot> > find out. but why should we? > --------------------------------- Howard: Here I am not following you. ================= 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) 41751 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Vis. XIV, 134, Howard. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/4/05 3:09:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > N: Yes, it is clear what you say. Sometimes you use a different wording to > explain something, but when you elaborate on what you mean by your words, it > is clear. Like'consciousness', namely the experiential presence of a > dhamma', it is unusual for my ears, but I know what you mean. > ======================= Good, I'm glad that you do. BTW, part of the reason I use 'experiential presence' for 'consciousness' is to purposely not "make too much" of consciousness. I think there is a grave danger in turning mere awareness of something into a kind of self, entity, or agent. I also truly do think that the experiential presence of a phenomenon is exactly what consciousness of it amounts to, and that low-key terminology is a kind of protection against making a "thing" out of awareness. 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) 41752 From: Philip Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 2:03pm Subject: Predominant roots? (was Re: Q. Pilgrimage India /Nina Hi all I wrote this to Sarah yesterday: > BTW, this could again relate to the hetus (roots), as I mentionned > in a post to Joop about annica. How (as I learned in "Roots of GOod > and Evil") some people are more strongly rooted in greed (lobha) for > example. I think that's the case for me, thus my efforts to kick > unwholesome greed-related habits is so hard, so futile. For the > fellow you live with, perhaps not as hard, and that could have to do > with predominances in hetus? First of all, I'd like to change that "futile." The Buddha teaches us in a very stirring sutta that we all know that is *is* possible to abandon the unwholesome and cultivate the wholesome - otherwise he wouldn't teach us. My point is that we are dealing with very strong forces that make it much more difficult than we might think. Second, I'd like to ask you all what you know about or think of this teaching that different roots are more dominant in some people than others. Does it appear often in the suttanta and commentaries? I think it's very interesting. Metta, Phil 41753 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 3:50pm Subject: Re: for James Dear Connie and RobertK, R: (message #41730) Another commenst on venerables Bodhi's translation of sammasankappa as right INTENTION. All these pali terms do not have exact english equivalents so there are always problems, but Intention seems an unfortunate choice of term for sankappa. Sankappa is the mental factor (cetasika) vitakka and Bodhi translates it as 'initial application' at times . So why use Intention? For cetana he uses volition. What is the difference between volition and Intention? T: Robert has very good eye - like that of an eagle -- and mind for detail. The word sankappa is a synonym to vitakka, a kind of thought like Connie has pointed out. Thus the straightforward translation for samma-sankappa is, without a question, 'right thought'. But Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi is too experienced and too wise to miss such a simple translation (that even a non-expert in Pali like me does not miss). So I think 'thought free from sensuous desire' (nekkhamma sankappa), for example, may not sound as serious and noble to him as 'intention, or volition for freedom from sensuous desire'. Besides, virtue as volition is "in one who fulfils the practice of duties" (VM I, 17). This is just my guess. C: Or, wimpy hod carrier I am, it's only that cornerstone I really need to concern myself with and the rest will just fall into place like magic; the sutta does say they all just "run and circle around" each other and "right view is the forerunner". When it ever gets to the point that my view turns into the super-right 'view' of the arahant, I'll really see how all compounded things are impermanent when all the defilements are finally exhausted and the whole structure collapses for the last time. T: I agree with Connie about the forerunning role of samma-ditthi and that the practice of the Eightfold Path works its way from the lower level (mundane) toward the top (lokuttara), where "all the defilements are finally exhausted and the whole structure collapses for the last time". C: That the other bricks just fall into place depending on view, right or wrong, seems much the same as saying satipatthana or 5-fold development is the 'only' or 'direct' way, I think. T: I also see the role of satipatthana (sati and sampajanna on the 4 foundations: kaya, vedana, citta, dhamma) as expressed in MN 117 too. "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. ... One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right resolve: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right resolve: This is one's right mindfulness, ... etc. " Please notice the word "resolve" as the taranslation for sankappa. I think "resolve" is closer to "intention" than "thought". Again, just another quess. Kindest regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Dear Robertk and Tep, > > Thanks for the Expositor quotes, Robert. To go back to MN 117 / Great > Forty, it also says that there are both the mundane and noble factors (snipped) 41754 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 3:55pm Subject: Re: Q. Pilgrimage India /Nina Hello Phil, Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote:> > > Hi Sarah, and all > > Continuing with your kind post, Sarah. > > > > We may feel discouraged or fear that without taking special actions > that > > we will just become meaner and have less metta or even really 'go > to the > > dogs', so to speak. I think the opposite is true. With less thought > or > > concern about oneself or one's mental states and more understanding > about > > all dhammas, there is the development of higher sila, generosity, > metta, > > understanding of others and so on in addition to satipatthana. We > learn > > more and more about what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'. > > > "We learn more and more about what is 'right' and 'wrong.'" I like > that. It takes such a very long time, but the understanding arises. > We don't need to panic and fight off unwholesome mental states - we > can see them for what they are. (I always use "we" so loosely. I > think of people in general to take the focus off myself.) THere > should be abandoning of them, of course - it's one of the right > efforts. But it's not a matter of responding with revulsion and > flinging them away whenever they arise. We'll never learn that way. > The lotus grows in the mud and produces a beautiful, pristine flower > eventually. > Azita: This is so helpful. Have been giving myself a hard time lately, and have been responding with revulsion and anger, but when I think about it, it just means that "I'm" accumulating more of the same :-( Occasionally, I'll remember that these are just namas and rupas arising and passing away, and that they have gone already when there is thinking about them. Btw. Phil, I'm quite happy with the 'we' bec. much of what you say relates in my case too. I believe it takes a long long long time to develop the awareness and understanding that knows a nama from a rupa. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 41755 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: > Kel: I dunno what is being taught from suttas anymore with all the > >spinning going on. I just rely on what is being taught in >meditation centers in tradition of different teachers. They all >seem to discuss working with pannatti to reach paramattha. They >also appear to give different instructions depending on the level >and ability of the student. I view it not so much 2-track approach >but different stages of the path? > > Kel, you disappoint me ;-)). A very detailed knowledge of the pitakas and familiarity and obvious familiarity with Pali (even James can accept Pali as used by you), but when it comes to the development of insight you say you disregard this in favour of uncritical acceptance of teachers in meditation centres??? I know this couldn't really be the case. Of course you do evaluate what the teacher says against your extensive knowledge of the suttas. On the other hand, however, it's easy to be swayed by the conviction of those who have dedicated their lives to a particular kind of practice. It takes a certain courage to take a stand that runs counter to the generally held view on what the development of insight entails. > Kel: I didn't want to use "formal meditation" but I guess that's > >the general idea. Going to a quiet place so the assault on senses >are less. Kinda like a "clean room" for maufacturing computer chips >or sanitary room used for surgery operations. When something is >delicate, it requires more protection and nurturing. Once it's >strong, it can withstand more things. So along with the theme I had >above, for people at varying stages, the practice might indeed be >different. > Whether we call it 'formal meditation' or 'dedicated sessions of meditation' makes no difference, I think. If it is not something directly explained or clearly implied in the texts then we need to approach it with caution. Generally speaking, did the Buddha advise his listeners in terms of special practice in a quiet place, or did he rather explain in great detail the way things are and urge his listeners to consider and apply what he was explaining? How come so many people became enlightened while actually listening to a teaching about the khandhas or ayatanas, impermanence and not-self: content that may seem to us not particularly deep? Are we perhaps missing something? >I agree that real judge of progress is in how well we >handle vicissitudes of life. I don't necessarily agree that normal >life is a good setting to practice for everyone. People who are >firmly established in practice are able to do it I'm sure. For >myself I know, I'm just barely hanging on and gradually slipping >when I'm back to normal life. Only in a quiet and protected >environment of a retreat, I'm able to recharge so to speak. It's >just a fact that I've observed about myself and others around me. > > I understand the phenomenon you refer to here, whereby achievements made in retreat are gradually lost when we are back in the real world. I think it's fair to ask ourselves in this case whether the apparent achievements were really the sati/panna or whatever that we took them for. Again, is this something we read about in the texts? Jon 41756 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:23pm Subject: Re: Predominant roots? Hi, Phil, I wonder what good it does to tell myself I'm predominantly greedy or hateful or any of the 6 (more or less, depending on who you read) basic natures. Basically, we're all here because of lobha mula citta. How do I know from minute to minute what "I am" and why would I want to 'set it in stone' or define/limit myself/possibilities? Or have some teacher tell me since it seems I've mostly seen it in connection with which meditation subjects are most appropriate for any given personality and there's usually some advice there about how only a qualified teacher would be able to tell you. I don't think it matters to sati. But you were asking about references, I think. Vsm III 121: 10. As to suitability to temperament: here the exposition should be understood according to what is suitable to the temperaments. That is to say: firstly the 10 kinds of foulness and mindfulness occupied with the body are 11 meditation subjects suitable for one of greedy temperament. The 4 divine abidings and 4 colour kasinas are 8 suitable for one of hating temperament. Mindfulness of breathing is the one [recollection as a] meditation subject suitable for one of deluded temperament and for one of speculative temperament. The 1st 6 recollections are suitable for one of faithful temperament. Mindfulness of death, the recollection of peace, the defining of the 4 elements, and the perception of repulsiveness in nutriment, are 4 suitable for one of intelligent temperament. The remaining kasinas and the immaterial states are suitable for all kinds of temperament. And any one of the kasinas should be limited for one of speculative temperament and measureless for one of deluded temperament. This is how the exposition should be understood here 'as to suitability of temperament'. 