42200 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:06pm Subject: Nina Dear Nina, I have not been reading all posts lately - but in speaking with Azita on the phone last night we discussed how, through your posts, your dear father was a part of our lives also. I recall reflecting on the ups and downs of your relationship with him, and was grateful for your honesty in telling it as it was. He had an indomitable spirit, and sometimes I'd chuckle to think of the stubborn old gentleman living life as much as possible on his own terms. Your anecdotes, your frustrations, your insight into your own feelings are an example I use in my relationship with my own elderly mother - a relative youngster really, only approaching her ninth decade - but every bit a determined and strong individual. She 'will not go gentle into that good night', but I'll walk along with her whenever she lets me, and hope that I can be of service and comfort to her as you so evidently were to your parent. Thank you. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 42201 From: Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions In a message dated 2/13/2005 3:32:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: Hi TG, The term realities seems to lead to confusion. What about the term dhammas? Hi Nina TG: This doesn't help at all because the term is still being used as "realities." Not only that, some people hide behind foreign terms like dhammas as if it verified their point of view. Not by you, or in this group so much, but in chat rooms, etc., I've seen that go on a lot. It becomes like a "mucky proof" that's used more to confuse than to clarify. I would prefer the terms -- states, conditions, or events...or the three alternatives at the end of this post. op 11-02-2005 22:10 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > The principles of conditionality: impermanence, suffering, no-self -- are > what need to be known. The elements are merely the "tools" we use to see the > principles that lead the mind to be able to overcome suffering. I see these > tools as things to use and then discard. N: the three characteristics are characteristics *of* dhammas. Thus, seeing now is impermanent, dukkha, anatta. The three characteristics are not abstractions, as you will agree, I am sure. TG: Absolutely. > >Quote: ³Form is like a lump of foam, > Feeling like a water bubble; > Perception is like a mirage, > Volitions like a plantain trunk (coreless), > And consciousness like an illusion, > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 952 953) N: We can repeat all this, but then it is only thinking. Understanding of dhammas has to be developed stage by stage so that it is directly realized. It cannot be realized immediately that rupa is a lump of foam. First it has to be clearly known what are the dhammas that are a lump of foam, a water bubble, etc. TG: Its only think when its thinking. Its directly realized when its directly realized. I believe these conditions are seen in this manner when conditionality principles are quite deeply inculcated into ones insightful awareness. If you are saying that "elemental states and interactions" need to be well discriminated first, in order to be able to do this with proficiency; then I agree. However, one should not be so quick to conclude that someone else is merely "thinking" about these things as opposed to applying them. I do not assume that you are merely "thinking" about dhammas. :-) TG: My view is that elements should be seen as elements (not realities), > aggregates should be seen as aggregates (not realities), and they should be > seen > conditioned, impermanent, suffering, selfless, and in light of the above > quote. > They are constantly mutating states, never remain the same, and have nothing > of > their own. N: Let us examine more closely what elements are: nama and rupa, and also the unconditioned element, nibbana is included here. The five khandhas: rupa, cetasikas, citta which are conditioned dhammas. The aayatanas: nama and rupa, and also nibbana is included here in dhammaayatana. Now we speak only of conditioned dhammas. First they have to be directly known when they appear as dhammas, TG: Breaking in... Experiences for me appear as experiences. They do not appear to me as "dhammas." Seing them as "dhammas" means I am layering something upon them that isn't there. arising because of a concurrence of conditions. Without conditions seeing could not arise. Seeing is real, it can be experienced at this moment. It is a reality or, if you prefer a dhamma. Terms are not at fault, but it is right understanding that is deficient, not yet developed. Nina. TG: Right understanding is of course the thing...but terminology is important because the way it is used can have a tendency to lead to grasping or lead away from grasping. In my view...by "de-realifying" 'the person' and substituting components as realities, we've just transfered the grasping to a different object. I think this grasping is more subtle, but nevertheless, a form of grasping. And this is why I think such a thing (defining as realities) is not done in the Suttas. Some people may be able to see things as realities without grasping...but I think the tendency will be to grasp them. The Buddha does not focus attention on "realities" at all, he focusses attention on the certainty of change, death, suffering and no-self (to show there is nothing to lose by detaching the mind.). The elements (the All) is merely the "stuff" that's changing. No need to glorify them as realities; rather, they should be seen as repulsive and lacking substance. The term realities unfortunately enhances a substantiality viewpoint. Maybe the term "stuff" "scum" or "crap" would better define what these states are. TG 42202 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl Hi RobM, > > I think that Carl may be referring to Abhidhamma's definition of > > rupas as: > > - inherently undesirable (anittha) > > - inherently moderately desirable (ittha or itthamajjhatta) > > - inherently desirable (ati-ittha) > > > > See CMA p 172 for some details (I can provide more if required - > > this is a fascinating topic). Are you referring to Vithi section since two page numbers you gave were close. Then Dhamma Thread (216), #40600 contains explanation of this vithi. This vithi has two special tadarammana cittas that arise after 7 javana cittas. There are 3 kinds of cittas possible for the two tadarammana cittas: aksuala upekkha santirana, kusala upekkha santirana, kusala somanassa santirana. They are all vipaka cittas. Now relate the cittas and rupas above: kusala upekkha santirana -> anittha kusala upekkha santirana -> ittha kusala somanassa santirana -> ati-ittha Bottom line, this classification of rupa only makes sense in the context of the two tadarammana cittas. Hence it shouldn't be applied to rupa classification as a whole. - kel 42203 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 0:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl typo, should read: > kusala upekkha santirana -> anittha aksuala upekkha santirana -> anittha - kel 42204 From: mnease Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha said: That's how you should train yourselves Hi Sarah, "Of all those things that from a cause arise, Tathagata the cause thereof has told; And how they cease to be, that too he tells, This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse."[2] Upon hearing the first two lines, Upatissa became established in the Path of stream-entry, and to the ending of the last two lines he already listened as a stream-winner. What a fine example of the central place of pa.ticcasamuppaada and the understanding thereof--so often overlooked or underestimated--in the Dhamma. Also a wonderful glimpse of Sariputta's biography--I had forgotten. mike 42205 From: mnease Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] abbreviated conversation Hi Connie (and Sarah), ----- Original Message ----- From: "connie" To: "dsg" Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 11:45 AM Subject: [dsg] abbreviated conversation > "...What is the difference between a > dream at night and a dream now? Is it not a dream? Because it's only the > thinking after the processes of seeing, hearing... just dream about > reality which keeps on arising and falling." Wonderful--thanks for posting this (I can almost hear Khun Sujin's voice). mike 42206 From: Andrew Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha said: That's how you should train yourselves --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mnease" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > "Of all those things that from a cause arise, > Tathagata the cause thereof has told; > And how they cease to be, that too he tells, > This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse."[2] > > Upon hearing the first two lines, Upatissa became established in the Path > of stream-entry, and to the ending of the last two lines he already > listened as a stream-winner. > > What a fine example of the central place of pa.ticcasamuppaada and the > understanding thereof--so often overlooked or underestimated--in the Dhamma. Hello Mike and Sarah A question you may be able to help me on. In books like "The Buddha and His Teachings" by Narada, Dependent Origination is put into diagramatical form with 5 links being designated "The Active Side of Life" (avijja, sankhara,tanha, upadana, bhava) and the rest "The Passive Side of Life". Oddly, the distinction doesn't seem to be explained in the text. When I first studied DO in a group, the prevalent interpretation of this was that "we" could do things about the active links but not the passive links. Of course, this now strikes me as being way off target. Do you happen to know if there is any Pali textual support for the active/passive distinction and what its correct significance is? Or is it a red herring? I have just seen on DSG news of Nina's father and send our condolences to her and Lodjewijk. Best wishes Andrew T 42207 From: Hugo Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Five Indriyas, what is sati, no 1. Hello Nina and Tep, On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:12:32 +0100, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > T: I never wait for sati to arise or try to direct it, given that awareness > > is already present. For example, I am typing now and I am aware of it > > without trying to keep sati with the typing. My awareness, or sati, at this > > level continues because my attention is staying with the typing. > N: I understand what you mean. I know that some people mean by sati: knowing > what one is doing. Knowing what one is doing is not "good mindfulness", you need to know what you are doing and WHY you are doing it. If you don't know WHY you are doing whatever you are doing then the defilements are leading. Of course because one of the defilements is 'ignorance' it might be that you think you know WHY you are doing it but are deluding yourself. So, you have just to keep doing it until you are good at finding who is "speaking", if it is "wisdom" or the "defilements". And this means you have (like The Buddha instructed to Rahula) to reflect on what you did and see if there was some suffering produced. That's the reason of my "everyday psychology" practice of asking me "why?" to almost every action I do. Greetings, -- Hugo 42208 From: robmoult Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 137 and Tiika. Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Thank you. He died this morning, but it was peaceful. Condolences. Some time ago, I shared with you my view on passing away and you appreciated the thought. I will restate it again. Through our lives, each of us impact each other. Nina, your father obviously had a huge impact on you. You, in turn, have had an impact on me. I have had an impact on my Abhidhamma class students. And so on. Your father's impact on you has indirectly impacted me and even more indirectly impacted by Abhidhamma class students. I visualize concentric waves moving ever outwards. The source of the waves is no longer present, but the source "lives on" as the focus of the concentric waves which it created. Karuna, Rob M :-) 42209 From: Hugo Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/Hugo Hello Connie, Thanks for the time dedicated to write this long reply. On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:43:02 -0800, connie wrote: > Yes, we all use the imaginery tool/coping mechanism called self. I don't > know how skillfully, though. We tend to forget it's not real - it's > shorthand aspect as you and Howard mentioned. Yes, but we are clinging to a self, that's a fact, just by saying "there is no self, there is no self, there is no self" or by avoiding writing or speaking in any way possible to avoid inferring a self will NOT make it go away. So, the first step is to accept it, yes, there is a self, one that we have created. Then we should know it, learn what is it, how it works, this will lead you to discover that it is a cause of suffering, thus you should remove it. So you work on it, while you are doing all this you realize that there is no real "you". We have a big advantage over other people, we know from The Buddha that there is a needle in the haystack, so we don't need to wonder if it is indeed a needle or not, so we need to plan what's the best way to find it. At least that's where I am at, I am still clinging to a self, and no matter what I say or do, it doesn't go away, so I am learning about it, and figuring out what feeds it, what is 'self' and what is not. When I find that something feeds it, I try to cut it, then check if there were good results or not (comparing to what The Buddha said and by my own experience). Greetings, -- Hugo 42210 From: Hugo Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Hello Ken, On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 00:10:39 -0000, kenhowardau wrote: > Remember, lobha can be extremely subtle - even while we are giving > money to the poor or sitting on a meditation mat, there can be - and > mostly is - the desire to gain something for ourselves. I agree. > H: > If you are subscribed to DSG, if you are reading Dhamma books, > if you are having Dhamma discussions, if you are observing with > wisdom, aren't those your own personal practice? > ---------------- > > I would be wrong to think they were. The outside, conventional, > appearance