57200 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple sarahprocter... Dear Kom, Icaro & all, Contd [2] --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Based on the scripture, as well as another text (which are parts of the > Pali Studying textbooks), it impressed me that memorization (word by > word) of the Buddha's teachings were parts of the monk's life as well as > some layperson's life. I believe there is a sutra that mentioned that > the teachings will fade if it is not memorized, recited, well pondered, > and penetrated. .... S: I’d like to look a little more at what is meant in the texts by ‘memorization’ in the context here of the disappearance or fading of the teachings. You may be thinking of this sutta as an example (and here I’m partly using extracts from a couple of my past posts): MN 70, ‘At Kitagiri’ "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. And how is final knowledge achieved by gradual training, gradual practice, and gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he MEMORIZES it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has memorized; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective acceptance of those teachings;.....” .... S: By ‘memorizes’, I take it to refer to the firm development of satipatthana, not to the ability to be able to repeat or recite. With understanding, the Dhamma can be ‘remembered’ and ‘recalled’ even if there is no ability to find particular suttas or recall particular names. When the citta is kusala (wholesome), so is the sa~n~na and vice versa, of course. So there may be conventional forgetfulness, but kusala ‘marking’ or, on the other hand, conventional memorizing, but with akusala cittas and akusala ‘marking’ by sa~n~na as I see it:). ..... In, AN, 5s ‘The Confounding of Saddhamma (b) (PTS), we read about the 5 things which lead to the disappearance of the Teachings: “Herein, monks, the monks master not Dhamma.... They teach not others Dhamma in detail.... They make not others speak it in detail... They make no repetition of it in detail.... The monks do not in their hearts turn over and ponder upon Dhamma, they review it not in their minds.....” ..... In AN,4s, 186 ‘Approach’ (Ummagga), we read about the meaning of what this ‘mastery' refers to. It refers to being 'widely learned' and 'knowing Dhamma by heart'. This sounds like memorization of the texts, but what it says is: “...Well, monk, I have taught Sutta, Geyya, Veyyaakara.na ,Gaathaa, Udaana, Itivuttaka, Jaataka, Abbhutadhamma and Vedalla. Now if a monk *UNDERSTANDS THE MEANING* and (text of) dhamma, - *EVEN IF IT BE BUT A STANZA OF FOUR LINES*, - and be set on living in accordance with Dhamma, he may well be called ‘one *WIDELY LEARNED*, *WHO KNOWS DHAMMA BY HEART*” [S: Excuse all the caps for emphasis:)) ***** S: As Kom rightly pointed out, in the Buddha’s time, the bhikkhus did orally memorize and recite the teachings, but I believe it is the lack of understanding of the meaning of the Dhamma as indicated in this sutta, along with not living ‘in accordance with Dhamma’(i.e not following of the 8fold Path) that leads to the disappearance of the Teachings. Comments from either of you or anyone? Metta, Sarah ======== 57201 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg]they form the formed, to Paul. nilovg Dear Paul, I found the text about forming the formed. Vis. Ch XVI, 44: they form the formed. Sorry that I oversaw it. op 28-03-2006 04:31 schreef Paul Grabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: ------ P: All kusala and akusala cittas have latent > defilements in the one who has not reached enlightenment. In addition, > kamma is volition and is a cetisika that arises with a kusala or akusala > citta. It would not be correct to think of kamma/volition as something that > eminates from a self. Rather, it is the result of ignorance in the sense > that formations "form the formed." These formations (the formed which is > formed) which are non-self are "the condition for consciousness." -------- N: It is explained in No 46, that all dhammas with conditions are formations consisting of the formed. This is one word meaning. Sankhaara means what combines, or prepares. Sankhaara dhamma or sankhata dhamma is conditioned dhamma. There are many word meanings explained here by the Visuddhimagga. Nina. 57202 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. nilovg Hi James, I like your direct way of expressing yourself, and, you are also inspiring. You give me an opportunity to consider more realities. Such as the long way, considering more why it has to be long. I had to laugh about hogwash, I did not know this word and had to ask Lodewijk. Now we say to each other: hogwash. Nina. op 28-03-2006 23:16 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > Yes, Nina is a great writer and very articulate. She is also very > knowledgeable. However, her passive approach is not what the Buddha > taught. 57203 From: sharad goswami Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:32pm Subject: Encounters with Buddhism pisean282311 Hi All, i hv read very interesting articles on encounters of ordinary ppl with buddhism.I m sure you ppl wuld also like it. kindly view - http://www.cam-associates.com/articles/religion/coming_home.htm sharad <...> 57204 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple icarofranca Hi Sarah and all. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > S: As Kom rightly pointed out, in the Buddha's time, the bhikkhus >did > orally memorize and recite the teachings, but I believe it is the >lack of > understanding of the meaning of the Dhamma as indicated in this >sutta, > along with not living `in accordance with Dhamma'(i.e not following >of the > 8fold Path) that leads to the disappearance of the Teachings. > > Comments from either of you or anyone? ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Buddha, in all His long life, never departed out from his loved Magadha country. All his teachings were told in Ardha-Magadhi (Pali language is the closest form of it)and were preserved by oral recitation in this language. But it´s easy to perceive that there are people more fitted for memorization and oral recitation than others...and what if a Bhikkhu - who came from other Índia Country, with other language or dialect: Prakrit, for example - was assigned to memorization and recitation in a language entirely foreign for himself ? Our Prakrit-speaker Bhikkhu with strong memorization skills will attack his task, cracking the nut by taking by heart all Pali language teachings without necessarily understand its meaning! And...speaking seriously...if the "tape-recorder Bhikkhu" develops Samma-Sati in this path ( it can be perfectably feasible by definition),he and the Sangha will greatly profit with it!!! Sometimes, between friday and saturday - not in rainy nights of course - I think about trying to get Samma-sati from these perspective! Mettaya Ícaro Mettaya 57205 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:46am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! tikmok > By the way, but why is parents' agreement required for one > who wants to become a monk ? > There are situation (like mine) where one 'd never get this > agreement, not because if he gets enrobed he leaves debts, > sons or unresolved troubled situations,but just because his parents > are full of wrong views. > If some one has clues about this, I'll be very happy to hear > his opinion. > Dear Cerini, The specific story was that after the Buddha had attained Buddhahood, he eventually pursuaded his half-brother Nanda, his son Rahula to ordain. They were both in line to ascend to the throne (after the Buddha himself), and they both had high expectations from the Buddha's father Suthothana. Suthothana, after Rahula was ordained, asked that the Buddha disallow taking the sons without the explicit permission of the parents because the events pained Suthothana so much even though he himself was a sotapanna (and had unshakable confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sanga). Although I don't know about the exceptions to this rule, there was one monk, Ravata, who was ordained with the permission of his brother (Sariputta) instead of his mother who was at the time trying to marry the 7-year-old away just to prevent that very problem. So, it seems there maybe some exceptions, but I just don't know about them. kom 57206 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > S: Kom, perhaps you would tell us which method was used at the temples you > lived in and if either of you (or anyone else, of course) has any other > comments. Dear Sarah, At both temples, the entire Patimokkha was recited. kom 57207 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Good to read all your good humour and waiting to see if James really does give you the last word on it:-)) --- upasaka@... wrote: > James > Ps. I am so glad to hear that little Sophie is doing better. I keep > rooting for her! > ------------------------------- > Howard: > Thank you so much, James. I'm very, very happy to report that she > came home this afternoon! The doctors said she should be the poster > child for rapid recovery! She was in the hospital a total of only six > days!! Her echocardiogram taken yesterday has shown very good valve > functioning, and the one of the two (constructed) valves that was known > at the outset to be leaky has now been determined to have an extremely > minimal leakage! So, she's really doing well. Now she just needs to gain > some weight. .... S: Super news and I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say how very glad I am (we all are) to hear of such a quick recovery. I'm sure the doctors must feel very confident about her condition to let her home now. Super news! Enjoy the rest of your stay.... And to relate this to the subject heading, I'd just like to emphasise that when we write, laugh, hold babies or celebrate, there are only dhammas, only 6 worlds of experience ever....if it's not seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or body-sense experiencing, it's mind-door activity. Best wishes to your family from us all here! Metta, Sarah ====== > ======================= 57208 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ontological Status of the Tilakkhana -- The term "Reality" jonoabb Hi Suan Thanks for coming in on this thread, and for the interesting examples from your experience as a 'New Australian'. I'm sure there were many perplexing things to come to grips with, given the penchant of Australians for slang ;-)) abhidhammika wrote: >Moreover, compilers of dictionaries usually prove to be very >versatile in adding new meanings to the same words to reflect the >living and changing nature of the language as being used by new >generations of speakers and writers to express new developments in >every filed of human activites. This means that compilers of English >language dictionaries may eventually include the term 'reality' in >the original Buddhist sense that is (non-Mahayanist, non- >Vedic). > > I agree with your comments about the adaptability of the compilers of dictionaries these days. However, I'm not expecting to see 'real' explained in its dhamma sense any time soon. Even among 'Buddhists' the meaning that you and I understand by this term is shard by a small minority, I fear ;-)) >Jon also wrote: > >"The Buddha often used familiar terms in a way that carried a >meaning that was new t the listener, so that the listener had >to 'relearn' the term." > >That is spot-on, Jon. The terms 'Attaa', 'Attabhaavo', 'Brahma.na' >and the like no longer have Vedic meanings when used by the Buddha >in the original Buddhist (non-Mahayanist) context. > > Yes, almost all the special language concerning dhammas, the Truths, and the like, plus the meaning given to such everyday terms as fire, world, patience, brahmin, the list is endless. Jon 57209 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok Dear Sarah, > You may be thinking of this sutta as an example (and here I'm partly using > extracts from a couple of my past posts): More like the second, but I think they share some similar contents. > > MN 70, `At Kitagiri' > > "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by > gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > And how is final knowledge achieved by gradual training, gradual > practice, and gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] > visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays > respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having > heard the Dhamma, he MEMORIZES it; he examines the meaning of the > teachings he has memorized; when he examines their meaning, he gains a > reflective acceptance of those teachings;....." > .... > S: By `memorizes', I take it to refer to the firm development of > satipatthana, not to the ability to be able to repeat or recite. With > understanding, the Dhamma can be `remembered' and `recalled' even if there > is no ability to find particular suttas or recall particular names. When > the citta is kusala (wholesome), so is the sa~n~na and vice versa, of > course. This would lead to the question of what Satipatthana is. In what A. Sujin said Satipatthana is, the memorization of the wordings are not required because if one knows the characteristics of the paramatha dhamma as nama and rupa, then at least one would continue to develop at this particular level of vipassana nana. In another school of thoughts which interprets Visuddhimagga (and other places in the texts? sorry, haven't got there yet :-) ) more literally, the development of the first vipassana nana appears to require more extensive knowledge of the paramatha dhamma, like the fact