122: All this has been stated in the form of direct opposition and complete suitability. But there is actually no profitable development that does not suppress greed, etc., and help faith, and so on. And this is said in the Meghiya Sutta: '[One] should, in addition, {34} develop these four things: foulness should be developed for the purpose of abandoning greed (lust). Loving kindness should be developed for the purpose of abandoning ill-will. Mindfulness of breathing should be developed for the purpose of cutting off applied thought. Perception of impermanence should be cultivated for the purpose of eliminating the conceit "I am"' (A.iv,358). Also in the Rahula Sutta in the passage beginning 'Develop lovingkindness, Rahula' (M.i,424) seven meditation subjects are given for a single temperament. So instead of insisting on the mere letter, the intention should be sought in each instance. This is the explanatory exposition of the meditation subject referred to by the words 'and he should apprehend ... one [meditation subject] (section 28). {fn 34: 'In addition to the 5 things' (not quoted) dealt with earlier in the sutta, namely, perfection of virtue, good friendship, hearing suitable things, energy, and understanding}. This all starts off in the Pali (as near as I can make out) with "Cariyaanukuulatoti cariyaana.m anukuulatopettha vinicchayo veditabbo". The Ven. Nanamoli's Vsm glossary gives "cariya, carita - temperament, behaviour, exercise". I kind of like that 'exercise' bit... which ever root or quality is most active at any given moment as opposed to 'the inherent, fundamental flaw in my personality' or something. However, in one of the preceding chapters, there is some discussion of the kind of dwelling most suitable to each 'type' and that does make it sound like a more or less in-born, die-hard trait. Also some examples of different behaviours that indicate which type you are from how you hold a broom to how you fall out at night. peace, connie 41757 From: jonoabb Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: ... Howard: ...I am explicitly speaking of the phenomenological object. That is why I made the point of saying "experienced object (as experienced object)". I am not speaking of an alleged something underlying the experienced object. That may or may not exist, and if it does, it may or may not exist prior to the experienced object. Experienced hardness and the experiencing of it are co-occuring and mutually dependent. An alleged unexperienced hardness, if it exists, is simply unknown. I am not addressing such a thing-in-itself, as it is only the experiential object that is experienced. I am not dealing with ontological inference, but with experience. Jon: Well I too am speaking of the presently experienced object, specifically, when that is a rupa appearing through one of the 5 sense-doors, and I am speaking of that object only (so let's have no more talk of 'something underlying the experienced object' or an 'alleged inexperienced object' ;-)). My question is, on what basis do you assert that the presently experienced sense-door object arises no earlier than the moment at which it is experienced by the sense-door consciousness? Howard: ... [A]s far as concepts are concerned, I am coming to the point of view that "there ain't no such things - not really!" The "tree concept" as idea, just isn't findable upon introspection; and trees are conventionally "encountered", but not actually encountered - we merely think we encounter trees. It is just a matter of thinking and imagining interspersed with seeing, touching, recognizing etc. Jon: So far as I'm concerned too, there are no such things as concepts. But there are moments of consciousness that think in terms of names, meanings and 'things' (what you refer to as thinking and imagining). The tag 'concept' is used to refer to such names, meanings and *presumed* things. If it has existence, substance or individual characteristic, if it arises or falls away, then it would not be correctly referred to as a concept. (This discussion has brought home to me how reference to concepts can be a real trap for the unwary -- it's so easy to unwittingly give substance to 'them' (actually, no 'them'!).) Jon 41758 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:43pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Ken H. , At this point in our series of dialogues I begin to feel like a car running out of gas! No, it does not mean I am exhausted. On the contrary, I am exhaustless when I have a dhamma discussion with a person with clear understanding like you, Ken. But I think there are only a few issues remaining. KH: The audience to the Sekha-patipada Sutta were given a description of a certain type of ariyan learner and his accomplishments. T: I was incorrect in underestimating the 500 rich Merchants, remember? Thanks to you, Nina and RobertK for correcting me (these 500 guys were all sotapanna!). So you may be right again here. KH: Some suttas describe the qualities of the Tathagata and the way of the Bodhisatta. Obviously, we are not expected to treat them as a set of instructions. I feel sure the same applies equally (but less obviously) to all suttas. T: Prepared to be surprised, Ken. Read the following sutta excerpt and let me know what you think about whether it is a set of instructions or not. BTW, I hope you still are not exhausted :<). "Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will be pure in our bodily actions manifest, open and without a flaw. ...there is something more to do. Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will be pure in verbal actions manifest, open and without a flaw. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done. We will be pure in mental actions manifest, open and without a flaw. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will be pure in our livelihood manifest, open and without a flaw. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will be with protected mental faculties. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will know the right amount to partake food. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We should be yoked to wakefulness. ... Bhikkhus, what further thing has to be done? We will be endowed with mindful awareness. ...there is something more to do. [End of excerpt, see the original sutta for more.] MN 39, Maha-assapura Sutta > 2) "... knows moderation in eating, is devoted to wakefulness..." KH: These are not things that greedy, sleepy people can deliberately know and be devoted to. True moderation is an attribute of people who are established in virtue and who understand the benefits of moderation. T: I am glad you used the expression "deliberately know and devoted to". Your main point, "The key is to understand the Dhamma: the rest will follow naturally", does not depend on whether or not the practitioner knows moderation in eating, etc. In other words, you can eat six heavy meals each day and sleep 8 hours each night, study the texts and higher dhamma while eating, and still can understand the dhamma too. :-) Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > You asked if I thought a certain practice was right or wrong. I > didn't make my answer clear enough. > (snipped) -------------------------------- > > I am tempted to say that the way of bare insight would suit me > better, but that brings in the idea of self. The key is to > understand the Dhamma: the rest will follow naturally. > > Ken H 41759 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Jon (and Kel) - In a message dated 2/4/05 7:11:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Generally speaking, did the Buddha advise his > listeners in terms of special practice in a quiet place, or did he > rather explain in great detail the way things are and urge his listeners > to consider and apply what he was explaining? ----------------------------------- Howard: Yes, and yes. ----------------------------------- > How come so many people > became enlightened while actually listening to a teaching about the > khandhas or ayatanas, impermanence and not-self: content that may seem > to us not particularly deep? Are we perhaps missing something? ------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. what we are missing was 1) the listeners were well practiced, and 2) It was a BUDDHA they were in the presence of. =================== 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) 41760 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 0:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/4/05 7:39:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Hi, Howard > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ... > Howard: > ...I am explicitly speaking of the phenomenological object. That is > why I made the point of saying "experienced object (as experienced > object)". I am not speaking of an alleged something underlying the > experienced object. That may or may not exist, and if it does, it > may or may not exist prior to the experienced object. Experienced > hardness and the experiencing of it are co-occuring and mutually > dependent. An alleged unexperienced hardness, if it exists, is > simply unknown. I am not addressing such a thing-in-itself, as it is > only the experiential object that is experienced. I am not dealing > with ontological inference, but with experience. > > Jon: > Well I too am speaking of the presently experienced object, > specifically, when that is a rupa appearing through one of the 5 > sense-doors, and I am speaking of that object only (so let's have no > more talk of 'something underlying the experienced object' or > an 'alleged inexperienced object' ;-)). > > My question is, on what basis do you assert that the presently > experienced sense-door object arises no earlier than the moment at > which it is experienced by the sense-door consciousness? --------------------------------- Howard: Jon, you just agreed that we are talking about what is experienced. We are not talking about an unexperienced. Something experienced does not exist when it is not experienced, because what is not experienced is NOT what is experienced. You do *not* seem to be getting the distinction I am making. The hardness I sense is mental content. [Note: That does *not* mean it is nama - it is *object* of nama.] Any prior unexperienced "hardness", if it exists at all, is not mental content, and is another beast altogether. ---------------------------------- > > Howard: > ... [A]s far as concepts are concerned, I am coming to the point of > view that "there ain't no such things - not really!" The "tree > concept" as idea, just isn't findable upon introspection; and trees > are conventionally "encountered", but not actually encountered - we > merely think we encounter trees. It is just a matter of thinking and > imagining interspersed with seeing, touching, recognizing etc. > > Jon: > So far as I'm concerned too, there are no such things as concepts. > But there are moments of consciousness that think in terms of names, > meanings and 'things' (what you refer to as thinking and > imagining). The tag 'concept' is used to refer to such names, > meanings and *presumed* things. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. No problem. :-) ---------------------------------------- > > If it has existence, substance or individual characteristic, if it > arises or falls away, then it would not be correctly referred to as > a concept. > > (This discussion has brought home to me how reference to concepts > can be a real trap for the unwary -- it's so easy to unwittingly > give substance to 'them' (actually, no 'them'!).) > ------------------------------------- ;-)) ------------------------------------- > > Jon > > ===================== 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) 41761 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 1:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/4/2005 4:39:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: Howard: ... [A]s far as concepts are concerned, I am coming to the point of view that "there ain't no such things - not really!" Hi Howard and Jon Question... Does the sense-of-self, self view, conceit of I, etc. arise or not? If so or if not, how would you distinguish these from concepts? TG 41762 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 1:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/4/05 9:20:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard and Jon > > Question... Does the sense-of-self, self view, conceit of I, etc. arise or > not? If so or if not, how would you distinguish these from concepts? > > TG > ====================== I think that sense of self is a paramattha dhamma, a mental dhamma. Self view, on the other hand, amounts to an often recurring thought process. If you would like to call that a concept, I won't object. ;-) 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) 41763 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 7:22pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi Jon (howard), > > Kel: I dunno what is being taught from suttas anymore with all the > >spinning going on. > J:you say you disregard this in favour of uncritical acceptance of > teachers in meditation centres??? Kel: I was just being a bit facetious which you noticed. A few discussion appears to go something like, "that is what Buddha said but don't you think this is what he actually meant?" I just don't see how to draw a definite conclusion since he's no longer around to ask for clarification. > J: Of course you do evaluate what > the teacher says against your extensive knowledge of the suttas. On the > other hand, however, it's easy to be swayed by the conviction of those > who have dedicated their lives to a particular kind of practice. It > takes a certain courage to take a stand that runs counter to the > generally held view on what the development of insight entails. Kel: Yes, you're right on that I do evaluate what is being taught with my background. I only accept something if it makes sense to me. I would think that's just sutamaya-panna turning into cintamaya- panna. That in turn develops bhavanamaya-panna, same process for everybody. I'm not fortunate enough to be directly taught by famous Sayadaws. I take what is said to be merely based on the presenter's capacity. I think one of the things that happen is you get to know yourself really well. So it becomes apparent what meshes with your personality and what doesn't. I would say the courage would be to practice in a way that works for you regardless of what is convential wisdom. Ultimately I think that's the only reference we have to go by. Once we have pretty good understanding, only thing is to continously practice. > J: Generally speaking, did the Buddha advise his > listeners in terms of special practice in a quiet place Kel: Howard answer yes to this. I would also say even mahasatipatthana sutta starts with that advice. > rather explain in great detail the way things are and urge his listeners > to consider and apply what he was explaining? Kel: He also explained it from different angles for different audience. But there's always underlying message of applying it after understanding it. So I would think it depends on the particular person and what deficiency Buddha was trying to fix. > became enlightened while actually listening to a teaching about the > khandhas or ayatanas, impermanence and not-self: content that may seem > to us not particularly deep? Are we perhaps missing something? Kel: We missed Buddha's time so our kamma/paramis are not up to par to be that fortunate. Luckily we still caught his sasana albeit after halfway point. Buddha was there to guide Ashine Mahamogallana through his practice in very hand-ons way. To make up for a lack of such a teacher, we'll just have to try harder. I think anicca and anatta concepts are very deep because if we truly understood it, we would act accordingly to that wisdom. To me if I can't apply it fully then I only understand the model but still lacking true understanding. Again only cintamaya-panna and not fully mature bhavanamaya-panna. Also I think it's curious why Sotapannas are still immersed in sensual pleasures if they truly understand anicca/anatta if you go by some people's definitions of what understanding those concepts mean. > I understand the phenomenon you refer to here, whereby achievements made > in retreat are gradually lost when we are back in the real world. I > think it's fair to ask ourselves in this case whether the apparent > achievements were really the sati/panna or whatever that we took them > for. Again, is this something we read about in the texts? Kel: I know if I can live the rest of my life in a retreat setting then it'll have far more kusala moments. I believe the apparent achievements are some degree of sati/panna but they are not fully mature yet. If they were then that would make the person an ariya. Repeated experience of those sati/panna is what will lead to enlightenment. The faster (frequency) we have those experiences, earlier we'll achieve the goal. It's not said in the texts explicitly about life on a retreat versus a real life. Perhaps because there's no difference for an ariya but that's only a conjecture. Buddha did exhort qualities of a place of practice that can be related to a retreat environment. I see a separation between setting up for success and being attached to the success. Thoughts and reactions that show such attachments are easily discernable. I can only trust my own experience and what I observe about myself in this. So I only claim this for myself and not generally to anyone else. In some sense more viriya is required for maintaining a lower level sati in everyday life. I definitely think it benefits me here and now but will pay even more dividends in a retreat since the mind is now more inclined to sati. - kel 41764 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/4/2005 7:03:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I think that sense of self is a paramattha dhamma, a mental dhamma. Self view, on the other hand, amounts to an often recurring thought process. If you would like to call that a concept, I won't object. ;-) With metta, Howard Hi Howard I wonder if you could expand on that. Is the sense-of-self a paramattha dhamma in the sense of conceit and or delusion? I noticed "wrong view" is listed as a cetasika. Wouldn't "self view" be classified under that? TG 41765 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 8:56pm Subject: Re: Predominant roots? Hello Connie and Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Phil, > > I wonder what good it does to tell myself I'm predominantly greedy or > hateful or any of the 6 (more or less, depending on who you read) basic > natures. Basically, we're all here because of lobha mula citta. How do I > know from minute to minute what "I am" and why would I want to 'set it in > stone' or define/limit myself/possibilities? Azita: I kind of agree with you here, but don't you ever see traits in yourself that you maybe have seen all your life? I know I have and its what I would call a 'predominant root'. i personally don't see it as 'setting it in stone' but there is certainly traits that makes up 'me'. To see them for what they really are - not me, not mine - is, I think, part of Buddha's teaching on anatta. For example, this anger I take to be mine, this generosity I take to be me or mine. Or have some teacher tell me > since it seems I've mostly seen it in connection with which meditation > subjects are most appropriate for any given personality and there's > usually some advice there about how only a qualified teacher would be able > to tell you. I don't think it matters to sati. But you were asking about > references, I think. > Azita: no, it doesn't matter to Sati, but to have Sati arise, isnt it important to firstly know and really understand what it is that awareness can be aware of? I mean, we learn about seeing and hearing etc, about attachment, anger, ignorance, but its only ever after the fact that I think 'o that was such and such'. Anyway, I think I might not have references to back up any of my comments, and I think Phil was looking for just that. ....snip.... > This all starts off in the Pali (as near as I can make out) with > "Cariyaanukuulatoti cariyaana.m anukuulatopettha vinicchayo veditabbo". > The Ven. Nanamoli's Vsm glossary gives "cariya, carita - temperament, > behaviour, exercise". I kind of like that 'exercise' bit... which ever > root or quality is most active at any given moment as opposed to 'the > inherent, fundamental flaw in my personality' or something. However, in > one of the preceding chapters, there is some discussion of the kind of > dwelling most suitable to each 'type' and that does make it sound like a > more or less in-born, die-hard trait. Also some examples of different > behaviours that indicate which type you are from how you hold a broom to > how you fall out at night. Azita: what is this 'fall out at night' - i admit to an imaginative mind so here I'm thinking vampires :-0 > > peace, > connie Patience, courage and good cheer Azita. 