is not what counts. In reality, there are only fleeting > dhammas - some of them will be kusala, but most will be akusala - > and they are all that count. If we think the outside, conventional > appearance is what counts then we have wrong view. Sorry, I am not at that level Ken, I still see a self, I still cling to it, I am not able to see any dhammas, cittas, cetasikas or anything like that. Maybe I should join other mailing lists for beginners, I am starting to suspect that I am just making you all waste your time. I apologize for that. > They are commonly understood as intentional practices. But in fact, > there is never any control. You and I think we can make choices - > e.g., to snap our fingers or not snap our fingers, to look straight > ahead or look to the side - but that is only thinking. In reality, > everything is conditioned by dhammas, over which there is no control. > > For conventional purposes, it doesn't matter that we think we have > control, but for Dhamma practice, it does matter - we have to know > there is no control. So, then "becoming Enlightened" is like winning the Lottery without even having to buy a ticket? > There are other good points in your post that require discussion, > and there are two more recent posts that you have kindly addressed > to me. But I had better send this off before I get too far behind. > (It's a busy weekend - the surf's up and we have visitors.) Before you waste your time, remember that I am still clinging to a self, and just you telling me that it doesn't exist, won't make it go (I have tried that). But I appreciate the time you took in replying to this and other message (it might read like sarcasm, but I am not being sarcastic). Greetings, -- Hugo 42211 From: Hugo Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Hello Rob M, On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 08:03:21 -0000, robmoult wrote: > Greetings from another Abhidhamma-loving engineer who has been away > for a while :-) I am far from being an "Abhidhamma-loving" person, I haven't even read it, and so far my understanding is not at that level. The way I see it is like the following: I know that my eyes are not good (I can't read, I can't see far, etc.), I am barely out of elementary school (I can read, write and do some simple math). Should I go and try to read books on anatomy, medicine, etc. so I can fix my eyes? I don't think so. What do I do? Get a job, save enough money to buy a pair of glasses, then study more, and finally realize that I don't need to do the job myself, if I save enough money I can get Lasik surgery and get it fixed! But again, I can't trust my mind as it is full of defilements so what I said above, might change tomorrow. :-) Greetings, -- Hugo 42212 From: robmoult Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions Hi Kel (and Howard), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi RobM, > > > Does the conformational mind door process (tadanuvattika > > manodvaravithi) not take the same object as the previous 5 door > > process? See CMA p164. > Cannot exactly be the same exact as the original object is already > gone. Original vithi receive it as pancadvaravajjana with the > object still present. Subsequent vithis can only receive it as > mandovaravajjana. Also why the 2nd mano-vara combines the two > impressions of the object. I don't have CMA so I can't check if > we're talking the same. Of course, you (and Howard) are correct; two processes cannot take the same rupa as object. Quoting Dr. Mon's "Abhidhamma - Ultimate Science" (p 148), "Thus, after a panca-dvara vithi, a mano-dvara vithi quickly follows it retaking the sense-object of the panca- dvara vithi as a past object. Then the second mano-dvara vithi follows suit observing the new image and the old impression together. The third mano-dvara vithi quickly follows again observing the form and shape of the sense-object. The fourth mano-dvara vithi follows considering the name associated with the object. If necessary, many many mano-dvara vithis quickly occur in succession considering the features of the object in detail and also the time and place connected with the object if he has encountered it before." Clearly, from this explanation, we can see that the first mano-dvara vithi takes the rupa as a past object, not as a present object. I have a set of Abhidhamma notes prepared by Ven. Sayadaw U Silananda which lists the details for the five clear (vibhuta) vithi and two obscure (avibhuta) vithi taking present rupa object. Present objects have a lifespan of 17 thought moments and include all rupas except the two intimations and the four characteristics. Why five clear vithi with present rupa objects? The rupa object lasts for 17 moments and this allows up to five past bhavanga + one vibrating bhavanga + one arresting bhavanga + one mind door adverting + seven javana + two retention. Of course, when there are six or seven past bhavanga before the vibrating bhavanga there are no retention cittas and the process becomes obscure (avibhuta). From these notes, it is clear that mind door processes can take present rupas as object (just as sense door processes do). I have a set of Audio CDs of U Silananda's Abhidhamma lectures and I will try to find the portion where he discusses this subject. I am curious under what conditions a mind door process takes a present rupa object. Editorial ========= Let us look at the history (origins) of the thought process. 2500 years ago: Suttas and (according to many) six books of Abhidhamma begins as an oral tradition. The term "javana" briefly appears in a Sutta (Patisambhida Magga) and the terms "javana" and "bhavanga" appear two or thee times in the Patthana. The Patthana very roughly maps out the progression of mental states, but not in detail. (See Appendix of Nyanatiloka's "Manual of Buddhist Terms"). 2000 years ago: Suttas and Abhidhamma written down. 1500 years ago: Buddhaghosa compiled commentaries (some dating back to the time of the Buddha). In various places, the Visuddhimagga provides some more details on the individual states, but does not present them as a process nor does it give the current names. 1000 years ago: Acariya Anuruddha compiles the Abhidhammatthasangaha. The thought process appears in its current form for the first time (complete with new terms such as sampaticchana, santirana, votthapana, tadarammana, cuti, etc.). The concept of 17 thought moment lifespan of a rupa is introduced here. Recent times: Ledi Sayadaw and others add more details such as conformational mind-door processes. Bottom line is that I do not consider the level of detail that we are discussing here to be part of the "original" Abhidhamma. This is not to say that we should not discuss it, but getting caught up in this level of detail may not be bringing us closer to the Buddha's teachings. Metta, Rob M :-) 42213 From: connie Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 7:44pm Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/Hugo Hello, Hugo, What needle in the haystack did Buddha teach? The using self to get rid of self idea reminds me of the old cartoons where a character would erase all of itself except it's hand which would quickly redraw a new self. Rather than "there is (no) self", I'd say the first thing to accept is that there is a mistaken belief in / way of seeing self... sakkaya ditthi. I think we're all sitting here believing that "everything", all namas and rupas, are me and mine or others' and will be forever unless and until we're sotapanna. What I don't call me or mine, I call some other thing / self. What is there that is not some self in our thinking? So I would just rephrase your questions a bit. When will namas and rupas go away? What other selves might there be apart from them? What are nama and rupa? What feeds them? peace, connie 42214 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:38pm Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder II Hi Sukinder - Thank you for making the message shortened! (III) T: I was talking about dana and sila at the level of ordinary people, who had perfected their 5 precepts. The focus was not on satipatthana. Higher sila comes with higher panna and sati, and vice versa. T: How do you yourself ensure that sati and panna are present "to know the moment", and how does the remembering about the danger of self make you free from the20 personality views? Please don't tell me the theory again and again. Now I want to know the 'real thing' that works. Kind regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > > (III) 42215 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:42pm Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder IV Hi Sukinder, I am skipping some irrelevant issues to make my reply shorter. Sorry for that. Beside, it is good to keep in mind that a Dhamma discussion is no debate, unless you want to accumulate your personality view. IV T: Wrong guess, Sukinder. The point I have made is I am using the current right view (with asava) as the forerunner. The fact that I am discussing the Dhamma here proves that the miccha-ditthi is a lot weaker than the right view. <'Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: there is right view with fermentations [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path'.> With continuing development of sila-samadhi-panna the noble right view will be nearer. < S: You say that to assert that there is no self, is memorizing. How do you know? Can't there be any direct understanding of the moment? Can't the development have been such that the nimita of lobha and ditthi for example, are recognized at some level or the other? > T: These questions are supposed to be for you to answer. How can I answer them for you since our approaches are different? You want direct knowledge/direct undestanding? Study the Maha-salayatanika Sutta. Lobha is completely eliminated by the Arahat-magga. Sakkaya- ditthi is eradicated by the Sotapanna. Best wishes, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > > ----------------- > > Sukinder: > > I agree with anyone who states that patipatti is more important > than 42216 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:45pm Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder V Hi Sukinder, I think it is always nice to keep in mind that we are discussing the Dhamma, not trying to win a debate. T: There is only one Teaching, the Dhamma. The conventional or ultimate approaches are just an observer's perspectives of the Dhamma. Remember the 10 blind men and the huge elephant? T: There you go again! Just chanting the same mantra over and over. > T: Indeed, "learning from experience" helps peeling off the wrong- view-layers of the avijja onion. S: :-) Development of panna is about greater familiarity with the presently arisen dhamma. It is not a matter of looking back and learning from the past. Thinking about the past involves sanna and citta vipallasa and can't be relied upon. T: You probably did not read carefully! Learning from experience is learning from the real dhammas that are arising now and those that arose in the past. The past understanding is useful as a review and assessing the progress you have made. For example, reviewing of fruition of the Sotapanna (see VM, XXII.20). Kind regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > > --------------- > > (IV) > >> T: Being alone is kaya-viveka ('abiding in solitude free from > alluring > > sensuous objects'). > > 42217 From: robmoult Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl Hi Kel, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi RobM, > > > > I think that Carl may be referring to Abhidhamma's definition of > > > rupas as: > > > - inherently undesirable (anittha) > > > - inherently moderately desirable (ittha or itthamajjhatta) > > > - inherently desirable (ati-ittha) > > > > > > See CMA p 172 for some details (I can provide more if required - > > > this is a fascinating topic). > > Are you referring to Vithi section since two page numbers you gave > were close. Then Dhamma Thread (216), #40600 contains explanation > of this vithi. This vithi has two special tadarammana cittas that > arise after 7 javana cittas. There are 3 kinds of cittas possible > for the two tadarammana cittas: aksuala upekkha santirana, kusala > upekkha santirana, kusala somanassa santirana. They are all vipaka > cittas. Now relate the cittas and rupas above: > kusala upekkha santirana -> anittha > kusala upekkha santirana -> ittha > kusala somanassa santirana -> ati-ittha > > Bottom line, this classification of rupa only makes sense in the > context of the two tadarammana cittas. Hence it shouldn't be > applied to rupa classification as a whole. Here is the relevant section of the Abhidhammathasangaha (IV, 17, Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary in CMA): ===== Sense objects are distinguished into three classes: the undesirable (anittha), the moderately desirable (ittha, also called itthamajjhatta, desirable-neutral), and the extremely desirable (ati-ittha). While the desirable object is thus subdivided into two, all undesirable objects are comprised within a single class called simply "the undesirable". According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, this distinction in the quality of objects pertains to the intrinsic nature of the object itself; it is not a variable determined by the individual temperament and preferences of the experiencer. The Sammohavinodani, the commentary to the Vibanga, contents that when a person considers a desirable object to be undesirable, or an undesirable object to be desirable, he does so due to a perversion of perception (sannavipallasa). The object itself, however remains inherently desirable or undesirable independently of the perciever's personal preferences. The Sammohavinodani states that the distinction between the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according to what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, burgesses, land owners and merchants." ===== We often think of sense objects as "visible objects", but this can be confusing when considering the intrinsic nature of sense objects because I think that almost all visible objects would be desirable neutral. When trying to understand intrinsic nature, I have found it useful to consider tangible objects. When an object is very cold or very hot, this is intrinsically undesirable. When an object is at room