that the eye can be decomposed into 54 rupas, or 11 sense-bases, or the 11 elements, which would require quite a bit of exact knowledge in those regards. In a world where the Buddha's teachings was orally transmitted, if the exact transmission totally stopped, the teaching is obviously dead. Only the Buddha himself has the capacity to put the internal knowledge into words that also lead other people to the ultimate release. In fact, in some other Buddha's period, where the Buddha didn't put his teachings into the details (like this one), but taught his disciples exactly what each needed, the teaching of that Buddha ended in 2 generations of people, just simply because his teachings were not memorized and transmitted (because there wasn't one). The last Ariyan disciples, even they understood what the teachings were, were unable to carry on to the next generation. How does this apply to us, the lucky ones who basically have all the teachings in writing? A good example maybe the practice of Metta Brahmvihara, a teaching that the Buddha obviously explicitly taught (perhaps in more details than any other teachings on metta today), there were so many perspectives that one can take to put the mind at ease when anger is simmering. However, without remembering those teachings, or having well rehearsed, well practiced mind, there is no way those perspectives can be put into helping easing the mind. Now take a monk who wants to pursue the task of kusala development as wholeheartedly as he could as another example. He either would have a good library of texts, or extensive data bank of the teachings, in order to keep him going on the path. I think you and I would agree that unless one keeps prowing ahead with the teachings, extending what we already learned in the past, repeating the points that haven't been seen clearly before, progressing in the path would be difficult if not at all impossible. Good memory of the texts can help solving many knotty problems. In the question whether Satipatthana, as in Satipatthana sutra, is purely lokuttara, the two monks, a teacher and student, resolved it by reciting the sutra itself. And with the scarcity of resources and teachers for the monks nowadays, I think having a good memory is gold --- it is impossible to understand all the teachings that is useful to one, but it maybe possible to remember them. I mentioned to you one of my very good Vinayana teacher. He is a young monk (only 30), but surpassed many monks more senior to him in interpreting the Vinayas. You know why (partly)? He has incredibly good memory: he is able to recall passages (in Pali) after having seen the texts only once or twice. This allows him to cross-referece the volumnous amount of texts in the Pali, commy, and tikas more easily than those who are not as fortunate. Sarah, I think you are often very convincing in your arguments about the teachings, and the reason for me was the joyfully unending realms of quotes you are able to bring to bear on the topic. I don't think your arguments would be as effective without your memory of some of the texts :-). > > This sounds like memorization of the texts, but what it says is: > > "...Well, monk, I have taught Sutta, Geyya, Veyyaakara.na ,Gaathaa, > Udaana, Itivuttaka, Jaataka, Abbhutadhamma and Vedalla. Now if a monk > *UNDERSTANDS THE MEANING* and (text of) dhamma, - *EVEN IF IT BE BUT A > STANZA OF FOUR LINES*, - and be set on living in accordance with Dhamma, > he may well be called `one *WIDELY LEARNED*, *WHO KNOWS DHAMMA BY HEART*" > Yes, this venerable one, who knows the dhamma by heart, would definitely benefit himself, but maybe unfortunately, without a good memory of the Buddha's teachings (or good writings!), the teachings may end up not being carried on. My point of this random rambling is, I don't think we should (or definitely I should) sneer or have even the slightest contempts for those people who try hard to remember the texts, even without the crystal clear understanding of the texts in the beginning, especially if they know that memorization is not the ultimate goals of this sasana (but it can help bring one closer to it), not only the memorization can help them, it may aid other people as well. I am most grateful to those most venerable ones, who passed on this text to me, even not having understood all what he remembered. (Would he? All of the buddha teachings he understood perfectly?) kom 57210 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:03am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Control or No control? jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: >As for how I formulated my language, it reflects the way I always understand this business, but it was purposely formulated to avoid ordinary locutions that are prone to misinterpretation and "pouncing"! LOL! My perspective has been this all along, but not my language. > I am delighted to know that you have all along seen things in terms of the dhammas underlying conventional activities, rather than the conventional activities themselves. I am only a little surprised that it has taken you so long (is it 3 years or 4 now?) to express that understanding in so many words ;-)) ;-)). >Of course, if I continue with such techno-speak language as this it will get to the point that no one who speaks in a normal way will understand me! I did, as you noted, mix in some ordinary language too, else the intentional point about the Buddha's prescribing just couldn't have been made, at least not in a way succinct enough for anyone to have a clue of what I meant! > > Don't worry, dhamma-speak may seem like 'techno-speak', but it is largely just a re-learning of already familiar terms, as I have been discussing with Suan. And of course, this is a dhamma speak-friendly zone ;-)) Jon 57211 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. tikmok Dear Icaro, My experience being a layperson (which I still am by the way, since I disrobed) is that the less one wants, and the more one appreciate the sila, the better one is able to keep it. My inability to keep the sila are driven in parts because I want better car, better jobs, higher salary, more secured retirements, being better accepted in a group, etc. If I attenuate those wants and understand better the faults of not keeping the sila, and the benefits of keeping the sila, then it is easier to keep them. kom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi Eddie! > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Here there is this dilemma with most folks, how do we balance the > >daily life with practice, and be not tempted with tanha or > >temptations surrounding us by media, daily events, etc. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > That´s no dilemma, "Carissimus Eddie"! > I am a layman on Buddhism. I am not able to follow any buddhistic > precept in full or in parts, in any time or any opportunity. If I were > a Bhikkhu I could try to do it, but I am not. So I am totally unable > to copy with any of the five precepts or applying them rightly on > daily life or fight against tanha, lobha, dosa and moha, etc. And you > are in the same level. And all DSG members are at the same situation > except Kom, that is a Buddhist Monk now! > > And back to Abhidhamma!!!! > > Mettaya > > Ícaro > 57212 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:30am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple tikmok Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Kom, Connie & all, > > 2 contd. > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > S: I know what you mean. Of course there is saddhaa or faith whenever > there is kusala of any kind, even for non-Buddhists, with or without any > understanding. When it comes to faith in the teachings, this can only be > developed with satipatthana as I see it. I personally think that perfect, unshakable faith in the teachings can only be developed with Satipatthana, but faith in the teachings itself can be tremendously developed with wisdom, even that wisdom isn't exactly about nama-rupa, conditions, impermanence, suffering, and anatta. I personally am, in numerous time, so grateful to the Buddha's teachings about daily life (either as monks or laypeople), even when the ultimate meanings (the 4 noble truths) of the teachings are still hidden from me. I remember having read the Maha-dukkhakhandha sutta the first time, I was so impressed I repeated this sutta many many times to people. I remember having read about Tiissa Samanera (a 7-year-old arahat), and how he thoughts about the situations of his life, that I can often tell his tale with such joy and details. I personally wouldn't discount any confidence developed in anyway. Didn't the Buddha teach that we shouldn't look down on even the slightest kusala? For the slightest kusala, when maintained and developed bit by bit, will eventually fill its container, just like drops of water will eventually fill its. kom 57213 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:57am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple tikmok > S: As I see it, through the development of understanding, through the > development of satipatthana, kusala will be developed naturally. For > example, metta can only develop by clearly understanding the clear > distinction between it and attachment when it arises now. It seems to me that the Bodhissatta developed kusala however he can, with or without Satipatthana. We are not Bodhisatta (or at least most of us aren't!), but I am convinced that we need to take the examples of the Buddha in developing the kusala traits however we can. There are fewer lives where Satipatthana is available to us than without, if the development has to be "natural", then developing perfections in other lives would be impossible, and developing perfections in this life would be limited to a standard I don't think ever gets imposed anywhere in the texts. > > When we wish to develop kusala of any kind (rather than just understanding > what has been conditioned already), isn't this a clinging to being one > developing/having more kusala in life? A subtle point perhaps:) > Our Buddha took 20 aeons for him to develop all the perfections to become the sammasambuddha, I can't imagine all those time that he thought, I did this for I want to become a Buddha, that he didn't even once think with the minds tainted with lobha, mana, and ditthi --- the manifestation of mine, me, and self. I wouldn't say don't follow the sila because you don't understand it, or because it is tainted with self, but I would say, follow the sila as best as you can, and then work to better understand the faults of not following it, the benefits of following it, and that following it has one ultimate goal: to get rid of mine, me, and self by better understanding impermanence, suffering, and non-self. kom ps: I pray to the Buddha that in every life I become, that I always work my hardest to develop kusala as much as I can, towards the ultimate goal that the Buddha taught us, the release from mine, me, and self. 57214 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Icaro and Eddie Lou, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi Eddie > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > I was able to quickly read through what you have described, if the > >drink is alcoholic I think it is not in tune with the 'pragmatic but > >altruistic' rules of Buddha for monk, no intoxicating drink in the > >very basic rule of 5 precepts. Anyway that is their violations, good > >you left soon, very observant, courageous and decisive of you. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I think that´s no alcohol involved in this scene... as James had > wrote, only Coffee, tea and some drinks as refreshment. > But he stumbled on a very important matter of etiquette: monks have > priority over laypeople, and must be approached with uppermost respect. > "But they didn´t showed any of these "respect" with him!" > "Again, they are monks and YOU ought to show respect!" > These are clear rules and our dearest James failed in this point! Eddie, there weren't any alcoholic drinks (or at least I don't assume there were. After all, I was chased off before I could say "Boo"! ;-)) Icaro, in this group I can always count on someone opposing just about anything I have to say. Even if I said the sky is blue, someone would post about how it isn't! ;-)) First, I wasn't really a layperson during the incident, I was an 'initiate'. I was given special white clothes to wear, which looked like pajamas or a karate outfit (without the black belt ;-). Second, it was a group meditation for all the monks and the initiates, no laypeople were there. And after this meditation, the abbott said to me "Go have something to drink". I turn around and there is a cart with drinks on it. Go figure, I thought I was supposed to go there! I didn't know, since this was only my second day, that the drinks for the initiates were in the temple and not on the verada where we meditated. Third, I don't care if I followed proper etiquette or not, no one has the right to talk to me in such a nasty way!!!!! And the fact that it came from a monk, just after we had meditated together, was really atrocious! That monk could have explained to me nicely that my drinks were in a different place. I was obviously new. As far as I was concerned, there was no excuse for his behavior with me. But, Icaro, if you want to think I am in the wrong, that's fine. Metta, James 57215 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! icarofranca Hi James! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Icaro, in this group I can always count on someone opposing just > about anything I have to say. Even if I said the sky is blue, > someone would post about how it isn't! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------------------- James, I won´t play any rethoric tricks against you, be sure of it! let´s try to reach a solution together... ------------------------------------------------------------------ > First, I wasn't really > a layperson during the incident, I was an 'initiate'. ----------------------------------------------------------------- And they are monks, dear... ------------------------------------------------------------------- > I was given > special white clothes to wear, which looked like pajamas or a >karate > outfit (without the black belt ;-). Second, it was a group > meditation for all the monks and the initiates, no laypeople were > there. And after this meditation, the abbott said to me "Go have > something to drink". I turn around and there is a cart with drinks > on it. Go figure, I thought I was supposed to go there! I didn't > know, since this was only my second day, that the drinks for the > initiates were in the temple and not on the verada where we > meditated. Third, I don't care if I followed proper etiquette or > not, no one has the right to talk to me in such a nasty way!!!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------- James, think about your own words and your misdeed will become clear: they are monks and this implies a higher level than you. If they talk nasty to you or not, they are in a higher position than you and your only right answer is bow your head and your eyes, say some excuses and depart. They would understood you well. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > And the fact that it came from a monk, just after we had meditated > together, was really atrocious! That monk could have explained to > me nicely that my drinks were in a different place. I was obviously > new. As far as I was concerned, there was no excuse for his > behavior with me. But, Icaro, if you want to think I am in the > wrong, that's fine. ------------------------------------------------------------------- You are wrong, James. Sila Sila Sila They could answered you to buy an AK-47 and kill some monks to compensate your frustation....but they are experts on Metta and gave you an adequate reply. You could have used this oportunity to enlarge your understanding . Mettaya ìcaro > > Metta, > James > 57216 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two, II nilovg Dear Han, op 27-03-2006 07:09 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > > For me, anicca is most easily understood among the > three characteristics. ------ N: True, some people are more inclined to understand dhammas as dukkha, others as aniccaa or as anattaa. It depends on the individual. That is why, in the process during which enlightenment is attained, the mind-door adverting-consciousness adverts to the nama or rupa appearing at that moment as dukkha, or as aniccaa or as anattaa. Just as you indicate further on. --------- H: Therefore I concentrate on the > arising and passing away of whatever phenomenon > (kaaya, or vedanaa, or citta, or dhamma) that appears > at the moment of contemplation.... . One of the > components of yathaabhuta nana is to note the arising > and falling away of conditioned things, which we call > “phyit-pyet in Burmese. (phyit = becoming, pyet = > dissolution). ----- N: This is the first stage of mahaa-vipassana ñaa.na. As you also know this is not theory. It pertains to our life just now, to seeing, visible object, hardness, the experience of hardness, etc. Sati sampajañña can have only one object at a time, either a nama or a rupa. When seeing arises it experiences visible object, thus, although seeing and visible object are present at the same time, only one of them can be the object of sati sampajañña. When the arising and falling away of dhammas is realized, this means: the arising and falling away of this or that rupa, or of this or that nama, very precisely. But all this is still theory for me, I only repeat what I grasp with intellectual understanding. -------- H: If one contemplates on “phyit-pyet’ long > enough he will get bored with the “phyit-pyet. He > will not like to have anything anymore that is > constantly arising and falling away. At that stage > nibbidaa nana will arise. In Burmese we call > “phyit-pyet mone (mone = to hate). ------- N: Yes, the Sayadaw explains correctly, but he explains stages of insight which are so high for a beginner. I like what you say: H: But, what about me? Where am I now? At the moment, I > am still struggling with the yathaabhuta nana. I do > not even know whether I will achieve nibbidaa nana in > this life, let alone magga nana. -------- N: Yes, you are quite right in asking. The Ven. Sayadaw explains about phyit-pyet, but how to begin? He does not speak about the stages before that. It may seem that we note the arising of anger and then its disappearing, it is like a quick noting, without thinking. But this is not yet phyit-pyet. The borderline between thinking about dhammas and direct awareness may seem very unclear. The reason is, as I see it, that we have to be quite sure what sati is, when there is sati and when not, but only noting or thinking. A difficult subject, I find. At this moment I am not sure what exactly the characteristic of nama is, I confuse nama and rupa. The first stage of tender insight, taru.na vipassanaa, is distinguishing nama from rupa, and this is realized through the mind-door, in a mind-door process. Rupa is experienced through a sense door and then that rupa, when it has just fallen away is experienced through the mind-door. But we do not notice this. When thinking arises on account of rupa, for example sound, thinking about the kind of sound, its source, etc. occurs already in other mind-door processes, arising later on. The mind-door process which follows upon a sense-door process experiences just rupa, not a concept on account of the experience of rupa. But now, I have no idea of what a mind-door process is, paññaa is not so keen yet. But at the first stage of insight it is known what a mind-door process is. The Abhidhamma can help us not to get confused about nama and rupa, about the many different cittas arising in processes. When there is a moment of pain, aversion arises immediately. However, body-consciousness that is accompanied by painful feeling also arises, and this is only vipaakacitta, no aversion. When aversion arises it arises together with mental unhappy feeling. There is also rupa which impinges on the bodysense, which can be hardness or heat for example. Now, there is quite a tangle of rupa, feelings, cetasikas, it is hard to know them one at a time. Only when there are conditions for sati and paññaa more understanding of the different characteristics of nama and rupa can develop. This is an example that may make it clear that the first