41766 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard Just to comment on the references to me in particular. upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > > Now here, when you speak of "the objects of the proliferations" we get >close to another problem in "concept language", namely the systematic >conflating of alleged mental phenomena (the momentary, mind-constructed phenomena >that I have trouble finding and that Jon seems to accept but to dismiss) and the >nonexistent shadow entities they seem to refer to - that they project in >imagination. > I do not by any means *dismiss* concepts (life would be impossible without them), but I think discussion about them helps one gain a better understanding of what is meant by 'dhammas', and this I see as a crucial aspect of the teachings. It is necessary to realise that what we take as being (conventional) 'things' are not dhammas nor are they 'things composed of' dhammas; the reality is simply multiple moments of *conceptualising about things*. Only dhammas are real; anything else is a concept or, to be more precise, mere conceptualising about (imagined) things. There are no 'mind-constructed phenomena' such as you mention here; the only phenomenon associated with this conceptualising is the momentary mind/consciousness itself. > Is a chair a concept? Are there chairs at all? Well, I say that there >really are no chairs, but to speak of chairs in not meaningless - it is >abbreviational, figurative language. A tougher question: Is there a *concept* of >chair, and do we think of it. Jon seems to think so. I think not. I believe there >are mental processes that occure which we *call* thinking of the concept of >chair, but I do not think that introspection will ever reveal to us a single >mental phenomenon that is "concept of chair". > > No, I do not think there is such a 'thing' as a concept of a chair. As I understand it, at the moment of thinking there is a chair there is only conceptualising about 'chair', that is to say, there is the dhamma of consciousness with idea of chair as its 'object'. Jon 41767 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation Hi, Ken Ken O wrote: >Hi Jon > >In fact, all volitions that are base on kusala roots are dana by >itself if one consider dana as alobha. Why is there so much debate >about dana when it is implicitly implied ;-). Cheers > > All kusala can be considered dana of one form or another? Well, I suppose so, but then there are multiple ways of describing/classifying kusala, so that would be but one way of looking at it. But I think your point is that dana is not a particular action (or class of actions), and realising this will mean there is more chance of there being dana at times other than times of carrying out that particular action (or action belonging to that particular class of actions). That is certainly so, I believe. Jon 41768 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: >Hi Jon, > >I've lost the thread. I don't know what either one of us is talking >about. > Glad to know I'm not the only one ;-)) >Maybe we should start over. > > Your serve. Jon 41769 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/4/05 11:49:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > In a message dated 2/4/2005 7:03:35 PM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... > writes: > I think that sense of self is a paramattha dhamma, a mental dhamma. > Self view, on the other hand, amounts to an often recurring thought process. > > If > you would like to call that a concept, I won't object. ;-) > > With metta, > Howard > > Hi Howard > > I wonder if you could expand on that. Is the sense-of-self a paramattha > dhamma in the sense of conceit and or delusion? > > I noticed "wrong view" is listed as a cetasika. Wouldn't "self view" be > classified under that? > > TG > ======================== I'm not very clear on the nuances of all the various terms. Sense-of-self seems to me to be an elementary dhamma, specifically a fundamental ignorance-forged sankhara, or, perhaps, a form of ignorance itself. But self-view seems to me to be a complex of sorts, a kind of recurring mental process or thought pattern conditioned in part by sense-of-self . Self-view is eliminated at stream entry, but sense-of-self I believe is not uprooted until the fruition of arahanthood. 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) 41770 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: the Five Indriyas, what is sati. Dear Tep, > Your golden message (# 41713) is very special to me -- the best ever. > The idea (view, ditthi) of the 'self' who "directs sati" and the subtle, but > wrong view that "sati has to arise without interruption" have become > clear to me for the first time. [Well, now I realize that I wasn't 'that > impossible' to be taught!] This is very encouraging :-). Frankly, I thought that you would be hard to convince, but now I see that I was wrong. Btw, because you did not respond to my last post, I thought that you might have been offended by something I wrote, perhaps the comment about the 'uninstructed worldling'? If this is so, allow me to explain. I did not refer to you, but to 'dictionaries'. You had asked me to refer to the dictionary for the meaning/definition of some term (I forget which one). I make the distinction for example between 'language dictionary' and 'Buddhist Dictionary'. The latter can give some understanding about dhamma concepts, but the former only clarifies the meaning of words used for communication and does not lead to any understanding of Dhamma, which is our primary concern. Hope this clears any misunderstanding. :-) Metta, Sukinder 41771 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 9:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: > Okay. I think I follow you, and I actually agree with the sense of it! > >There is just the process of thinking, and it *seems* to be "about >something," but with that "something" not an actual object. > Well, thinking does *in fact* think about "things". That is its function, i.e., to think ;-)). And there's nothing 'wrong' with that. But we also take there *to be* actual things. That is an (invalidated) assumption on our part, even though that assumption appears to be constantly being validated by virtue of our projections on the basis of those assumptions proving to be accurate. At the moment of taking there to be "something called 'X'", the reality is the thinking that thinks "thing called 'X'". There is never the direct experience of 'thing X', although there could of course be the direct experience of, say, hardness that we take for forming part of "thing X". >However, it still remains >true, does it not, that every mindstate has an object or objective content? It >just may be that during thought processes we may not be all that clear on what >the actual objects are. > > Well it is my understanding of the teachings that every moment of consciousness has an 'object', since its function is to 'experience'. Jon 41772 From: Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 4:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/5/05 12:08:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > > Hi, Howard > > Just to comment on the references to me in particular. > > upasaka@a... wrote: > > >Howard: > > > > Now here, when you speak of "the objects of the proliferations" we get > >close to another problem in "concept language", namely the systematic > >conflating of alleged mental phenomena (the momentary, mind-constructed > phenomena > >that I have trouble finding and that Jon seems to accept but to dismiss) > and the > >nonexistent shadow entities they seem to refer to - that they project in > >imagination. > > > > I do not by any means *dismiss* concepts (life would be impossible > without them), but I think discussion about them helps one gain a better > understanding of what is meant by 'dhammas', and this I see as a crucial > aspect of the teachings. It is necessary to realise that what we take > as being (conventional) 'things' are not dhammas nor are they 'things > composed of' dhammas; the reality is simply multiple moments of > *conceptualising about things*. Only dhammas are real; anything else is > a concept or, to be more precise, mere conceptualising about (imagined) > things. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I like the foregoing paragraph of yours *very* much, Jon. I particularly like "It is necessary to realise that what we take as being (conventional) 'things' are not dhammas nor are they 'things composed of' dhammas; the reality is simply multiple moments of *conceptualising about things*." What I like so much about this is your talking about "conceptualizing about things" instead of talking about "concepts". --------------------------------------- > > There are no 'mind-constructed phenomena' such as you mention here; the > only phenomenon associated with this conceptualising is the momentary > mind/consciousness itself. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Agreed. ----------------------------------- > > > Is a chair a concept? Are there chairs at all? Well, I say that there > >really are no chairs, but to speak of chairs in not meaningless - it is > >abbreviational, figurative language. A tougher question: Is there a > *concept* of > >chair, and do we think of it. Jon seems to think so. I think not. I believe > there > >are mental processes that occure which we *call* thinking of the concept of > > >chair, but I do not think that introspection will ever reveal to us a > single > >mental phenomenon that is "concept of chair". > > > > > > No, I do not think there is such a 'thing' as a concept of a chair. As > I understand it, at the moment of thinking there is a chair there is > only conceptualising about 'chair', that is to say, there is the dhamma > of consciousness with idea of chair as its 'object'. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: I was just about to say that we are in agreement until I read <>. In my opinion, no phenomenon that is "idea of chair" arises in the mind as object. There is merely the imagining that such is so. Had you stopped with <>, I would have said that we are in perfect agreement. ----------------------------------------- > > Jon > > > ====================== 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) 41773 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Feb 4, 2005 10:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >Howard: > I was just about to say that we are in agreement until I read <is the dhamma of consciousness with idea of chair as its 'object'>>. In my >opinion, no phenomenon that is "idea of chair" arises in the mind as object. >There is merely the imagining that such is so. Had you stopped with <moment of thinking there is a chair there is only conceptualising about 'chair'>>, I would have said that we are in perfect agreement. > > Just to clarify, I have already said that I do not mean to suggest any phenomenon that is "idea of chair" arises in the mind as object. As Nina pointed out the other day, 'object' in the context of object of consciousness is not to be equated with 'object' in any other sense. Consciousness *thinks of* idea of chair; idea of chair is, in that sense *object of* consciousness. No phenomena at that moment other than the consciousness that thinks of 'idea of chair'. Jon 41774 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 0:54am Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Tep, --------------------------- KH: > > The audience to the Sekha-patipada Sutta were given a description of a certain type of ariyan learner and his accomplishments. > > > T: > I was incorrect in underestimating the 500 rich Merchants, remember? Thanks to you, Nina and RobertK for correcting me (these 500 guys were all sotapanna!). So you may be right again here. ---------------- We are misunderstanding each other here, Tep. I was simply saying that the audience in the sutta was given a description of the ariyan disciples. I don't think it matters whether or not members of the audience were, themselves, ariyan. You seem to think it does matter. ----------------------- KH: > > Some suttas describe the qualities of the Tathagata and the way of the Bodhisatta. Obviously, we are not expected to treat them as a set of instructions. I feel sure the same applies equally (but less obviously) to all suttas. > > > T: > Prepared to be surprised, Ken. Read the following sutta excerpt and