temperature, this is desirable neutral. When an object is a bit warmer than room temperature (like the coffee I am drinking at the moment), then it is intrinsically desirable. You are correct that this discussion takes place in the chapter on vitthi. Let us consider the sense door process in more detail to see why. When the five sense door adverting mental state falls away, which sense-consciousness mental state will arise? It can be either a kusala vipaka sense-consciousness mental state or an akusala vipaka sense-consciousness mental state. But which one? If the sense object is intrinsically undesirable, it will be an akusala vipaka sense-consciousness mental state, otherwise it will be a kusala vipaka sense-consciousness mental state. The receiving mental state will be of the same nature (kusala or akusala) as the sense- consciousness mental state. When an akusala vipaka receiving mental state falls away it will be followed by akusala vipaka investigating mental state. When a kusala vipaka receiving mental state falls away, a kusala vipaka with neutral feeling will arise when the object is intrinsically desirable neutral and a kusala vipaka with pleasant feeling will arise when the object is intrinsically desirable. The determining mental state is functional and like the five sense door adverting mental state, it is not influenced by the intrinsic nature of the object. The javana mental states are fixed by accumulations (only indirectly by the intrinsic nature of the object). The retention mental state is also a function of the intrinsic nature of the object. An undesirable object will use the akusala vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling as retention. Desirable-neutral objects will have either the kusala vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling or one of the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with indifferent feeling as retention. Desirable objects will have either the kusala vipaka investigating mental state with pleasant feeling or one of the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with pleasant feeling as retention. You are correct that this classification refers to rupas acting as sense objects (though as you can see, I believe that it impacts more than the retention mental state). Metta, Rob M :-) 42218 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Salesmanship: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > > > Hi Sarah, > > Of course I knew that your question wasn't an open question. It was > a leading question which supports your particular point of view. We > have covered this ground so many times that it is getting too > redundant to get into a deep analysis. Let me just summarize: You > hold the view: "There is No Self" while I hold the view "Everything > is Non-Self". .... S: Perhaps we should use the Pali and just say 'sabbe dhamma anatta'. Seeing is anatta, hearing is anatta...the 5 khandhas are anatta as described in the sutta I just quoted. There is no self in any of these dhammas. I hope we can agree on this. ... >It may not seem to be a big difference but this > difference in viewpoint will translate into a difference in > practices. .... S: It's true that if there's any 'self-wriggle-room' given, no matter the words used, it will translate into how patipatti (practice) or bhavana (mental development) is interpreted. I have no doubt we all look for self-wriggling in gross or subtle ways a lot more often than we realise. .... >Your practice is passive while mine is active. ... S: For the record, I have no idea of having any practice or of patipatti being active or passive, but I quite understand you and others see it like this. ... >Your > practice is text-centered while my practice is experience-centered. ... S: ;-). It's true that I consider experiences which are unsupported by the Buddha's teachings to be pretty uninteresting. Actually, I know we both have a lot of confidence in the Buddha's teachings and this can only be developed by some direct experience about the truth, however little that may be. ... > Your practice attempts to begin at the supermundane while mine > begins at the mundane. ... S: I'd like to take that as a compliment. Unfortunately, I see no truth in it. ... >If your practice works for you, fine. Good > luck. I don't have anything more to say about it. ... S: Thanks for your good wishes always, James. You've said quite a bit here already. Again, I appreciate the 'tests' you give me and I never fail to see you as a good friend, even when our ideas are so different in many regards. Perhaps at this point it would be better to stress the respect we both have for the Triple Gem as we blunder around in ignorance most the time. Hopefully, we'll chat later. metta, Sarah p.s Hope Simon (kitty) is in good health now! In the Sig Others Album, wedged between Azita w/the lovely python and Mike w/Rose. =================== 42219 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:45pm Subject: 'Cetasikas' study corner 122 - Vitality/jivitindriya and Attention/manasikaara (f) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.7 Vitality(jivitindriya)and Attention(manasikaara)contd] ***** Manasikåra, attention, is another cetasika among the universals which arises with every citta.(2) The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 133) which defines manasikåra in the same wording as the Visuddhimagga (XIV, 152) states concerning the cetasika which is manasikåra: * "…It has the characteristic of driving associated states towards the object, the function of joining (yoking) associated states to the object, the manifestation of facing the object. It is included in the sa'nkhårakkhandha, and should be regarded as the charioteer of associated states because it regulates the object." * The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 152) adds that the proximate cause of manasikåra is an object. *** 2) There are also two kinds of citta which are called manasikåra (Atthasåliní 133 and Visuddhimagga XIV, 152). One kind of citta which is manasikåra is the pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta (five-sense-door adverting-consciousness), the first citta of the sense-door process, which adverts to the object; it is called 'controller of the sense-door process'. The other kind of citta which is manasikåra is the manodvåråvajjana- citta (mind-door adverting-consciousness) which adverts to the object through the mind-door and is succeeded by the javana citta. It is called 'controller of the javanas'. ***** Metta, Sarah ====== 42220 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl RobM, > the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the > average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according to > what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time > by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, > burgesses, land owners and merchants." Kel: doesn't sound like a solid definition to me. Fact is, it's pretty hard to distinguish between akusala and kusala vipaka cittas for first four sense objects. They're all upekkha and so how does it make sense in 3 type categorization? > The retention mental state is also a function of the > intrinsic nature of the object. An undesirable object will use the > akusala vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling > as retention. Desirable-neutral objects will have either the kusala > vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling or one of > the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with indifferent > feeling as retention. Desirable objects will have either the kusala > vipaka investigating mental state with pleasant feeling or one of > the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with pleasant feeling > as retention. Retention cittas are determined by the type of javana cittas preceding them. And as you said the type of javanas have no direct correlation with "intrinsic" nature of the object. In Dr. Mon's book he gave 3 types of javana and retention object correlations. It's clear to me this categorization of objects are talked about in vithi chapter because it makes sense in connection with nama. For rupas that are from utu and ahara for example, it's hard to consolidate into the same view of objects. - kel 42221 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re: Aren't we rooted in ignorance? Hi Connie, Appreciating all your reminders in your posts and quote from India too. I was also glad to read in an earlier post of yours that your group are now reading 'Buddhism in Daily Life'. Let us know how this goes - what they like and don't like and any comments.Maybe they will transform into 'agreeable dinosaurs';-). --- connie wrote: > Our lobha accompanied patisandhi/re-linking citta is a kusala > kaamaavacara > vipaka citta and the bhavangas that follow are all the same type of > citta > as the patisandhi. ... S: Where does it say that the patisandhi citta and following bhavangas are rooted or accompanied by lobha? The latent tendencies of moha and lobha are there for sure, but no lobha accompanying kusala vipaka cittas. Lobha always arises with the first set of javana cittas in the first vithi process as I understand. .... > Sounds like we've all got our fair share of greed. Then again, the > patisandhi and subsequent bhavanga cittas can also be accompanied by any > > or none of the three beautiful roots: alobha, adosa and amoha or > pa~n~na. How do you suppose there could be alobha and lobha at the same > > time? Or amoha at all if there has to be ignorance in order for there > to > be greed? I hope I sound confused. ... S: Yes, you sound suitably confused! There can't be alobha and lobha and the same time and there isn't. .... > "All akusala is accompanied by ignorance, whether it's dosa or lobha, > right?" > > I believe so. Moha can arise without dosa or lobha, but neither of them > > can arise without moha. Maybe we just say 'rooted in greed' because > ignorance is a given. ... S: Right - no confusion. For more, look under 'birth' in U.P. - I'm thinking of posts there which Nina has written on patisandhi. Also some of Htoo's from memory. Metta, Sarah p.s oh yes, I was going to add my comment on the story K. Sujin told about the woman who had the stroke, listened to the dhamma and regained her former health. You've listened to the account yourself. At the time I took it as a 'btw anecdote' told at the time to give encouragement to Nina in particular who was concerned about Lodewijk's health. We have all sorts of ideas about what will happen, when really we never know and the worry is so very useless and doesn't help any condition at all. We do know, however, that understanding of Dhamma is the best medicine for the real cause of suffering. I don't think there was any suggestion that we can really know all (or any of)the reasons for this lady's cure or that this would be the result for the next stroke sufferer who had confidence in the Dhamma. Conditions are far too complicated for that. We could see visibly on the trip in India, however, how the teaching, listening and considering of Dhamma visibly helped some of us (including K.Sujin on the day in Sikkhim she mentioned this example) who were really quite sick. Cittas are one cause of rupas as you know well. I haven't heard about the 'chanting for Cadillacs' saying before;-). =============== 42222 From: robmoult Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl Hi Kel, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the > > average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according > to > > what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another > time > > by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, > > burgesses, land owners and merchants." > Kel: doesn't sound like a solid definition to me. Fact is, it's > pretty hard to distinguish between akusala and kusala vipaka cittas > for first four sense objects. They're all upekkha and so how does > it make sense in 3 type categorization? ===== I agree that on first reading, this definition does not sit well at all. Citing "accountants, government officials, etc." in a definition seems to be very awkward. I remember sitting staring at this section of the Displeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodani) thinking, "you're not dispelling any delusion here..." :-) . Then I realized that what Buddhaghosa was really trying to do was to exclude people such as maschocists or sadists who are not "normal" or "average". I don't believe that the purpose of these 3 type categorization is to help us distinguish akusala or kusala vipaka cittas. It provides a theoretical underpinning for the citta vitthi. ===== > > > The retention mental state is also a function of the > > intrinsic nature of the object. An undesirable object will use the > > akusala vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling > > as retention. Desirable-neutral objects will have either the > kusala > > vipaka investigating mental state with indifferent feeling or one > of > > the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with indifferent > > feeling as retention. Desirable objects will have either the > kusala > > vipaka investigating mental state with pleasant feeling or one of > > the four sense sphere resultant (mahavipaka) with pleasant feeling > > as retention. > Retention cittas are determined by the type of javana cittas > preceding them. And as you said the type of javanas have no direct > correlation with "intrinsic" nature of the object. In Dr. Mon's > book he gave 3 types of javana and retention object correlations. ===== You may have misinterpreted Dr. Mon. I believe that the text to which you are referring is as follows: Tadalambana (retention) occurs only in kama-persons when they are observing kama-sense objects with kama-javana-vara vithis. Generally upekkha-javana or domanassa-javana is followed by upekkha-tadalambana whereas somanassa-javana is followed by somanassa-tadalambana. In practice the following procedure is observed. - After 4 maha-kiriya upekkha-javanas and 2 domanassajavanas, 4 maha- vipaka upekkha-tadalambanas and 2 santirana-upekkha tadalambanas may arise. - After 4 maha-kiriya somanassa-javanas and hasituppadajavana, 4 maha-vipaka somanassa-tadalambanas and one somanassa-santirana tadalambana may arise. - After the remaining 10 akusala-javanas and 8 maha-kusala javanas, all the 11 tadalambanas may arise. As I