stage of tender insight is indispensable. Before the realization of phyit-pyet we have to know which dhamma is arising and falling away, which nama, which rupa. Nina. ---------- 57217 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. nilovg Hi James, op 28-03-2006 23:43 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > All of the monks glared at > me and then one of the monks snarled (and, yes, I mean > snarled), "This is not for you. You need to go back to the temple." ****** N: The snarling is not the right way, but, there is a rule. When laypeople offer food or drink to the monks, a laypeson is not supposed to take part in this. It is an offering to the monks. Offerings to the monks are special. Later on, when there are left overs, yes, then they can have it. I had a similar experience. I was in a temple where the late Ven. Dhammadharo was and he received something to eat together with the samanera who attended on him. I was very hungry at that time and I felt very sad that they would not give me anything. But later on I learnt that this is not done. Nina. 57218 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a drop of water. - at the first temple nilovg Dear Kom, What you say I want to apply to a slight moment of awareness of a nama or rupa, however imperfect and mixed with thinking it may be. It should not be despised, it can accumulate. It is encouraging what you say here. Nina. op 29-03-2006 16:30 schreef Kom Tukovinit op kom@...: > I personally wouldn't discount any confidence developed in anyway. > Didn't the Buddha teach that we shouldn't look down on even the > slightest kusala? For the slightest kusala, when maintained and > developed bit by bit, will eventually fill its container, just like drops of > water will eventually fill it 57219 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: perfections - at the first temple nilovg Dear Kom, but with such intention the development of kusala is already the development of the perfections. It is not necessary to think of the names of all these perfections. All kusala through body, speech and mind is a perfection if the aim is not a gain for oneself, but having less defilements. BTW, as to your remark about the Visuddhimagga and all details of for example rupa, these were not explained with the aim to be aware of all these rupas, but it is a foundation knowledge that can help to understand the conditioned nature of dhammas. But, it depends on the individual's inclination how much he studies. Nina. op 29-03-2006 16:57 schreef Kom Tukovinit op kom@...: > I pray to the Buddha that in every life I become, that I always work > my hardest to develop kusala as much as I can, towards the ultimate > goal that the Buddha taught us, the release from mine, me, and self. 57220 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > op 28-03-2006 23:43 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > > > All of the monks glared at > > me and then one of the monks snarled (and, yes, I mean > > snarled), "This is not for you. You need to go back to the temple." > ****** > N: The snarling is not the right way, but, there is a rule. When laypeople > offer food or drink to the monks, a laypeson is not supposed to take part in > this. It is an offering to the monks. Offerings to the monks are special. > Later on, when there are left overs, yes, then they can have it. > I had a similar experience. I was in a temple where the late Ven. > Dhammadharo was and he received something to eat together with the samanera > who attended on him. I was very hungry at that time and I felt very sad > that they would not give me anything. But later on I learnt that this is not > done. > Nina. > Thanks for the sweet message. Of course I had no problem that the drinks were not for me. I misunderstood the abbott's directions. I thought he had told me to go drink there. What was I supposed to do? (rhetorical question- don't answer). Anyway, the problem I had was the nasty way the monk spoke to me- that's it. (and the way the other monks gave me nasty looks). He didn't need to be nasty. I have been around many monks for many years, I have never seen a monk act like that to anyone. Metta, James 57221 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:31am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Icaro, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi James! > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > Icaro, in this group I can always count on someone opposing just > > about anything I have to say. Even if I said the sky is blue, > > someone would post about how it isn't! ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > James, I won´t play any rethoric tricks against you, be sure of it! > let´s try to reach a solution together... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > First, I wasn't really > > a layperson during the incident, I was an 'initiate'. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > And they are monks, dear... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I was given > > special white clothes to wear, which looked like pajamas or a > >karate > > outfit (without the black belt ;-). Second, it was a group > > meditation for all the monks and the initiates, no laypeople were > > there. And after this meditation, the abbott said to me "Go have > > something to drink". I turn around and there is a cart with > drinks > > on it. Go figure, I thought I was supposed to go there! I didn't > > know, since this was only my second day, that the drinks for the > > initiates were in the temple and not on the verada where we > > meditated. Third, I don't care if I followed proper etiquette or > > not, no one has the right to talk to me in such a nasty way!!!!! > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > James, think about your own words and your misdeed will become > clear: they are monks and this implies a higher level than you. If > they talk nasty to you or not, they are in a higher position than > you and your only right answer is bow your head and your eyes, say > some excuses and depart. They would understood you well. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > And the fact that it came from a monk, just after we had meditated > > together, was really atrocious! That monk could have explained to > > me nicely that my drinks were in a different place. I was > obviously > > new. As far as I was concerned, there was no excuse for his > > behavior with me. But, Icaro, if you want to think I am in the > > wrong, that's fine. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > You are wrong, James. > > Sila > Sila > Sila > > They could answered you to buy an AK-47 and kill some monks to > compensate your frustation....but they are experts on Metta and gave > you an adequate reply. You could have used this oportunity to > enlarge your understanding . > > Mettaya > > ìcaro So, you suggest I could have bought a gun and killed some monks as a response. Interesting. As I recall, you were in some trouble in this group a while back for suggesting the slaughter of an entire race of people (Italians? Germans? I forget...) I think you should examine your own mind and definitely not lecture anyone about metta. Metta, James 57222 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 0:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two, II hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much. I have noted your very useful comments. With metta and deepest respect, Han ------------------------------ N: It is not all the time with wrong view that we cling to ourselves. I find, often when we talk about others and the citta is not kusala, it is with conceit. N: We see a whole of a person, and we forget that there are only namas and rupas arising and falling away. I think this is the most difficult, to know exactly when naama appears and when ruupa appears, and to know naama as naama and ruupa as ruupa. Only when sati sampajañña arises this can be known. N: When seeing arises it experiences visible object, thus, although seeing and visible object are present at the same time, only one of them can be the object of sati sampajañña. N: It may seem that we note the arising of anger and then its disappearing, it is like a quick noting, without thinking. But this is not yet phyit-pyet. N: The first stage of tender insight, taru.na vipassanaa, is distinguishing nama from rupa, and this is realized through the mind-door, in a mind-door process. N: Only when there are conditions for sati and paññaa more understanding of the different characteristics of nama and rupa can develop. This is an example that may make it clear that the first stage of tender insight is indispensable. Before the realization of phyit-pyet we have to know which dhamma is arising and falling away, which nama, which rupa. =========================== 57223 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 0:47pm Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > ... Dear Tep, Han, Nina Without quoting details of what you - Tep - wrote I think I can conclude you are more a Sutta-student than a Abhidhammika. That is a good position, better than the opposite. But now I understand better the source of some misunderstandings between us. I'm not a believer in the Abhidhamma but use it as a very good model of realities. Of course not all problems are solved then Tep: … the "conflict" here is in terms of their interpretations (in the mind). If 'anatta' means 'there is no Joop, or Tep anywhere', then how could metta be practiced? Nina also has tried to address this issue. What do you think of her explanation? Joop: 'Anatta' does not simply mean to me "there is no Joop"; because who is thinking that four words? It is for example I know I'm playing the role of 'being a buddhist' when I'm telling a friend I'm a buddhist and he/she asks "what is it, being a buddhist?" The problem with Nina's explanation that she jumps from ultimate to conceptual reality and back on moments that I did not expect it. I can agree with her on the conceptual level but I still think something is lacking. It has to do with my idea that the "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" had not to be understood ontological but soteriological; but I don't know how to come deeper in that idea. Perhaps we can wait for the third part of Han' comtemplation on the Anattalakkhana Sutta, I do not have enough creativity on this moment, I'm afraid to repeat myself. Metta Joop 57224 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:05pm Subject: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Here is the third part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ---------------------------- “Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of feeling whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all feeling should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of perception whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all perception should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all volitional formations should be seen as they really are with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ ---------------------------- Han: In the third part, the five aggregates are classified and enumerated under eleven headings and it is taught to contemplate them as "not mine, not me, not my self". The sutta starts with material form. Let us see what Mahasi Sayadaw has to say. Mahasi Sayadaw said: [material form is described in eleven ways: as past, future, present, internal, external, coarse, fine, inferior, superior, far and near. With respect to time, form is described in terms of past, future or present. "The past" refers to what has arisen and ceased either in previous existences or previously in the present existence. By "future" is meant that which has not yet happened, which is going to happen at some time in the future. The present means what is actually happening now. Sequentially, it covers what happened before, what is happening now and what will happen in the future. Thus, when form is enumerated in these three ways respective of time, all the material form in oneself and in others, both animate and inanimate, are covered. But for the purpose of vipassanaa meditation, disciples are mainly concerned with contemplating what is happening in the body, as clearly stated in the Commentary and Sub-Commentary of the Anupada Sutta in the Majjhima Nikâya. Phenomena happening elsewhere need be known only conjecturally. Thus the meditator needs only to understand the corporeal and mental phenomena happening inside his own body and see their true nature with his own (insight) knowledge.] end quote. I think this remark by Sayadaw is very important, and applicable to not only the material form but also other aggregates. Another Burmese Sayadaw once said that Nibbana is not inside the body, but it is also not far away from it. One has to contemplate one’s own body of one fathom in length, for the realization of Nibbana. Thus the meditator, as Mahasi Sayadaw has said, needs only to understand the corporeal and mental phenomena happening inside his own body and see their true nature with his own (insight) knowledge. Nevertheless, one has to study other classifications as well - internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, to have a complete picture and not to leave out anything. Having said that, when I consider some realities of five aggregates, such as “they all vanish at their respective moments of arising”, or “aggregates do not pass on from one moment to another”, or as in the case of material form, “they cease and vanish at the place where they come into being”, at times, I find it difficult to appreciate some aspects of this eleven-fold