let me know what you think about whether it is a set of instructions or not. > ---------------------- :-) I am glad I added, "but less obviously." The example you gave does sound very much like a set of instructions. So, it is one of those suttas that are "less obviously" a description of reality. Remember, the world is nothing more than fleeting, worthless, void- of-self mental and physical phenomena (nama and rupa). How can we tell nama and rupa to get off their backsides and follow a set of instructions? It doesn't make sense. The Dhamma only makes sense when it is seen as a description of all the possible combinations of citta, cetasikas and rupas. And that is all we need. When there is right understanding of the description, panna can arise to directly know nama and rupa. -------------------------- T: > BTW, I hope you still are not exhausted :<). -------------------------- Never! And I'm glad to hear that you, too, are bearing up. :-) ---------------------------- T: > I am glad you used the expression "deliberately know and devoted to". Your main point, "The key is to understand the Dhamma: the rest will follow naturally", does not depend on whether or not the practitioner knows moderation in eating, etc. In other words, you can eat six heavy meals each day and sleep 8 hours each night, study the texts and higher dhamma while eating, and still can understand the dhamma too. :-) ------------ As silly as it sounds, that is probably what I am saying. Provided there has been wise consideration of the Dhamma, even a glutton can have moments of right understanding. But the point is; at those moments there is no glutton - the akusala cetasikas (lobha, ahirika, thina, middha, moha and so on) do not arise. Ken H 41775 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Comments invited My response to the questions are as follows: 1. >who do you think you are? 2. >who do you think this "self" is? 3. >where do "you" come from? 4. >where will "you" go when you depart? 1. Me, myself, and I -- oh -- Charles Anthony DaCosta 2. That depends on the moment ... the answer is too relative to state in a few words. 3. My mother's womb. 4. This is a bit relative too, but ultimately, I will go to what, in the west, we often call the grave. ----- Original Message ----- From: TGrand458@a... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 31 January, 2005 5:43 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Comments invited In a message dated 1/31/2005 12:04:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: Dear Group, A good friend on another list asked me four questions - 1. >who do you think you are? 2. >who do you think this "self" is? 3. >where do "you" come from? 4. >where will "you" go when you depart? I would be sincerely interested in anyone's reply regarding my current understanding, with respect to the Buddha's teachings, and their own views as well: 41776 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Get more dukkha! This approach sounds tantric -- the bitter pill used for medicine. More and more suffering, soon you are immune. At least we hope. Charles D ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 31 January, 2005 11:23 PM Subject: [dsg] Get more dukkha! Hello everyone This morning, over breakfast, Sandra was reminding me of things I have to do today. One of these instructions was "get more dukkha". Not being fully awake, my mind struggled to comprehend. Was she cursing me? Was there some new-fangled theory that more dukkha was desirable? Then it dawned on me. She was talking about "duccah", a mixture of seeds that is sprinkled over warm bread and olive oil. So there you go, kind DSG folk, one and all, a hearty breakfast of dukkha/duccah will give you all the energy you need for the arising of right effort. (-: Best wishes Andrew T 41777 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:52am Subject: Re: Anicca as characteristic --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > > Hi Joop, and all. > > Thanks for this post. It got me thinking about anatta which is > always good. Thinking about anatta conditions a deeper understanding of anatta (hopefully!) Dear Phil Thanks for your reaction that also created a new thread. A pitty you (or somebody else) has not given a reaction to my core question: When only Nibbana is permanent, all other things are impermanant, how can one say that Kamma is not anicca? Why does not automatically kamma falls away (perhaps after a very long time), as the result of a built-in property of it? You said: "Abhidhamma is all about anatta, isn't it?" My answer: Yes, it is, and that is my problem: that's anatta but not anicca. You said: "Perhaps it's of less import to discuss impermanence because even though it is not as easy to understand as we might think, it is also not as profound and subtle an issue as anatta?" My answer: I don't agree with you, I don't think there is a Sutta in which a hierarchy of the three dukkha-anatta-anicca is made. Nytiloka even states: "It is from the fact of impermanence that, in most texts, the other two characteristics, suffering (dukkha) and not-self (anattá), are derived." You said: "So our interest in the characteristics might be conditioned by the preponderance within the roots we are born with?" My answer: Yes, I think our interest is conditioned in this way; but there are always more conditions than one. But when alobha (non- greed) can be combined with understanding of impermanence, and amoha (wisdom) with understanding of not-self, with what then can 'dukkha' be combined ? I think it's not a problem to combine (scientific) psychology with Abhidhamma, as long we realize Abhidhamma is more than psychology. So it's possible to combine personality-types with "roots-types" as you tried in your reaction to me and in message # 41752. One of the books of the Abhidhamma (I mean the Abhidhamma itself, not a commentary on it), is "Puggalapaññatti" ("Description of Individuals"); this book contains descriptions of a number of personality-types. I have not read it, even don't know if it is translated. So I don't know if those personality types are root-types. In his book "The heart of buddhist meditation", Nyanaponika quotes a explanation why there are Four Frames of Reference in the Satipatthana Sutta ? (# 70, "Typologie" in my dutch translation). As I understand this, four character-types are distinguished: much desire + slow intelligence; much desire + quick intelligence; liking theory + slow intelligence; liking theory + quick intelligence. I have some doubt which this system and I cannot understand how somebody with a slow intelligence can like theory (ditthhi-carita); but also the combination personality-typology and The teachings is made. Metta Joop 41778 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:55am Subject: Predominant roots? (was Re: Q. Pilgrimage India /Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > > Hi all > > I wrote this to Sarah yesterday: > > > BTW, this could again relate to the hetus (roots), as I > > mentionned > > in a post to Joop about annica. Hi Phil See my message # 41777 about this theme Metta Joop 41779 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 3:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: False a priori assumptions hidden in the 10 Indeterminable Questions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Joop, > > I just wished to say that I thought the research and sutta quotes you gave > on this thread were excellent and very helpful. snip > Your recent questions and comments on kamma are very good too. Sometimees > I think that it is those who really question every aspect as you and James > do, who potentially get the most benefit from the Teachings. > > Metta, > > Sarah Dear Sarah That's nice said of you. I prefer to give opinions and ask question about things that really bother me I should like it if you react on my thread about 'anicca as characteristic' including my question why kamma is not impermanent Metta Joop 41780 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 4:03am Subject: Dhamma Thread (261) Dear Dhamma Friends, As I always include as PS: at the bottom of every Dhamma Thread post, I hope readers do not feel uneasy to read Pali words. If even a single Pali word does not make understand just give a reply. There may be 1000 words of Pali in a message and some may not know all 1000 words. At that time there is no need to go mad. Word by word study will help. Dhamma Thread starts with explanation on realities. It went through about consciousness (citta) and its associated phenomena called cetasikas (mental factors). Then it moved to material matter or material phenomena called rupa (material). Rupa in Dhamma setting in Dhamma Thread went deep and superficial things were not touched. After that Dhamma Threads explained the implications of cessation (nibbana). Panatti dhamma is also explained in a readily understandable style. There are citta (consciousness), cetasikas (mental factors), rupa (material), nibbana (cessation) exist as ultimate realities. These dhammas are always right. Panatti dhamma is also an interesting dhamma and it is also explained to some extent. Different cittas (consciousness) [89] were explained. Different cetasikas (mental factors) [52] were explained. Different rupa (material) [28] were explained. And then different classifications on citta (consciousness) were discussed in detail. Citta is not just that can be sensed as a single entity. But it is flowing like the flow of the water of a river. These different flows of cittas are explained in the form of citta-vithi (consciousness- procession). Actually there are citta, cetasika, rupa and their interactions. But as an illusion we see as life, man, deva, animal. Actually these events are served by different cittas along with their cetasikas and supporting rupas. I discussed centering on citta because citta can be centered in our own mind. Cittas may be one of 2 possibilities. They may be 1. in procession 2. not in procession When cittas are procession or vithi then they are working as consciousness mind equivalent of science mind. Regarding these different processions called vithi varas were explained. 1. panca-dvara vithi vara (5-door turn of procession) 2. kama javana mano-dvara vithi vara(sensuous impulsion mind-door top) 3. jhana javana vithi vara(absorption-impulsion turn of procession) 4. magga javana vithi vara(path-impulsion turn of procession) 5. abhinna javana vithi vara(super-power-impulsion turn of procession) 6. jhana-samapatti (absorption-attainment) 7. phala-samapatti (fruition-attainment) 8. nirodha-samapatti(cessation-attainment) Whenever we are alert we may be in one of these processions. But mostly in the 1st 2 processions that are kama javana vithi vara or 'sensuous impulsion turn of procession of cittas'. But in between these TOP or 'turn of procession' or 'vithi vara' there do arise bhavanaga cittas which are not the cittas in procession. When not in processions cittas will be one of three possibilities. They are 1. patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness or linking consciousness doing the job of linking the cuti citta or dying-consciousness of the immediate past life and the 1st bhavanaga citta of the current life. 2. bhavanga citta or life-continuing consciousness doing the job of continuing life when there is not in procession. 