mentioned above, javana cittas are conditioned by accumulations and not directly by the intrinsic nature of the object. Dr. Mon used the term "generally" because in most cases, being exposed to an instriniscally undesirable object will result in domanassa javanas because of accumulations. Here is an additional quote from BB's CMA: It should be noted that while the resultant cittas [Rob M: note that retention cittas are resultant cittas] are governed by the nature of the object, the javanas are not, but vary in accordance to the temperament and proclivities [Rob M: I call this accumulations] of the experiencer. ===== > > It's clear to me this categorization of objects are talked about > in vithi chapter because it makes sense in connection with nama. > For rupas that are from utu and ahara for example, it's hard to > consolidate into the same view of objects. ===== This discussion applies to objects of sense-door processes. All objects of sense-door processes (except sound) can originate from kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. Sound can only originate from citta or temperature). My coffee cup originates from utu. When I touch it, the cup is slightly warmer than room temperature which makes it intrinsically desirable. Or to paraphrase the Beatles, "Hapiness is a warm cup" :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 42223 From: robmoult Date: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Greetings Hugo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > Hello Rob M, > > On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 08:03:21 -0000, robmoult wrote: > > Greetings from another Abhidhamma-loving engineer who has been away > > for a while :-) > > I am far from being an "Abhidhamma-loving" person, I haven't even read > it, and so far my understanding is not at that level. > > The way I see it is like the following: > > I know that my eyes are not good (I can't read, I can't see far, > etc.), I am barely out of elementary school (I can read, write and do > some simple math). > > Should I go and try to read books on anatomy, medicine, etc. so I can > fix my eyes? > > I don't think so. > > What do I do? > > Get a job, save enough money to buy a pair of glasses, then study > more, and finally realize that I don't need to do the job myself, if I > save enough money I can get Lasik surgery and get it fixed! > > > But again, I can't trust my mind as it is full of defilements so what > I said above, might change tomorrow. :-) ===== Please help me to understand your analogy. Are you saying that you want to put practice before theory? I am not clear on what it means to have somebody else do the job for you. Metta, Rob M :-) 42224 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:11am Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder I Dear Tep, I just saw that you have responded to three other of my posts. I will probably get to read those no sooner than Wednesday; yes I am way behind in my reading. :-( > Tep: The idea of breaking down the long dialogue into 7 threads will not > solve the problem of message branching out, because eventually > each 'child' becomes very long again like its parent. The in-line > question-and-answer logic is at fault, and we should correct the > problem right where it began. S: No problem, and please don't even feel obliged to reply, I realize that you are quite busy. > Tep: My next message will no longer use the inline scheme. S: Hope you don't mind me doing it though? > >S: (#41894) But do you see that the idea of `finding the shortest cut > > through Sila-Samadhi- Panna' may go against the Teachings > > about the need to `develop the parami' and that the process > > involves `long time development' (meaning aeons over aeons)? > S: (#41950) I think firstly that you misunderstand my comments about > developing the parami. Remember, I am one of those who don't > believe in deliberate practice? So I wouldn't say to the effect to > develop parami or sila or anything first or last. > > T: Perhaps, I didn't misunderstand it at all. You said it yourself (see > above) about the "need to develp the parami". Okay, if you change > your mind not to "develop parami or sila or anything first or last", that's > fine with me. But are you now not going against the Teachings yourself? S: No I haven't changed my mind. :-) But perhaps I should explain. When I said `develop the parami' in #41894 it was meant not as a `thing to do' to be followed by other `things to do'. What I stated was in the context of final attainment of the goal, and how for example viriya, saddha, sati, panna and so on cannot become bala if the parami such as metta, sacca, khanti and so on were not accumulated enough. How and when these are developed is not in any order, however their relationship is such that they condition and support each other, and one cannot grow without the other also developing, all the way to enlightenment. Though I think that panna is the leader, and having Right View makes the development of the others possible. So an idea that one can develop sati and panna without taking into consideration that the paramis are lacking or not, goes against this aspect of the Teachings. Reminiscent of this is the idea that becoming a monk is more conducive to the development of wisdom. People should consider their accumulations and not think that becoming a monk is in and of itself desirable. -------------------------------------------- > S: What the Buddha said would be the correct conditions only if > correspondingly there is a level of understanding on the part of the > audience. Without understanding, the image of "one's hair and clothes > on fire" will be anything but right. Likewise, Nibbana is an empty > concept at best and an object of desire and wrong view at worst, > depending on how wrongly we understand it. > > T: Our Buddha always gave instructions to 'monks, 'bhikkhus' > (including bhikkhunis), and 'noble disciples' or 'disciples of the noble > ones'. Therefore, the scenario you are assumimg does not apply to > His audience. S: So what He taught these disciples, do they apply to us now? Do we understand the same way as they did? I meant to point to this. ------------------------------------------ > S: On the question of parami, haven't you heard that if these are > lacking, then enlightenment is not possible? Do you think that > without sacca, khanti, metta, nekhamma, panna, viriya and other > qualities being developed to a high degree, it would be possible for > sati and panna to develop far enough? > > T: There you go again! Talking again about parami. But I see some > dangers here. There is a lobha associated with your desire for > enlightenment. Also, your worry about not having enough parami > indicates a 'self' that craves for and accumulates parami as the raw > materials for achieving the goal of 'enlightenment'. You also want to > control sacca, khanti, etc., such that they meet your quality control > objectives! Is that Right intention? > So it seems that you yourself are going against your own rules at the > beginning of our discussion. S: Lobha, I do have a mighty lot. But in the above, how do you see Lobha in that? Perhaps after you have read my response at the beginning of this post, your perception will have changed? ----------------------------------------- > S: I think that viewing the Teachings as prescriptive creates a big > problem, one becomes `goal oriented' and ignores conditions which > are causes, namely one's accumulations as expressed from moment > to moment. And if one does not see the prime importance of > developing understanding in daily life, then these conditions which > make up the cause will not become apparent. > > T: I agree with the importance of developing understanding (insight > and wisdom, panna) here and now, in this very life, that's why I have > been telling you about the sila-samadhi-panna development. S: But I don't think we do mean the same. Your `in this very life' is not the same as my `in daily life'. Yours is pointing to a time scale, mine is about this very moment, which to me is the only reality. :-( ------------------------------------- > T: But how do you make your goal-oriented-desire to accumulate parami > compatible with the goal of "developing understanding in daily life"? S: Do you still see my position as such? Metta, Sukin. 42225 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:12am Subject: Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder II Dear Tep, > But you haven't yet described what you meant by 'vipassana > meditation'. Please remember this: you should be careful not to put > any meditation technique down, unless you understand it very clearly > in both principle and practice. S: As taught by Goenka, Mahasi Sayadaw and others with whatever slight variation. As long as there is the idea of wanting to be mindful and trying to do something, I think it is wrong. "Understanding it in principle and practice"? Why do you put forward these conditions? Your understanding of the principle of 'vipassana meditation', will not match another person's, likewise the experience and conclusions made from this. So what is it that you are going to take to decide if indeed what I or anyone states is right? In the end we will have to compare with what is taught in the Tipitaka no? Btw, I experienced two 10 day courses of the Goenka method, and was so keen on it, that were it not for my meeting with K. Sujin and dsg, I would have very probably done my first 45 day course by now. But I do believe that my own experience is quite meaningless not only for anyone else, but even for myself to think about it in retrospect. Principle wise, whatever it is, it was enough for me to have taken one of my staff with me for my first retreat, paid and an announcement to the rest to all be given a chance to accompany me for any subsequent retreat, fully paid!! In a rush, must go now. Metta, Sukinder 42226 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > > >>S: My question before and still is, surely in normal conditions, > agreeable objects are usually experienced with lobha (akusala javana > cittas) and not by kusala javana cittas??? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Dear Sarah, agreeable seems like attachment-loaded. Ittha-arammana of > The Buddha images cause arising of kusala javana cittas. … S: If you use this one example -usually, I'm sure. Still, for many, conditions for attachment too when they saw the Buddha. For a few, conditions for aversion. Still, these akusala cittas may not be with the immediately following javana cittas (in that sense door and mind door vithi). Who knows? In the texts when we read examples like this, they're'generally speaking' conventional examples. It'll depend on kamma what is seen (or not seen) at any given moment, including when looking at the Buddha. … > On kasinas and jhanas > > H:> 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. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Is that bhavana kusala citta, kusala anyway? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S: IF it's bhavana, it's kusala… ….. > Htoo: Because the practitioner knows that drifting thoughts are > akusala and he is avoiding these akusala. 'White itself' is pannatti > and nothing. But arising mind is a pure mind which has panna. It is a > citta that takes that white object. That citta is tihetuka citta. … S: I take it you're speaking conventionally without any idea of self when you talk about this practitioner and what he avoids. I think there are a lot of Ifs here - if it is a pure mind, if there is panna etc. You haven't said how the reflection on the object is a condition for calm or kusala or for panna to arise. Later you suggest that because you focus on tihetuka citta (with 3 wholesome roots) and the object is a white kasina, then it is kusala and without lobha as in the poor golfer's case. Here it is: …. > Htoo: I remember your word on 'concentraion and acrobats'. > > That is why I said above that you are concentrating > on 'concentration'. Actually I focus on tihetuka citta. Tiger Wood's > mind could not be tihetuka citta at the time he was playing golf. > Because it is linked with subtle lobha to win his own physical action > of steadiness not just for to win others players. > > Ekaggata or concentration is present in all kinds of citta. > > It is miccha-samadhi that works in stealing, fishing, acrobating etc > etc. …. S: You haven't told me anything to suggest that it isn't miccha-samadhi when you 'focus on tihetuka citta' or 'white kasina' either. In fact, I think Tiger's variety is less likely to be with the wrong view of it being anything wise or noble or related to jhana. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Yes. Conventioanl intelligence is not related to dvihetuka and > tihetuka patisandhi. But generally it seems like dvihetukas are not > as intelligent as tihetukas. …. S: So, I think it's better not to bring in the scientists as I don't believe there is any correlation between the conventional kind of intelligence associated with science and that associated with the development of wisdom. Think of the example you always give of Culapandika who couldn't remember a few lines, but who not only became an arahant, but one with full patisambhidas as I recall. Devadatta, on the other hand, must have been very clever and cunning conventionally speaking, with the greatest access to the Buddha, but not able to even listen to the teachings. Metta, Sarah p.s I liked your post on Devadatta and the Vinaya #41637. Also #41780 is a very good summary of your series to date with lots of helpful detail. If anyone has got lost, it's a useful one to review. ====== 42227 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] thanks. Dear Nina and Lodewijk, I am sorry to hear about your father's passing away. But am also glad to have seen that you were there with him all through these years. It was good for him to have two wise people like you all this time, also for both of you to be able to help a parent. Not everyone gets the chance to do this. Thankyou for sharing your experiences with us and hope you have very good days to come. With respect and metta, Sukinder --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, Jon, and also Howard, Azita, Phil, Mike, all who said kind words > to Lodewijk and me on or off list, > our heartfelt thanks for this. > op 13-02-2005 09:26 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jsabbott@n...: > > It was no doubt a relief to you that the end was peaceful for him. > N: His lady friend was with him, and he had waited for her to die at last > without all those fears. We are very grateful to her. > J: I know that you and Lodewijk have given great support of all kinds to > > your father over the years. I'm sure that that kusala will be a source > > of moments of calm for you both during these difficult times. > N: All these last fifteen years were not easy. There was kusala, but in > between a lot of akusala. I had to conquer myself so many times, I was > frustrated and impatient. But there were also good moments, especially with > the music. > Sarah, my father did not wish any eulogies, and years ago he said that he > even did not like us to be at his funeral. He was so strongwilled, and very > special in many ways. We never knew he changed his mind, but we are all > going to his funeral, all family members. There will not be any fringes. > As Sarah said, the best medicine at this time as at all times.> This is true. > Nina. 42228 From: robmoult Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: object condition Hi Larry, Long time no chat! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > It seems to me there are no objects, and the object condition is > fundamentally responsible for the sense of a separate self, aka > conceit. An object is a reference point and, as such, is never > present, therefore there are no objects. ===== I see self-view as fundamentally different from object condition. Self-view arises because of accumulations whereas object condition describes a relationship between nama and that which is experienced. ===== > > From a schematic point of view an object gives birth to its own > subject, with the help of other "midwife" conditioners. But an object > is not an object until a subject makes it an object. The subject > defines itself in relation to another; this other is the object. Rupa > impinges on the body door; consciousness and feeling make this an > experience; sanna identifies this experience with names and > associations and sankhara khandha reacts to this experience with > like, dislike, etc. The experience as object is gone by the time > sanna and sankhara make it an object, and, in creating an object, > sanna and sankhara make themself a unitary subject. Even if the > object is a memory, the memory is gone before it is made into an > object. ===== Of course, if you go to the effort of labeling something as an object then that which is experienced has been "conceptually proliferated" and this conceptual proliferation is fed by accumulations of self-view. ===== > > Panna's job, first of all, is to see this subject object relationship > as simply discrete elements: hard is hard, experience is experience, > painful is painful, bump is bump, dislike is dislike. ===== Panna's job is not to look at the relationship of that which is experienced with that which experiences. As it says in the commentary to Mulapariyaya Sutta (Mn 1), panna's job is: 1. to recognize dhammas 2. to recognize the three characterisitics of these dhammas (impermanence, not to be clung to, non-self) 3. to not cling to the dhammas ===== > Secondly, > because there are no objects, there are no objects of satipatthana. > Just this, this, this; without reference point, timelessly. Even > seeming reference points and relationships are just that, i.e., this, > this, this. > > Objects are created by subjects, but objects are gone before they are > made into objects; therefore there are no objects. There cannot be a > subject without an object because a subject defines itself in > relation to another, so there are neither objects nor subjects. Just > this. ===== Of course, if you start thinking about relationships between that which is experienced and that which is experienced, it is like reading the cookbook rather than eating the food - it does not satisfy hunger. One should put this kind of thinking aside (analysis paralysis) when experencing the dhammas of the present moment. Do my comments make sense? Metta, Rob M :-) 42229 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:59am Subject: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Htoo, #40844 DT (226) You write: 'Magga vithi vara is output of vipassana bhavana. It derives from kamavacara mahakusala cittas. Sometime at early stages upacara samadhi or appana Samadhi help nivarana dhamma clear off the mind.' I think you are suggesting that highly developed samatha, i.e jhana attainment, makes it easier for enlightenment, because the nivaranas (hindrances) are temporarily suppressed at these times? If so, I'm not sure I agree. Later you add: 'As nivarana dhammas are away, the bhavana with upacara Samadhi is very pure'. Temporarily, of course. Then you add 'upacara Samadhi and appana Samadhi are known as cittavisuddhi or purification of consciousness'. Now, I may be wrong here, but I understand that cittavisuddhi refers to the same as adhi-citta or higher concentration which is only attained by the anagami, due to the eradication of all sensuous attachment. In other words, it is a stage of purification (visuddhi) and cannot be attained by the mere development of upacara and appana Samadhi without the very high degree of insight of the anagami (regardless of whether he has attained jhanas prior to this realization or not). Comments most welcome. You went on to say about cittavisuddhi above;: 'Because the cittas at that time is totally free of nivarana dhammas which definitely hinder magga nana not to arise'. Again, I'd turn it all around and say that there is citta visuddhi or calm from all sensuous attachment at this level of purification as a result of the highly developed insight and eradication (not just temporary suppression) of all attachment. In the same post, when referring to the arising and passing away of dhammas, you write: 'Shockingly they are disappearing all the time and they are not long lasting and they are frightening. Such frightening things are not to attach and they are to be disregarded and blameworthy….' It may just be language use, but I think it's important to stress that such a high level of insight is certainly not accompanied by any 'shock' or 'fear'. Understanding the danger or fearfulness of dhammas should be a condition for calm and equanimity. It is a (deep) aspect of seeing them for what they are, like seeing the 'foul', 'impermanence', 'unsatisfactoriness' etc. Talking of which (dangers and so on), briefly (because this is getting long), I love your posts on the various realms. In some, such as #41342, I'm not sure, however, if all the details you give can be found in the texts, such as about the hell stations, the hell-dogs, the razor trees, whips and hell-handlers & their methods. I'd be glad for any sources. I do have the Peta verses and commentary and of course many horrific details are given and it's quite a while since I've looked at them, but some of this seemed new to me. Interested to be corrected by anyone here. In the same post, you write about kamma -patha which can bring results in the way of rebirth consciousness and during life (pavatti). You then write: 'Pavatti means 'arising in dvara' or it is events that arise during the life time except patisandhi kala or rebirth time. These effects are 1.seeing etc. This is the point we are discussing in another thread. If it is killing etc, the kamma can produce results by way of rebirth AND during life. If it is not killing etc, the kamma cannot produce an unhappy birth, but it can produce results during life if it is strong enough as I understand. Just feeling mildly annoyed with someone or an insect would not qualify, but dreaming about killing someone or that poor insect just might! Metta, Sarah p.s I saw your note to me about conditions. I'm sure they're very good, but I just seem busy trying to keep up with what is posted here. Maybe if any parts or extracts are relevant to any discussions going one (eg lots being discussed about arammana paccaya at present), you can just choose relevant parts to join in threads. ======= 42230 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation - Pali terms Dear Htoo, I just looked without success for the posts where we were discussing kamma. Never mind, I found this one of yours which I meant to reply to as well. --- htootintnaing wrote: have heard from someone 'repeatedly saying the importance of > meditating'. I also think out in the same way as you mentioned as A > Sujin's and Nina's words. Without proper understanding any action > will not be in right order. ... S: So it's always good to look at the meanings of terms such as pariyatti, patipatti, pativedha, vipassana etc. ... > But in real term or actual term they seem not understand what jhana > means, what vipassana means, what bhavana means, what kammatthana > means, what kasina means etc etc. ... S: Well, mostly I don't think any of us really understand much about these terms - at least I don't, or just by book knowledge as friends would kindly remind me;-). So that's why we're here, to keep discussing and comparing notes, so that we understand better. For this, I greatly appreciate your series too, Htoo, as you know. ... > I had been attacked severely that I was not proficient in English and > I had problems with communication and I did not believe that matter I > could ask someone who were native speakers like Christine, Robert K > etc etc. When essential messages are not rightly extracted it will be > futile to set up self-corrected self-adapted Buddhism. .... S: I'm glad Chris, Rob and other friends are happy to help. Certainly your DT series is usually very polished. I never mind the mistakes anyone makes - as you suggest, it's the essence that counts, though of course, errors or cultural norms can lead to misunderstandings occasionally. ... > I said these because there are many who believe that it is sensible > to adapt and change some parts of teaching to accommodate own > culture. I do not believe so. ... S: I agree with you. ... In Myanmar Sayadaws teach in three > methods regarding theory. One is in pure Pali and the second is in > alternative Pali and Myanmar and the third is pure Myanmar. > > They do not change Pali. But they may change pure Myanmar as > languages are always moving and changing. Examples are 'bad words' > become 'good words' and 'decent words' become 'bad words'. .... S: This happens in all languages. metta, Sarah p.s It helps so much to understand that it is the cittas themselves that count (whether with or without good intentions) which only panna can know. Understanding more about dhammas does mean one is less concerned about what others say or about praise and blame, I think. Of course, we're all bound to be affected to some degree, but we know that this is just lobha and dosa again;-). We see what good medicine abhidhamma is. ====== 42231 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:22am Subject: Re: Nonduality --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Non-Duality is a confusing term. I have read many posts on the > internet where people are writing of non-duality, and it seems to me > that they often don't seem to be talking about the same thing. Some > mean 'interconnectedness of independent awarenesses', and some mean > 'merging completely with a ground-of-all-being' (by whatever Name), > and there are other views. Dear Christine Maybe this will interest you (if you still are interested in studying the concept nonduality): The Doctrine of Non-duality - A Restatement of the Buddha's Teaching of The Middle Way - in the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa by Dharmachari Ratnaguna Source: www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/nonduality.html I found it, looking for texts about the Kaccaayanagotta-Sutta, because I want to understand the relation between 'anicca' and 'emptiness' Metta Joop Quote of the first part of the Conclusion of this article: "I have argued that the doctrine of Non-duality is essentially a re- statement of the Buddha's teaching of the Middle Way. However, I have also stated that the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa takes this doctrine further than did the Buddha, stretching the application of it to include all concepts whatsoever, including those (necessarily dualistic) concepts which constitute the doctrines of Buddhism. Whereas the Buddha spoke simply of the Middle Way between the extremes of indulgence in sense pleasures and self-mortification, or, more metaphysically, between (absolute) existence and (absolute) non- existence, the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa teaches the Middle Way (Dharma Door of Non-duality) between such things as skilful and unskilful, knowledge and ignorance, good paths and bad paths. This `stretching' of the idea of Non-duality is dangerous, the danger being that people reading the text may assume that such teachings are appropriate to their level of spiritual development when they are not. Of course that danger is often present when we read a Buddhist text, even in the `basic' or `simple' teachings of the Buddha that we find in the Paali Canon. (That is why the Buddha told the parable of the water snake). When we read those texts we should constantly bear in mind that the Buddha was often talking to a particular person, and what may be good for that person may not be good for us. However, the danger inherent in The Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa's Dharma Doors of Non- duality is particularly acute, because to some people it could appear to be saying that all those doctrines and practices which make up the Buddhist path to Enlightenment are to be discarded because they are dualistic: there is no difference between good paths and bad paths, skilful and unskilful actions, knowledge and ignorance. Hence, some Buddhists may dismiss such `basic' teachings as the five precepts, or the necessity for renunciation, with the retort "Oh, but that is dualistic isn't it?" Or "There is no path, and no-one to tread it". Such a misunderstanding is tantamount to seizing the poisonous water snake by the tail, or stepping off the raft in midstream, only to drown in the deep waters of Sa.msaara." 