3. cuti citta or dying-consciousness doing the job of last arising or the job of moving to another state or the job of death. These 3 states are the state of mind when they are not in procession. The processions have been explained in some detail. Non-procession consciousness are illudedly viewed as beings in combination with rupas or materials. Beings or sattas in different realms (31) have been explained. Regarding the lifespan of beings 1. hell beings 2. animals 3. hungry ghosts 4. demons 5. human beings these 5 sattas or 5 kinds of being do not have a stable lifespan. From 1st to 6th deva realms, from 1st to 4th jhana realms, from 1st to 4th arupa jhana realms there are beings and they have a stable lifespan. 1. catumaharajika devas live 500 deva years or 9 million human years 2. tavatimsa devas live 2,000 deva years or 36 million years 3. yama devas live 8,000 deva years or 144 million years 4. tusita devas live 32,000 deva years or 576 million years 5. nimmanarati devas live 128,000 deva years or 2304 million years 6. paranimmita-vassavati devas live 512,000 deva years or 9216 million human years. 1. brahmaparisajja brahmas live one third of a kappa. 2. brahmapurohita brahmas live 2 thirds of a kappa. 3. mahabrahma brahmas live 1 kappa. 1. parittaabhaa brahmas live 2 kappas. 2. appamaanaabhaa brahmas live 4 kappas. 3. aabhassaraa brahmas live 8 kappas. 1. parittasubhaa brahmas live 16 kappas. 2. appamaanasubhaa brahmas live 32 kappas. 3. subhakinhna brahmas live 64 kappas. 1. vehapphalaa brahmas live 500 kappas. 2. asannisatta brahmas also live 500 kappas. 1. avihaa brahmas live 1,000 kappas. 2. atappaa brahmas live 2,000 kappas. 3. sudassaa brahmas live 4,000 kappas. 4. sudassii brahmas live 8,000 kappas. 5. akanittha brahmas live 16,000 kappas. 1. akaasanancayatana arupa brahmas live 20,000 kappas. 2. vinnanancayatana arupa brahmas live 40,000 kappas. 3. akincinnayatana arupa brahmas live 60,000 kappas. 4. nevasanna-nasannayatana arupa brahmas live 84,000 kappas. Even this longest living brahmas have to die there is no permanent being at all. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 41781 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 5:59am Subject: Re: the Five Indriyas, what is sati. Friend Sukinder (or should it rather be "pal" Sukinder?) - I am so sorry that you had waited for my response to the previous (but absolutely not "the last") mail of yours. Yes, there are still some loosed ends that need to be tied up. I apologize for my negligence and promise to write you a reply to day (after my regular morning walk). T: > > The idea (view, ditthi) of the 'self' who "directs sati" and the subtle, but wrong view, that "sati has to arise without interruption" >> have become clear to me for the first time. [Well, now I realize >> that I wasn't 'that impossible' to be taught!] > S: > > This is very encouraging :-). Frankly, I thought that you would be hard > to convince, but now I see that I was wrong. > T: But that is just one thin lyer of the thick, several-layer ditthi. More work to be done, admittedly. S: > > Btw, because you did not respond to my last post, I thought that you > might have been offended by something I wrote, perhaps the > comment about the 'uninstructed worldling'? If this is so, > allow me to explain. > T: Thank you for being open-minded and showing remorse. But I was not offended at all about that comment. Please feel free to discuss the Dhamma any way you like. People have different styles for expressing their opinion, and that's one reason why group discussion is interesting. Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > > > Your golden message (# 41713) is very special to me -- the best > ever. 41782 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 2/5/05 1:22:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Consciousness *thinks of* idea of chair; idea of chair is, in that sense > *object of* consciousness. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Okay - *in that sense* an object. I'll go along with that. This is a use of informal language, and I do follow you. ------------------------------------- No phenomena at that moment other than the > > consciousness that thinks of 'idea of chair'. > ===================== Fine. I want to formulate th matter somewhat differently, but I think we mean the same thing. :-) 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) 41783 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 7:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, TG TGrand458@a... wrote: >You seem to be saying that the "thinking consciousness" is one thing (a real >thing) and that thoughts are another thing (a not real thing). > Not quite. As I understand it, it's not a question of 2 different kinds of 'things', since there are no such 'things' as thoughts. > I can't >differentiate them in this way. In my thinking, they are mutualy dependent states >and one is just as actual as the other and neither can arise without the other >(as thinking consciousness). > > Yes, you have previously explained your idea of 'stored memories as potential thoughts', and I know you feel strongly that this is so. Would you care to explain the background to this idea, and how it fits in with your overall view of things? Just a thought here, but if as you say thoughts are a 'state' (dhamma), then since they are not nama-dhamma (dhamma that experiences an object) I suppose they would have to be rupa-dhamma (dhamma that does not experience an object). Is that how you would see it? Jon 41784 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >>Consciousness *thinks of* idea of chair; idea of chair is, in that sense >>*object of* consciousness. >> >> >> >--------------------------------------- >Howard: > Okay - *in that sense* an object. I'll go along with that. This is a >use of informal language, and I do follow you. >------------------------------------- > > No phenomena at that moment other than the > > > >>consciousness that thinks of 'idea of chair'. >> >> >> >===================== > Fine. I want to formulate th matter somewhat differently, but I think >we mean the same thing. :-) > > That would be quite an event if it were so! I think I'll call it a night before the situation changes (late Saturday night here) ;-)) Talk to you and all again tomorrow. Jon 41785 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 8:16am Subject: Re: Predominant roots? Azita: what is this 'fall out at night' - i admit to an imaginative mind so here I'm thinking vampires :-0 >peace, > connie Patience, courage and good cheer Azita. Oh no, Azita, vampires fall out in the daytime (we hit the sack and they hit the body bag?). Do you fall out in a sprawl or all just so or ??? And the part of the V that talks about this isn't 'one of the preceding chapters' like I'd said but ch III, 74-102. Sorry. Laziness on my part not to look it up or just a big rush to be 'helpful' or what??? More 'and' than 'or'. Hard to say what all the motivations behind any whole act are when things change so fast. Not much to talk about when it comes to my personality. Or personalities if I'm to believe other people. Who can say "o, I never" or "I always" or what they would or wouldn't ever do? Mom says Connie means steadfast. I think it's more like contradictory. Buddhaghosa starts out at III 74 listing the 6 temperaments: greedy, hating, deluded, faithful, intelligent and speculative and then says some would make that 14. ... "As to meaning the temperaments are one, that is to say, personal nature, idiosyncrasy." ...96: "However, these directions for recognizing the temperaments have not been handed down in their entirety in either the texts or the commentaries; they are only expressed according to the opinion of the teachers and cannot therefore be treated as authentic ... this is said: 'A teacher who has acquired penetration of minds will know the temperament and will explain a meditation subject accordingly; one who has not should question the pupil'...". 130: ..."a teacher who has not can know it by putting such questions to him as 'What is your temperament?' or 'What states are usually present in you?' or 'What do you like bringing to mind?' or 'What meditation subject does your mind favour?'..." 133: ..."he should apprehend from among the forty meditation subjects one that suits his own temperament..." So, yeah, I suppose we should know our own temperament and I'll just have to say 'deluded' or that Connie means 'drowning in the ocean of concepts'. I am, in this lifetime, in the words of III, 80, one who "has formerly drunk a lot of intoxicants and neglected learning and questioning". Furthermore, once I quit drinking, I graduated to developing some nice needle-toothed vampire marks on my arms and only returned to any 'learning and questioning' after I'd found some "Buddhist" books in a dumpster. peace, connie 41786 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 9:29am Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Howard & Ken O. Hi Sukinder, my pal - This is my reply to your message #41327. Again, I am sorry for the long delay. S: (about pariyatti and patipatti) From my perspective, pariyatti is inferior to patipatti only in that the latter is direct knowing of that which the former points to. However, any decision which says to the effect that pariyatti should be abandoned, is in my opinion, based on wrong understanding. T: I am in agreement with you here, except that I think only pativedha (penetration, realization) is "direct knowing", not patipatti. S: How many monks and laypersons do you know who equate patipatti with a moment of satipatthana, and how many of them would not think that to practice means to sit and meditate? T: There is more than one way to reach the top of a mountain. Most monks and laypersons I know, who are "serious" Buddhists, believe in finding the shortest cut through Sila- Samadhi- Panna, where Samadhi means Samadhi-bhavana and Panna means Vipassana-bhavana as expounded in the Visuddhimagga (which is based on many suttas). The "moment of satipatthana", as I understand it, is a part of Vipassana for attaining pativedha. S: Besides dana and sila without sati and panna to know the moment are just that, I don't think these should be considered patipatti otherwise. Parami is parami only in so far as there is knowing the moment for what it is, otherwise it just conditions a habit. T: Dana and Sila are part of the "brick-laying" like Connie used to say. If you want to call that parami, not included in patipatti, it is fine with me too. S: (About "appreciating the value of conditioned realities") One may consider the difference between kusala and akusala or one may think about the visesa lakkhana of various dhammas or one may think about other conditions and any other aspects of Teachings. But yes, I think it is important to keep in mind the three characteristics. T: I like the way you say it. Nina would have given you a perfect grade for this answer. S: But why did you ask, "when you are alone"? T: Being alone is kaya-viveka ('abiding in solitude free from alluring sensuous objects'). S: We don't know what level of akusala will arise at any given moment, likewise what level of sati and panna. This is why it is good to listen and consider more and more, because we need all sorts of reminders. T: I think you need to do more bhavana and less reading and listening (unless you listen to Dhamma talks given by an Ariya). S: We do however need to know the difference between samatha and vipassana. We should see the importance of developing panna as taught particularly by the Buddha. Also it is important to know clearly their difference. T: How would you know "the difference between samatha and vipassana" if you do very little (or zero?) samatha-bhavana but a lot more on listening and reading? S: (About the importance of Right exertion and viriya-bala) Are you thinking that there is some `short cut method', one that will bypass any lack of accumulated parami? Many people view meditation practice, particularly `jhana', in this way. They think that these are special techniques taught by the Buddha and developed by later `masters' (Zen, Dzogchen etc) for the purpose of getting to enlightenment `in this very life'. I think this is all symptomatic of `attachment to self'. T: Those later masters cannot be complete fools. Don't put them down too easily! The strength of Right exertion/effort that is the characteristic of viriya bala is important like a rocket booster to propell a spacecraft into the outer space. Many, many stories of successful monks during the Buddha Era and after that to the recent history, e.g. those several well-known Burmese and Thai acariyas ( the Forest monks) are my supporting evidence, Sukinder. How many monks and lay-persons you know have achieved an Ariya-magga without the "formal meditation" and jhanas? Can you give me just one name, please?:-) > Tep: Part of the above sutta quote is "monk generates desire, > endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent ...". All > these words (desire, endeavor, arouse persistence, uphold and exert > intention) points to "deliberate cultivation". S: Does it? I think they point to dhammas, all of them kusala and each performing their particular functions. The viriya here can't arise without sati and panna and none can arise without saddha. Cetana performs its very important function, but panna is the leader of a moment of satipatthana, which is what this passage is pointing to. T: Okay, you want to talk theoretical dhammas. Let's discuss like two bookworms would do. First, everything is dhamma. Second, when viriya becomes samma-vayama (Right effort/exertion) along with samma-sati and samma-ditthi, the other Path factors become highly developed. When all the 7 Path factors are matured, samma-samadhi arises (See the Great Forty, MN 117). Further, do you remember the following passage from the Visuddhimagga (VM I,7)? "Develops consciousness and understanding: develops both concentration and insight. For it is concentration that is described here under the heading of 'consciousness', and insight under that of 'understanding'. Ardent (aataapin): possessing energy. For it is energy that is called 'ardour' (aataapa) in the sense of burning up and consuming (aataapana- paritaapana) defilements." This shows how important trying-hard-the- right-way is. > Tep: Further, the four right exertions above show clearly that the > monk has an intention, a purpose to develop and culminate > his arisen skillful qualities (kusala dhammas) towards Nibbana > (as the goal). I think you are talking about the one who is able to > "know and see things the way > they really are", not about > the mind of a worldling who has not reahed > that state. > Before getting "there" you need "an act of will" with right exertions; > once there, no need for intention. [ T: Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi probably shares the above view for he defines samma-sankappa as Right intention.] S: No! I am talking about a "correct" intellectual grasp of the `way things are'. I am talking about the value of such moments, weak as they might be in terms of panna, that it sees the danger in "wrong practice" and is able to avoid it. I see this as requiring patience and courage and `self' not being drawn to "do" something. T: I completely agree with you (and Nina) about the danger of 'self' that is subtly directing everything because of tanha and avijja. But I also see a real danger in being an Armchair Dhamma Discusser, who knows everything but accomplishes little because he/she does not want to try "too hard" and wants to hold on to all (mundane) precious things in life. May I stop at this point because the remainder does not involve new issues? It is nice discussing with you, Sukinder, because you are, without any doubt, a very intelligent man. I always learn from intelligent people, one way or another. Warm regards, Tep --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > > Welcome back to the forum. > ----------------- > S> Thanks, but I wasn't away, only I didn't have the stamina to read > more than one or two posts at a time. > --------------------- (snipped) S> But a moment of understanding does accumulate and develop and it has to start from some where…… ;-) > Thanks Tep for spending the time to respond and giving me the > opportunity to reflect some more. > > Metta, > Sukinder 41787 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 5:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/5/2005 7:28:21 AM Pacific Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: Yes, you have previously explained your idea of 'stored memories as potential thoughts', and I know you feel strongly that this is so. Would you care to explain the background to this idea, and how it fits in with your overall view of things? Just a thought here, but if as you say thoughts are a 'state' (dhamma), then since they are not nama-dhamma (dhamma that experiences an object) I suppose they would have to be rupa-dhamma (dhamma that does not experience an object). Is that how you would see it? Jon Hi Jon A mind-object would be classified as a nama. Namas do not exist without being based on rupa. I've explained in enough detail to get my idea accross as best as I can. I'll I can do is repeat or rephrase. So I'll leave it for you to contemplate over if you wish. I really think the term "dhamma" has done far more harm than good. There are not these "real states" out there with individual essence. You may think that this is not what you are saying, but I don't see how it can be anything other than that. To me, this "isolation" of trying to see individual states as having realities...is taking the mind away from reality, not bringing it toward it. Nothing like a little commentary in the morning. TG 41788 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/4/2005 9:42:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: TG wrote... I noticed "wrong view" is listed as a cetasika. Wouldn't "self view" be > classified under that? > > TG Hi Howard Can't let you off the hook without asking you to answer the above question if you would care to. TG 41789 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 6:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/5/05 1:29:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 2/4/2005 9:42:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... > writes: > > TG wrote... > I noticed "wrong view" is listed as a cetasika. Wouldn't "self view" be > >classified under that? > > > >TG > > Hi Howard > > Can't let you off the hook without asking you to answer the above question > if > you would care to. > > TG > ======================= Well, if wrong view is a cetasika, then so is self view, because self view is certainly wrong. However, this is not how I use the language. I typically think of one's view on a matter as conceptual. I think of wrong views as mistaken notions, all conditioned by ignorance. I think of *sense* of self (in the person or in dhammas) as fundamental ignorance, and a cetasika. Whether that matches Abhidhammic definitions or not is another matter. Part of the problem is Pali usage versus my own English usage. 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) 41790 From: mnease Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 11:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: for James Hi Robert and Tep, ----- Original Message ----- From: "rjkjp1" To: Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:29 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: for James > I am not sure if the comments by Venerable Bodhi should be > considered so highly in this case. > The section he is writing about in the Abhidhammathasangaha is > detailing various momentary phenomena. It is true that one type of > samma samadhi is mundane jhana but I see nowhere in the section to > indicate that Anuruddha was restricting samma samadhi to this. In > fact it seems unlikely he would be. > The expositor PTS (translator :pe maung tin). > P58. Triplets in the Matika > "'leading to accumulation' are those states which go about > severally arranging births and deaths in a round of of destiny > like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer in a > wall." > "..leading to accumulation are those causes which by being > accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that > round of rebirth" > It then defines these causes as "moral or immoral states". i.e > akusala AND kusala. The Dispeller adds IMPERTURBABLE states to these--i.e., those conditioned by jhaana. > It notes that the way leading to dispersion > is the Ariyan path (eightfactored path). > There is then several chapters (total of 140 pages) that gives > much details about the various types of kusala (wholesome > consciousness). The last two chapters in this section explain > all the different types of mundane Jhanas. Thus the mudane jhanas - > although classified as samma samadhi are also classified as leading > to accumulation (of rebirth). Right-- > Part of the confusion about this subject is that many suttas are > addressed to those monks who had mastery of jhana, they could enter > and exit at will, many levels of jhana. They were the cream of the > Buddha's disciples. And of these ones they can - immediately after > exiting jhana- have awareness of the factors of teh various jhanas > they were in. And so use jhana as a base for development of teh > eightfold path leading out of samsara. This is how it seems to me too. > According to the texts these > most developed disciples can no longer exist. > Another commenst on venerables Bodhi's translation of sammasankappa > as right INTENTION. All these pali terms do not have exact english > equivalents so there are always problems, but Intention seems an > unfortunate choice of term for sankappa. > Sankappa is the mental factor (cetasika) vitakka and Bodhi > translates it as 'initial application' at times . So why use > Intention? For cetana he uses volition. What is the difference > between volition and Intention? I agree with this exception. Sammaasankappa (absent of course from all but the first jhaana) together WITH pa~n~naa constitute the wisdom section of the path--pa~n~naa cannot discern the tilakkhaa.na alone. mike 41791 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 6:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/5/2005 11:05:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: TG wrote... > I noticed "wrong view" is listed as a cetasika. Wouldn't "self view" be > >classified under that? > > > >TG > > Hi Howard > > Can't let you off the hook without asking you to answer the above question > if > you would care to. > > TG > ======================= Well, if wrong view is a cetasika, then so is self view, because self view is certainly wrong. However, this is not how I use the language. I typically think of one's view on a matter as conceptual. I think of wrong views as mistaken notions, all conditioned by ignorance. I think of *sense* of self (in the person or in dhammas) as fundamental ignorance, and a cetasika. Whether that matches Abhidhammic definitions or not is another matter. Part of the problem is Pali usage versus my own English usage. With metta, Howard Hi Howard (and Jon) Thanks for the clarification. I