42232 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:50am Subject: Re: Nonduality Dear Joop, Thank you for remembering my question when you came across this resource. Yes, I am still interested, and I appreciated your previous reply along with those of Larry and Philip. I am trying to understand non-duality, and what the Buddha taught about this. I have not got very far, and can't yet formulate an intelligent reply. Apologies to you all for my seeming rudeness. It seems there are differing views even on the definition of the term. Sometimes asking a question can bring about greater confusion - and I asked about this on several lists - including on a multi-tradition list, where replies from the followers of Islam and Christianity certainly gave a different perspective. Something else to add to the dhamma-paralysis I currently seem to be suffering from. You mention anicca - and I have to say that knowing it to be one of the characteristics of existence is a comfort right at this moment. It is certain that dhamma-paralysis will pass. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" > wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > Non-Duality is a confusing term. I have read many posts on the > > internet where people are writing of non-duality, and it seems to me > > that they often don't seem to be talking about the same thing. Some > > mean 'interconnectedness of independent awarenesses', and some mean > > 'merging completely with a ground-of-all-being' (by whatever Name), > > and there are other views. > > > Dear Christine > > Maybe this will interest you (if you still are interested in studying > the concept nonduality): > The Doctrine of Non-duality - A Restatement of the Buddha's Teaching > of The Middle Way - in the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa by Dharmachari > Ratnaguna > > Source: www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/nonduality.html > > I found it, looking for texts about the Kaccaayanagotta-Sutta, > because I want to understand the relation between 'anicca' > and 'emptiness' > > Metta > > Joop > > > Quote of the first part of the Conclusion of this article: > "I have argued that the doctrine of Non-duality is essentially a re- > statement of the Buddha's teaching of the Middle Way. However, I have > also stated that the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa takes this doctrine > further than did the Buddha, stretching the application of it to > include all concepts whatsoever, including those (necessarily > dualistic) concepts which constitute the doctrines of Buddhism. > Whereas the Buddha spoke simply of the Middle Way between the > extremes of indulgence in sense pleasures and self-mortification, or, > more metaphysically, between (absolute) existence and (absolute) non- > existence, the Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa teaches the Middle Way (Dharma > Door of Non-duality) between such things as skilful and unskilful, > knowledge and ignorance, good paths and bad paths. This `stretching' > of the idea of Non-duality is dangerous, the danger being that people > reading the text may assume that such teachings are appropriate to > their level of spiritual development when they are not. Of course > that danger is often present when we read a Buddhist text, even in > the `basic' or `simple' teachings of the Buddha that we find in the > Paali Canon. (That is why the Buddha told the parable of the water > snake). When we read those texts we should constantly bear in mind > that the Buddha was often talking to a particular person, and what > may be good for that person may not be good for us. However, the > danger inherent in The Vimalakiirti Nirde'sa's Dharma Doors of Non- > duality is particularly acute, because to some people it could appear > to be saying that all those doctrines and practices which make up the > Buddhist path to Enlightenment are to be discarded because they are > dualistic: there is no difference between good paths and bad paths, > skilful and unskilful actions, knowledge and ignorance. Hence, some > Buddhists may dismiss such `basic' teachings as the five precepts, or > the necessity for renunciation, with the retort "Oh, but that is > dualistic isn't it?" Or "There is no path, and no-one to tread it". > Such a misunderstanding is tantamount to seizing the poisonous water > snake by the tail, or stepping off the raft in midstream, only to > drown in the deep waters of Sa.msaara." 42233 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/ Tep & Sukinder I Hi, Hugo Yes, there are many references in the suttas to 'training oneself', no question about that. But I think you'll find there is no description of just how that training is to be carried out. You have suggested one possible means, namely, constant repetition to oneself (for example, 'I will not tell a deliberate lie even in jest'), but I don't think that could be what the Buddha meant. Firstly because, as we know from personal experience, even the most sincerely meant resolution is ineffective in counteracting deeply ingrained habits and tendencies. And secondly because it is highly unlikely that any such declaration of intention would be kusala, since it would be in the nature of an aspiration rather than a reflection on/recollection of any aspect of the teachings. Some of the other references you have quoted I would read as describing a person who is already highly of highly developed insight (based on a first impression -- I have not checked the suttas themselves). For example, "training day and night in skillful mental qualities" would seem to mean actually maintaining kusala continuously for an extended period, and does not refer to someone aspiring to that level of attainment. Similarly, the following passage you quoted describes a highly trained monk, perhaps a Sotapanna (see the words "consummate in his behaviour & sphere of activity"): "And what is the training in heightened virtue? There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Patimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest fault. This is called the training in heightened virtue." In short, I think 'training oneself' is a reference to the actual development of insight (i.e., moments of awareness and understanding), rather than to the means by which insight is developed (i.e., some form of 'practice'). Jon Hugo wrote: >I am not a Sutta expert, but I think this one is nice: > >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn061.html >Thus, Rahula, you should train yourself, 'I will not tell a deliberate >lie even in jest.' > >Maybe your mind is above Rahula's level, but mine is at that level >where the above line makes sense to keep repeating it to myself >frequently. > >That sutta contains phrases like: > >"training day and night in skillful mental qualities." >"you should exercise restraint in the future" > >Jon, didn't you read this sutta before?? > >Or what about: >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn47-020.html > >Or this (more direct, I don't think you can find it): >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-088.html > >"And what is the training in heightened virtue? There is the case >where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the >Patimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains >himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the >slightest fault. This is called the training in heightened virtue." > 42234 From: Philip Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:19am Subject: Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner 122 - Vitality/jivitindriya and Attention/manasikaara (f) Hi all Sick in bed with a cold so I'll keep this brief. > 2) There are also two kinds of citta which are called manasikåra > (Atthasålin?E133 and Visuddhimagga XIV, 152). One kind of citta which is > manasikåra is the pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta (five-sense-door > adverting-consciousness), the first citta of the sense-door process, which > adverts to the object; it is called 'controller of the sense-door > process'. The other kind of citta which is manasikåra is the > manodvåråvajjana- > citta (mind-door adverting-consciousness) which adverts to the object > through the mind-door and is succeeded by the javana citta. It is called > 'controller of the javanas'. Over the past few months I have come across quite a few references to yoniso manasikara in suttas that make it sound like a very pivotal factor with the potential to prevent or permit the arising of akusala. Can't dig them up now, but I see this one, from SN 46.24: "Bhikkhus, when one attends carelessly, unarisen sensual desire arises and arisen sensual desire increases and expands; when one attends carelessly, unarisen ill will arises and arisen ill will increases and expands" etc. And the reverse if one attends carefully. There is another one that goes something like "I can think of no other thing that permits (?) the arising of unarisen unwholesome factors like unwise attention" Do these suttas refer to the second kind of citta described above, the "controller of the javanas?" Listening to the India talks today heard someone ask Kh Sujin what the "care" in "careless" referred to, and Kh Sujin answered virya. Couldn't it be yoniso manasikaara? And what of appamada ( spelling?) which is "heedfulness." What is the relationship between heedfulness and wise attention. Something tells me I've asked this before. My apologies if that is the case. Metta, Phil p.s listening to the India talks is a nice way to spend a sick day. Nicely soporiphic, to tell the truth, as well as wholesomely conditioning. Kh Sujin's voice is very soothing. But there are occasional outburst of laughter by everyone that jolt. Can they be edited out? Laughter is akusala, right? (haha) I will return to listening now. 42235 From: nina Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:06am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 138 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 138 and Tiika. Text Vis. 138. (vii) By its means they live, or it itself lives, or it is just mere living, thus it is 'life'. N: As to the meaning of Œthey live¹ (jiivanti), this pertains to the accompanying dhammas who live because of life faculty. The Tiika explains that the task of life or sustenance, jiivita.m, is the maintenance (anupaalana) of the accompanying dhammas that should be supported. He has first mentioned the task of life faculty in saying Œ by means of it they live¹. But it also lives itself. N: Thus, jiivitindriya cetasika Œlives¹ and it also vitalizes the accompanying dhammas. Text Vis: But its characteristic, etc., should be understood in the way stated under material life (XIV,59). For that is life of material things and this is life of immaterial things (aruupadhamma). This is the only difference here. N: Here, in this context, the Visuddhimagga deals with the cetasika jiivitindriya that accompanies each citta. Citta cannot function without this cetasika, it is a Œuniversal¹. For its characterstic etc. the Vis. refers to ruupa jivitindriya that is present in each group of ruupa produced by kamma. It occurs only in a living body. We read in Vis. XIV, 59 about ruupa jivitindriya: *** N: The cetasika jiivitindriya has the characteristic of maintaining conascent naama dhammas, citta and the other accompanying cetasikas. Its function is to make them occur. It is manifested in the establishing of their presence. Its proximate cause is the accompanying naama dhammas that are to be sustained. *** The Expositor (Part IV, Ch I, 123,124) states: <... it watches over those states (the accompanying dhammas) only in the moment of (their and its) existence, as water over lotuses, etc. And although it watches over them, arisen as its own property, as a nurse over the infant, life goes on only by being bound up with these states (accompanying dhammas) that have gone on, as the pilot on the boat. Beyond the dissolution moment it does not go on, owing to the non-being both of itself and of the states which should have been kept going. At the dissolution moment it does not maintain them, owing to its own destruction, as the spent oil in the wick cannot maintain the flame of the lamp. Its effective power is as its duration.> N: Jívitindriya arises with the citta at the arising moment and it maintains the life of citta and the accompanying cetasikas, but it cannot make them stay beyond the dissolution moment; then jívitindriya has to fall away together with the citta and the accompanying cetasikas. The Expositor states: The term Œjiivitindriya¹ means: the indriya, leader or controlling faculty, of jiivita.m, life. Several naamas and ruupas are classified as indriyas or faculties. They exercise dominance each in their own field. Jiivitindriya cetasika is the dominant influence over the life of the accompanying citta and cetasikas, it controls the continual arising of citta and cetasikas in succession. The ŒExpositor¹ ((Part IV, Ch II, 149) elaborates on the faculty of life as defined in the ŒDhammasangani (§ 19). It is persistence *** Conclusion: Our life is an uninterrupted series of cittas arising and falling away, succeeding one another. If there were no citta we would not be alive. We take it for granted that there is citta from birth to death, and we cling to citta, we do not want to be without it. However, without the appropriate conditions citta cannot arise. At each moment there of birth and death of citta, and life faculty has a dominating influence on the continual arising of citta and its accompanying cetasikas. Life faculty is an indispensable condition for this continual arising. It is as indispensable to citta and cetasikas a wetnurse to an infant. It is beneficial to understand that there are manifold conditions for the arising of each citta. What arises because of a concurrence of conditions cannot last, it has to fall away. Life faculty does not maintain the life of citta and cetasikas at the dissolution moment, it falls away together with them. But there is a new life faculty arising together with the succeeding citta and it maintains its life. What happens at this moment also occurs at the dying moment. The last citta of this life falls away and together with it the life faculty. But it is succeeded by the rebirth-consciousness that is accompanied by a new life faculty. However, so long as we fail to see the arising and falling away of citta we believe that citta lasts. ***** Nina. 42236 From: Tep Sastri Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: walking, what is sati,Tep. no 2. Dear Nina, I can sense that your message (# 42182) is final; there are no more issues for further discussion. N: "Realities, including sati, arise because of their own conditions. The next moment is unknown. Sati may or may not arise. If it arises it takes an object, a nama or a rupa. We cannot know which object impinges on one of the six doors, impredictable. At that short moment understanding of that object can develop. Sati and understanding fall away, but they are accumulated". T: How could you develop mindfulness if it was so unpredictable? For example, breath meditation would be useless as the tool (recommended by the Buddha and Sariputta Thera) for developing samadhi and panna. Ajahn Chah explained the importance of such training clearly as follows: "When we breathe out, the beginning of the breath is at the abdomen, the middle at the chest and the end at the nose tip. We simply take note of this path of the breath at the nose tip, the chest and the abdomen, then at the abdomen, the chest and the tip of the nose. We take note of these three points in order to make the mind firm, to limit mental activity so that mindfulness and self- awareness can easily arise". http://www.dhamma.com/eng/lpch/taste2.html N: "It is not possible to maintain sati, because it is beyond control, anatta. T: A friend of mine commented, "If you look at it with the understanding: 'Sabbe dhamma anatta' it appears to be a valid statement, because sati is also a 'dhamma'. But in actual practice, sati can be controlled. If not, nobody will achieve jhana or magga nana". N: However, it is important to realize that it is understanding that matters, not this or that amount of sati. T: Again, my friend commented, "Not exactly true. Understanding and sati must go together. Without sati you cannot achieve right understanding (samma ditthi). And without understanding you cannot achieve right sati (samma sati). Samadhi sikkha and Panna sikkha of Noble Eightfold Path must go together. These two sikkhas are called pancangikamagga which is essential for vipassana meditation". He was talking about two of the 5 indriya. Let's hear what a real meditation teacher (a monk) explains about saddha, sati and panna: "While meditating the five indriya must be in balance. During a meditation session, one should abandon thinking (sankhara). -- reflecting/thinking briefly (vitakka) about tilakhana characteristics of a dhamma (e.g. samyojana, nivarana, the Four Noble Truths,..) is not wrong as long as there is no clinging to the dhamma. -- Whenever sati arises as fast as thinking (dhammaramana) the thinking will stop, then panna and saddha are in good balance. There is no clinging to the dhammaramana. --Some meditators have panna in excess of saddha, from studying and learning the Pali Abhidhamma. They have listened to learned persons or studied by themselves. When they take up meditation practice, sometimes one or the other objects or sabhava arise. They are given to thinking and reflecting that, 'this is a sabhavadhamma of such and such a name'. When they go on thinking or reflecting, the mind will become even more restless." [Extracted from THE METHOD OF ADJUSTING THE 5 INDRIYA EVENLY by Baladhammo Bhikkhu] http://www.vimokkha.com/adjusting5indriya3.html N: If we aim for many moments of sati we forget the goal of the dhamma: understanding leading to detachment. If we do not forget the goal understanding will grow for sure". T: I agree with that in theory. In practice ("on line") we don't aim for anything, it is just the sati and sampajano about the object of meditation that continue. Only when we are "off line" there is a reviewing of what have, or have not, been achieved and why. From now I will not be participating at DSG as actively as I used to. Thank you very much for your Dhamma discussion that was guided by a kind heart. I truly appreciate your extremely good manner, careful use of words, and thoughtful considerations. I really learned a great deal from you, Nina. Kindest regards, always, Tep Sastri ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep, > op 11-02-2005 05:49 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > > T: Reading through the above quote, I have no trouble understanding > > clearly that the 'derived materialities' indeed are impermanent and not > > self because they are conditioned dhamma.... 42237 From: Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:54am Subject: Inherent Nonsense ;-) Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl Hi, Rob - In a message dated 2/13/05 11:52:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Sense objects are distinguished into three classes: the undesirable > (anittha), the moderately desirable (ittha, also called > itthamajjhatta, desirable-neutral), and the extremely desirable > (ati-ittha). While the desirable object is thus subdivided into two, > all undesirable objects are comprised within a single class called > simply "the undesirable". > > According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, this distinction in the > quality of objects pertains to the intrinsic nature of the object > itself; it is not a variable determined by the individual > temperament and preferences of the experiencer. The Sammohavinodani, > the commentary to the Vibanga, contents that when a person considers > a desirable object to be undesirable, or an undesirable object to be > desirable, he does so due to a perversion of perception > > (sannavipallasa). The object itself, however remains inherently > desirable or undesirable independently of the perciever's personal > preferences. The Sammohavinodani states that the distinction between > the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the > average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according to > what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time > by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, > burgesses, land owners and merchants." > > ======================== I find it amazing that the the foregoing is Abhidhammic commentary. I cannot think of a better example of a purely conventional notion: "It is distinguishable according to what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, burgesses, land owners and merchants." Moreover, this makes the notion of *inherent* desirability or lack thereof go right out the window! I have inquired before what working criterion there is for a dhamma being desirable etc in itself, and I have not received anything close to an adequate response from anyone. What is quoted here, however, in terms of "average accountants, government officials" et alia, is just about the topper in worthless criteria, IMO. (None of this is a criticism of you, of course. I don't blame the messenger.) 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) 42238 From: agriosinski Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:05am Subject: Re: object condition...alone? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: [...]> > Objects are created by subjects, but objects are gone before they are > made into objects; therefore there are no objects. There cannot be a > subject without an object because a subject defines itself in > relation to another, so there are neither objects nor subjects. Just > this. > Hi Larry, your observations come very close to my mediative experiences. Let me point to something that actually is. At least seems to be, to self it seems to appear and vanish. Just this - being some kind of movement, some kind of life dynamic. Just conditions? What would you say? metta, Agrios 42239 From: Hugo Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge of the Dhamma/Hugo Hello Connie, On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 19:44:20 -0800, connie wrote: > What needle in the haystack did Buddha teach? I just like to use similes, I don't know if the Buddha actually talked about a needle or a haystack. > The using self to get rid of self idea reminds me of the old cartoons > where a character would erase all of itself except it's hand which would > quickly redraw a new self. :-) But, you are doing it, or not? Aren't you "using" your self ? Are you claiming that you have got rid of the concept of "self"? > Rather than "there is (no) self", I'd say the first thing to accept is > that there is a mistaken belief in / way of seeing self... sakkaya > ditthi. I think we're all sitting here believing that "everything", all > namas and rupas, are me and mine or others' and will be forever unless and > until we're sotapanna. What I don't call me or mine, I call some other > thing / self. I think I agree. > What is there that is not some self in our thinking? Don't know. > So I would just rephrase your questions a bit. When will namas and rupas > go away? What other selves might there be apart from them? What are nama > and rupa? What feeds them? I remind you, I am not an Abhidhamma expert, my Pali is very weak and all I know is that roughly nama=mind and rupa=body. I talk only at the conventional level because that's what I see, know and barely understand. I can see a self that keeps asking for things without any consideration of what happens, then there is this other self that keeps trying to make the first self be considerate and realize that some of the stuff that it is asking will create more suffering instead of happiness, and finally there is this other self who either enjoys or suffers the results of the two other selves. And sometimes there is this other self that watches the whole show and say "what are you all doing?, just be quiet!". So, it seems that my life is being run by a commitee. :-) Which confirms, I think, the fact that "my self" is an illusion. BTW, no, I don't "hear voices". :-) But, I can't directly answer your questions, sorry. Greetings, -- Hugo 42240 From: Hugo Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Hello RobM, On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 07:49:52 -0000, robmoult wrote: > Please help me to understand your analogy. Are you saying that you > want to put practice before theory? I am not clear on what it means > to have somebody else do the job for you. :-) No, I know that nobody can do the job for me. I think that we need both practice and theory. My analogy tried to say that you need to determine how much of each (practice and theory) you need in order to solve a problem. You also need to determine what kind of practice and theory you need. Not everybody needs the same kind and amount of practice and theory, we all have different abilities, or we all are subject to different conditions, or we all start the path at different parts and with different equipment, choose the analogy you like best. Greetings, -- Hugo 42241 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] object condition and Connie's quote. Hi Larry, Rob M has answered your letter. I just have a few observations about object. I shall not take your letter point by point. For me it is so complicated to think in philosophical terms of subject and object and creating objects. I find the Abhidhamma so much simpler. Object is not so complicated, it is just what is experienced by citta and its accompanying cetasikas. When there is experience, we know that there is something experienced, and that is called object, aaramma.na. Citta is dependent on an object, it cannot arise without it. Hardness is a rupa and when it impinges on the bodydoor it is experienced by citta. Then hardness is the object, that is all. There is no creating. Citta is accompanied by feeling, sañña and other cetasikas which share the same object. The objects of citta can be: rupa, (another) citta, cetasika, nibbana or a concept. Citta knows all kinds of objects, also what is imagined. I quote from what Connie renders: It helps to consider what is appearing now, then you can notice that you do not need words to experience an object. It is experienced already, before you think of it. No need to make it so complicated, I think. Abhidhamma is not a matter of learning many terms, the words are mere pointers to what can be experienced now. Nina. op 13-02-2005 20:14 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > It seems to me there are no objects, and the object condition is > fundamentally responsible for the sense of a separate self, aka > conceit. An object is a reference point and, as such, is never > present, therefore there are no objects. 42242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] thanks Dear Christine, Rob M, Sukinder, Thank you for your kind words, I like what you write about my father. Rob, you wrote:< your father obviously had a huge impact on you.