see sense-of-self much as you do. But I see this fundamental delusion as joining other mental constructs to develop self-view. And I see concepts as also being mental constructs that are associated with these "self" perspectives. Therefore, I really don't see that one is more real than the other. They proliferate due to conditions. If "sense-of'self" is a real thing, so are these other states that are just sense-of-self proliferations. I don't see one iota of difference between their so-called "reality." Nothing can arise without being part of the "conditional matrix" that makes up the whole field-of-conditions. How could something arise that is less real (or not real at all) then something else? And does such a question have anything to do with the Buddha's teaching? TG 41792 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 0:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Jon and Larry, what a pity, it was a nice dialogue about kusala, Larry's kusala, and about performing kusala without having to think first about it. Jon gave the examples. I hope you will both continue. Nina. op 05-02-2005 06:16 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jsabbott@n...: >> I've lost the thread. I don't know what either one of us is talking >> about. >> > > Glad to know I'm not the only one ;-)) > >> Maybe we should start over. > > Your serve. > > Jon 41793 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:17pm Subject: Re: Anicca as characteristic Hi Joop, > J: can one say that Kamma is not anicca? Why does not automatically > kamma falls away (perhaps after a very long time), as the result of > a built-in property of it? kel: it is anicca, kamma is nothing more than the link between previous citta and current citta. There is no permanent thing that exists. Note original citta has already fallen away, it's the persisting effect that cause the resultant. Once citta/kamma has given it's resultant, it falls away not because of time but because it's function is done. The built-in property is cause and effect and tranistory nature of anicca is the same here. > Phi:You said: "Abhidhamma is all about anatta, isn't it?" > J:My answer: Yes, it is, and that is my problem: that's anatta but not > anicca. kel: both are purely academic statements since abhidhamma is about all dhammas. > You said: "Perhaps it's of less import to discuss impermanence > because even though it is not as easy to understand as we might > think, it is also not as profound and subtle an issue as anatta?" > My answer: I don't agree with you, I don't think there is a Sutta in > which a hierarchy of the three dukkha-anatta-anicca is made. Nytiloka > even states: "It is from the fact of impermanence that, in most > texts, > the other two characteristics, suffering (dukkha) and not-self > (anattá), are derived." kel: Transitory nature of phenomena is what proves there's a lack of atta. A lack of a core is what proves it's all impermanent. And since nothing is there to latch onto for safety, it's all dukkha. So both arguments are redundant, drawing a line where there is none. > J: As I understand this, four character-types are > distinguished: much desire + slow intelligence; much desire + quick > intelligence; liking theory + slow intelligence; liking theory + > quick intelligence. > I have some doubt which this system and I cannot understand how > somebody with a slow intelligence can like theory (ditthhi- carita); Kel: if you look at D.O, the roots are: tanha and avijja. That's how it should be understood in terms of these personalities and what phil was asking. kaya - high tanha, low panna vedana - high tanha, high panna citta - high avijja but particulary ditthi, low panna dhamma - high avijja, high panna It's not liking theory as much as what can refute the leading akusala tendency. Since tanha is based on sensual pleasures, contemplating kaya/vedana leads to dispelling that. Some people's problem is ego and pride with what they know of dhamma etc. So nama/dhamma is mainly what they identify with and hence contemplating on their nature dispel wrong egotistical views. I use panna here instead of intelligence because it goes to show why each one is more suited. Kaya is easier to observe (more apparent) than vedana as citta is compared to dhamma. So highly intelligent ones will incline toward a harder, more elusive object. Eventually you got to get to the same vipassana-nanas but the orientation and the object is different. It's all about the anchor one is more comfortable with. - kel 41794 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 1:42pm Subject: Re: Anatta, Present Moment and Goal / Kel & Ken H Hi Ken H., KH: > We are misunderstanding each other here, Tep. I was simply saying > that the audience in the sutta was given a description of the ariyan > disciples. I don't think it matters whether or not members of the > audience were, themselves, ariyan. You seem to think it does matter. > T: I am glad that this is a smal misunderstanding, Ken. It helps me to make my point easily in case the audience were not ariyan. Because I can say, "Aha! these steps are my model too,". Otherwise, you might say that the "instructions" were given only to atiyans. KH: > > Remember, the world is nothing more than fleeting, worthless, void- > of-self mental and physical phenomena (nama and rupa). > How can we tell nama and rupa to get off their backsides > and follow a set of instructions? It doesn't make sense. > T: Yes, I agree with that ariyan's insight knowledge, Ken. But if we used the terms of the one who knows and sees (the nama and rupa the way they really are), then we'd sound like faked mathematicians discussing the higher-level theory that we have no idea how to prove. Then it does not make sense either. KH: > > Provided there has been wise consideration of the Dhamma, > even a glutton can have moments of right understanding. > But the point is; at those moments there is no glutton - > the akusala cetasikas > (lobha, ahirika, thina, middha, moha and so on) do not arise. > T: That moment between chewings? But which level of "understanding" do you think the glutton might be able to achieve while being absorbed in eating pleasure? By the way, isn't nekkhamma sankappa important for dispassion? How can a person who cannot become dispassionate with sensual pleasures achieve a vipassana-nana? This is beyond my imagination! Warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --------------------------- > KH: > > The audience to the Sekha-patipada Sutta were given a > description of a certain type of ariyan learner and his > accomplishments. > > > >(snipped) > ----------------------- 41795 From: Philip Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 2:35pm Subject: Revulsion ? Hi all Found this in a notebook: "Ordinarily you are really only dissatisfied with your dislikes. You have to become fed up with your dislikes and your likes, your happiness and your suffering." (Don't know the source.) It reminded me of the "revulsion" that appears in so many suttas. The monk comes to see annica, dukkha and anatta and then feels "revulsion" for the khandas, followed by "dispassion" and finally liberation. Revulsion has connotations of disgust, loathing, intensely negative feeling which to me doesn't sound like the way to go about things skillfully, though perhaps there needs to be a moment of such feeling to wake us up. I wonder what is meant by this word, whether the Pali is not quite as intense in its connotations? Whether "fed up" might not be quite a good way to put it. I like the above quote. So easy to be dissatisfied with dislikes while drifing along obliviously in one's likes, churning up a great wake of kamma as we go. What is the Pali used for "revulsion" and what are its connotations? Thanks in advance. Metta Phil p.s thanks in passing to Connie, Azita and Joop for your feedback in the "predominant roots" thread. Very interesting. Back to you on it tomorrow. 41796 From: Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Revulsion ? Hi Phil Just a few comments. I believe insight needs to take the mind through a phase that sees all conditions as tied up with suffering and death with great clarity. Conditions with this perspective can only be seen as revolting. This type of revulsion is not the emotional type of revultion we normally think of...it is it is an 'insight attribute' and an unattached spiritual state of mind. TG 41797 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 3:51pm Subject: Re: Revulsion ? What is the Pali used for "revulsion" and what are its connotations? Thanks in advance. Metta Phil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Phil, Revulsion may be 'viraga' in Pali. I may also be 'vikheppa'. With Metta, Htoo Naing 41798 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 4:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions TG TGrand458@a... wrote: >For consciousness not to have an actual object to be "conscious of" is >impossible according to Sutta or Abhidhamma as far as I know. During thinking, >consciousness has an "actual object." One needs to figure out what it is and how >it operates ... so that dependent origination principles are more clearly >seen. This is what Howard is alluding to I believe. > > I believe it is correct to say that consciousness must have an object, but I am not sure whether that must necessarily be an "actual object", whatever that may mean, since as far as I understand things there is nothing 'actual' about thoughts, only about the consciousness concerned. Sorry I'm not able to explain it any better than this, of course I'm not speaking from direct experience here ;-)). Jon 41799 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Feb 5, 2005 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Howard's suttas, 2. Sutta no 3. Hi, Nina Thanks for the extra detail about 'taming'. Very interesting. The correlation between the 3 'things prescribed by the wise' mentioned in the main text of the sutta and the qualities set out in the verse seems to be as follows: Giving: Giving Going forth: Harmlessness, self-control and taming Service to one's parents: Service to one's dear parents and to those who live the holy life So the reference to 'going forth' is a reference to qualities that (in their mundane form) can be developed by all of us, in daily life. Jon Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Dear Jon, >Thank you very much for the verse, BB translation. >It helped me, I can add something now. See below. >op 02-02-2005 23:05 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jsabbott@n...: > > >>Here is the verse from the BB translation, for comparison: >>The wise prescribe giving, >>Harmelssness, self-control and taming, >>Service to one's dear parents >>And to those who live the holy life. >>These are the kinds of deeds >>T which the wise person resorts. >>The noble one, possessed of vision, >>Passes to an auspicous world. >> >>A footnote to the verse reads: >>'It seems that in the verse, the "going forth" is represented by >>"harmlessness, self-control and taming", since these are the practices >>undertaken by those who go forth. >> >> >N: Taming, the Thai Pali had thama, in Pali dama, and now I see: taming, >subduing. The Co adds: uposatha sila, and also in the Punnovaadasutta: >khanti, patience, and also paññaa in the Alavakasutta. Thus, taming includes >several qualities, patience and wisdom. Harmlessness, self-control and >taming are virtues of the recluse. He lives a life of non-violence. Also >laypeople can develop those virtues. >Nina. > >