> He once said: I am a unity with Mama, and the children are separate, they have to find their own way. This sounds hard, they were somewhat spartanic, but it also has advantages. One has to learn to be independent from youth. He kept up his Greek and Latin even in his nineties and my parents always encouraged us to learn languages: each new language is a gain. We reminded him of his good points now and then to help him when he found himself useless. He liked it when we told him that he encouraged his children. op 13-02-2005 21:06 schreef Christine Forsyth op cforsyth1@b...: in speaking with > Azita on the phone last night we discussed how, through your posts, > your dear father was a part of our lives also. N: I really like this remark of you. I thought these days of you both who have so much experience with the dying. I print out your letter to Lodewijk, thank you very much. Nina. 42243 From: robmoult Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Hi Hugo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > I think that we need both practice and theory. > > My analogy tried to say that you need to determine how much of each > (practice and theory) you need in order to solve a problem. You also > need to determine what kind of practice and theory you need. > > Not everybody needs the same kind and amount of practice and theory, > we all have different abilities, or we all are subject to different > conditions, or we all start the path at different parts and with > different equipment, choose the analogy you like best. ===== I live in Malaysia and teach Abhidhamma at a Vihara that is home to a famous monk, Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda. He has written close to one hundred books on Buddhism. In one of his books, "What Buddhists Belive", he wrote: The question is raised whether the Abhidhamma is essential for Dhamma practice. The answer to this will depend on the individual who undertakes the practice. People vary in their levels of understanding, their temperaments and spiritual development. Ideally, all the different spiritual faculties should be harmonized, but some people are quite contented with devotional practices based on faith, while others are keen on developing penetrative insight. The Abhidhamma is most useful to those who want to understand the Dhamma in greater depth and detail. It aids the development of insight into the three characteristics of existence - impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and non-self. It is useful not only for the periods devoted to formal meditation, but also during the rest of the day when we are engaged in various mundane chores. We derive great benefit from the study of the Abhidhamma when we experience absolute reality. In addition, a comprehensive knowledge of the Abhidhamma is useful for those engaged in teaching and explaining the Dhamma. In fact, the real meaning of the most important Buddhist terminologies such as Dhamma, Kamma, Samsara, Sankhara, Paticcasamuppada and Nibbana cannot be understood without a knowledge of Abhidhamma. In my opinion, Abhidhamma helps us to gain a Buddhist perspective on life. Changing our perspective causes a shift in our perception of the world. As we gain a Buddhist perspective, the nature of the mind and the characteristics of reality will be obvious to us; not just at a knowledge level but at a deeper, belief / confidence level. Knowledge comes from books, belief / confidence comes from examining personal experience. Abhidhamma is about recognizing states in the present moment so that we may penetrate more deeply into the present. An untrained ear hears a melody while a trained ear recognizes notes, structure and chord progressions in the music. The trained ear has a deeper perspective when listening to music. A trained ear requires study of music theory followed up by practice of listening to music. Studying Abhidhamma is the first step in getting a trained mind. The next step, which builds on study, is practice; starting with virtue (sila), then concentration (samadhi) and finally wisdom (panna). With a trained mind we will see things as they truly are; this is mindfulness (sati). According to the Abhidhamma, the mind experiences millions of thoughts each second. We can only be aware of a small portion of these thoughts. A trained mind can be mindful of all thoughts. Most people structure their thoughts around the concept of self; "I am happy", "It happened to me". The Abhidhamma has a meditator's perspective; there is no self, there is only mind (nama) and non- mental phenomena (rupa). Abhidhamma is not for everybody; it depends on one's accumulations. As mentioned in the above quote by Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda, studying the Abhidhamma helps one to understand the Suttas in depth; the Abhidhamma provides the theory which underpins the Suttas. The Abhidhamma also helps the meditator understand their meditative experiences. Abhidhamma is suited to the enquiring, scientific mind. Metta, Rob M :-) 42244 From: Hugo Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deliberate practice: should we "do" something or just "observe with wisdom"? Hello RobM, On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:02:22 -0000, robmoult wrote: > I live in Malaysia and teach Abhidhamma at a Vihara that is home to > a famous monk, Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda. He has written close to one > hundred books on Buddhism. In one of his books, "What Buddhists > Belive", he wrote: I read that book, I really liked it. > An untrained ear hears a melody while a trained ear recognizes > notes, structure and chord progressions in the music. The trained > ear has a deeper perspective when listening to music. A trained ear > requires study of music theory followed up by practice of listening > to music. I really liked your simile, and I agree with it. If we use a piano for example, now I know that the keys on the left produce low tones and the keys on the right produce high tones, I noticed that there are black and white keys, but can't tell a difference between the black one and the two white ones that are beside it. Ah!, there are also three pedals down there, how do they work?...mmmmm....I press one, nothing happens.......what if I press it at the same time I press a key?.... > Studying Abhidhamma is the first step in getting a trained > mind. I am careful with categorical statements like that (and I think this is the source of all the recent threads I have involved here, i.e. people making categorical statements about what is the right way, what is not, etc.), as with my simile of the piano above, I was able to do something with the piano without knowing any "technical details" of it. So, now that I am a little familiar with what a Piano is, I can go and read the "technical details" so when I read detailed description of each part and how it is supposed to work it will make more sense, because I already know something about it. > Abhidhamma is not for everybody; it depends on one's accumulations. > As mentioned in the above quote by Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda, studying > the Abhidhamma helps one to understand the Suttas in depth; It is on my "to-do" list, I said I am not an "Abhidhamma-lover", but I didn't say I am an "Abhidhamma-hater". > experiences. Abhidhamma is suited to the enquiring, scientific mind. That was exactly my conclusion when I read about it, and that's exactly why I avoided it (as my starting point), because I have that kind of mind!!!! I really appreciate the fact that you wrote all this to me, and specially the approach you used. Thank you RobM. Greetings, -- Hugo 42245 From: Hugo Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge .../ Robertk's Finding about A. Mun Dear All (too many to list), On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 22:24:19 -0000, buddhatrue wrote: > He said that `devas and humans' would > not be able to see him after death; in other words, he was not going > to be reborn. However, he did not say anything about if other > arahants would be able to see him or not. Yes, that's what I meant, thanks. Like with satellite communications, the signal is sent from the satelite (actually there is "no self" in the signal, it is just energy that radiates out of the antena down to Earth), the energy is constantly coming to us, but it is not until we have a receiver tuned to that specific signal that we are able to see the T.V. program. Let's say that all the receivers and T.V. sets are destroyed on Earth, that doesn't mean the signal is "dead", it only means that nobody can see it, and at the same time there is "no self" that you can point as the "T.V. program", you may be able to point at the signal, but the signal is not the "T.V. program". Same thing with computer programs, how they are stored, transferred, executed......but I'd better stop with similes..... mmmmm....that funky idea of creating an Engineering Buddhism starts to make sense. ;-) Greetings, -- Hugo 42246 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:12am Subject: New view on satipatthana Hi, Sarah, all, Last night I stayed up rather late on my IRC channels and was sort of having a scary/semi-crisis situation, or at least what seemed like one. I had a good friend talking me through it, and everything seemed so real, when I looked at my body I had a more rich, realitic view of it without even meditating or contemplating it. It was actually a bit unwelcomed because I hadn't set myself up for formal meditation (as some of you may know, I had until a certain point late last year been big on going through extensive preparations for the repulsive nature of the body meditation). Anyhow, among the things that happened was I felt some sort of real, ultimate reality take hold in my left forearm. I didn't identify it or any of its characteristics as Earth element or primary or derived matter, but it sort of got me thinking.. is *this* what satipatthana is? In one of my practise guides, the suggestion for contemplation on the four elements is merely to recognize it in the body as they are. From a PDF [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/know-see.pdf] I went thruogh on Buddhanet, there is a suggestion for beginning to identify the elements of the body in a certain spot, and sort of do a 'body scan' to identify similar spots, or the same element, throughout the body. Last night was nothing like this. The reality just came to my attention very strongly, without meditation. Perhaps I am coming in on something where ultimate realities thrive? Honestly, I was sort of scared for my life, and it did occur to me that perhaps we really do have to develop understanding of the present reality little by little, over many lifetimes. The only thing is, many of the list subscribers here are people of real integrity, and it seems to me, that they have favorable conditions for future human births in immediate succession, whereas, unless I make some changes, I might have to be in it for the 'long haul'. So, if you get the picture, it was a little scary, but remembering Ayya Khema once had a vision of tall slender beings pulling her in and out of a vat of tar (obviously in a hell realm) and saying "this is the way to enlightenment. this is the way to enlightenment." My faith could sort of be, well, yes, this will take me to hell for a long time, but in perhaps a quadrillion years in hell and back I'll accumulate the necessary knowledge and vision to reach enlightenment, some day. Now I see two roads here, taking this road, Abhidhamma, and that of formal sitting meditation, or constant insight meditation throughout periods devoted to practise (which would basically be my whole life) and during other, less important, activities. I do believe that enlightenment is possible through just sitting and walking meditation, but I am coming to see maybe more of the perspective of the Abdhidhamma path so many in this group are set on. Any thoughts or perspectives from the group on this matter would be appreciated. Thanks for letting me share, A.L. 42247 From: Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 5:46am Subject: Re: Inherent Nonsense ;-) Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Carl In a message dated 2/14/2005 7:00:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: In a message dated 2/13/05 11:52:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Sense objects are distinguished into three classes: the undesirable > (anittha), the moderately desirable (ittha, also called > itthamajjhatta, desirable-neutral), and the extremely desirable > (ati-ittha). While the desirable object is thus subdivided into two, > all undesirable objects are comprised within a single class called > simply "the undesirable". > > According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, this distinction in the > quality of objects pertains to the intrinsic nature of the object > itself; it is not a variable determined by the individual > temperament and preferences of the experiencer. The Sammohavinodani, > the commentary to the Vibanga, contents that when a person considers > a desirable object to be undesirable, or an undesirable object to be > desirable, he does so due to a perversion of perception > > (sannavipallasa). The object itself, however remains inherently > desirable or undesirable independently of the perciever's personal > preferences. The Sammohavinodani states that the distinction between > the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the > average being (majjhima-satta): "It is distinguishable according to > what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time > by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, > burgesses, land owners and merchants." > > ======================== I find it amazing that the the foregoing is Abhidhammic commentary. I cannot think of a better example of a purely conventional notion: "It is distinguishable according to what is found desirable at one time and undesirable at another time by average (men such as) accountants, government officials, burgesses, land owners and merchants." Moreover, this makes the notion of *inherent* desirability or lack thereof go right out the window! I have inquired before what working criterion there is for a dhamma being desirable etc in itself, and I have not received anything close to an adequate response from anyone. What is quoted here, however, in terms of "average accountants, government officials" et alia, is just about the topper in worthless criteria, IMO. (None of this is a criticism of you, of course. I don't blame the messenger.) With metta, Howard Hi Howard and Rob Reminds me of the Sutta where the Buddha talks about a leper that burns his sores and feels pleasure from the burning due to the relief from the sores afflictions [itching?]. To me this shows that conditions including and especially mental predispositions are the determining factors as to what is considered desirable or undesirable. TG 42248 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:02pm Subject: [dsg] Salesmanship: Re: abhidhamma - Andrew L Hi Sarah, Sarah: Hope Simon (kitty) is in good health now! In the Sig Others Album, wedged between Azita w/the lovely python and Mike w/Rose. James: Thanks for asking! He is doing great and growing bigger everyday. ;-) He is a great lesson in impermanence. He is my dhamma cat. ;-)). Metta, James 42249 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:15pm Subject: Re: Inherent Nonsense ;-) Re: [dsg] Q. visible object neutral? Hi Howard, It only means: what is generally considered as... We need not think too much behind this. No need to think of such or such exception. Nina. op 14-02-2005 15:54 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > What is quoted here, however, in terms of "average > accountants, government officials" et alia, is just about the topper in > worthless criteria, IMO. (None of this is a criticism of you, of course. I > don't > blame the messenger.) 42250 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2005 0:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha said: That's how you should train yourselves Hi Andrew, Thank you for your kind words. I quote part of B.B. article on D.O.