analysis of material forms. For example, in the contemplation of internal and external material forms, I quote Mahasi Sayadaw: [People imagine that when they spit, defecate or excrete, the material form from inside the body gets expelled or thrown outside the body. When food is eaten or air is breathed in, the external material forms are believed to have come into the body. Actually, it is not like this. Material forms undergo dissolution at the moment and place of their coming into being, and new material forms rise afresh at the new place. The meditator who is taking note perceives such dissolution and cessation taking place at each place of origination.] end quote. And, in the contemplation of material forms in terms of far and near I quote Mahasi Sayadaw: [the material form which is near has not gone afar; the distant material form has not come near. They vanish at the respective moments of becoming.] end quote. Based upon the above quotes, let us see how we may have to consider a hurricane with winds of 200 kph approaching us. We may have to consider that the hurricane from a distance has not come near. The hurricane that arises at a distance undergoes dissolution at the moment and place of its coming into being, and fresh hurricane immediately arises in a new place millimeters nearer to us in a very quick series of appearing and disappearing until it arises at the place of our house and blows it away. This sequence may be true in terms of “realities” but it is very difficult to accept that the hurricane that we saw in the distance is not the same hurricane that destroys our house. Thus, my understanding of eleven-fold analysis of material forms is very weak, especially if the material form is inanimate. Or, am I mistaken? Does the material form here mean only the ruupakkhandhaa of sentient beings? But then, Mahasi Sayadaw has given the example of the external material forms such as food not getting from outside into inside of the body, but undergoing dissolution at the moment and place of their coming into being, and that new material forms rising afresh at the new place. It is all rather confusing. Fortunately, my understanding of eleven-fold analysis of mental aggregates seems to be a little bit better. Let us see what Mahasi Sayadaw has to say about feelings. Sayadaw said: [“Just as material form is considered in two aspects, internal and external, the internal material form not becoming external material form and vice versa, so also feeling should be considered in two aspects, internal and external," states the Visuddhimagga. The feeling from inside does not reach outside; the feeling from outside does not reach inside. This is how it should be contemplated. The question arises: Does this mean feelings from inside us not reaching the body of another person and other people's feelings not reaching our body? Nobody believes that feelings go from one person to another, so this manner of contemplation is not meant here. What is meant here is change of object, from internal to external and vice versa. When feeling that has arisen dependent on an internal object is replaced by feeling that has arisen dependent on an external object, people ordinarily think that the internal feeling has become an external one. Conversely when pleasant or unpleasant feelings conditioned by an external object are replaced by pleasant or unpleasant feelings dependent on an internal object, people think that the external feeling has become an internal one. Similarly, when feelings arising from an object far away change to feelings dependent on a near object, people think that feeling has moved from a far distance to nearby and vice versa. What is meant here, therefore, is change of objects, external and internal, far and near, dependent on which feelings arise.] end quote. Thus, in the case of feelings as described above, it is much easier for me to understand and appreciate. Perceptions and volitional formations could also be dealt with in a similar fashion. Mahasi Sayadaw gives special emphasis to consciousness. He said: [Of the four mental aggregates, vinnaana, consciousness or mind, is the most prominent. Mental concomitants, such as desire and hatred, are described as "mind" in everyday language: "desiring mind," "liking mind," "hating mind." In the Commentaries, too, expositions are given first in mind, then only are they followed by the mental concomitants. Here also we propose to elaborate on mind to a considerable extent.] end quote Some excerpts in relation to consciousness are given below. [When concentration is specially strong, the eye consciousness can be seen arising and vanishing in quick succession. Nose consciousness and taste consciousness should be considered in the same way. The noting mind is also perceived to be alternately noting and disappearing. In short, with every noting, both the object noted and the knowing mind are seen arising and vanishing. To the meditator who is seeing clearly in this way, eye consciousness does not reach the moment of noting, thinking or hearing, it vanishes at the instant of seeing. He realizes it is impermanent. Similarly, noting mind, thinking mind, and hearing mind do not reach the moments of seeing, they disappear at the respective moments of noting, thinking and hearing. Hence, the meditator realizes they are impermanent:] end quote. [Knowing personally in this way how consciousness arises and vanishes in one's body, it can be inferred that, just like the consciousness which has been noted, all the consciousnesses which remain to be noted, consciousnesses in other people and in the whole world, are arising and vanishing. We have considered all types of consciousness, but there remains consideration of consciousness from other aspects, such as internally and externally. The consciousness which already has an internal object does not reach an external object; the consciousness which has external object does not reach an internal object. While being fixed on the respective objects, consciousness ceases and is therefore impermanent, suffering and not-self.] end quote. Thus, in the case of the consciousness, I can understand fairly well in regard to eleven-fold analysis. In conclusion, I have difficulty in appreciating some aspects of the teachings in Part Three of the sutta, while I have better understanding in some aspects of it. This, I think, is due to my inability to appreciate and understand fully the characteristic of anatta, which is very difficult to understand, and even with anicca and dukkha which I have taken for granted that I understand better, may not well be the case! Anyway, if given the choice, I would rather not go for difficult aspects of the eleven-fold analyses of the aggregates, and choose to understand the corporeal and mental phenomena happening inside my own body and see their true nature with my own (insight) knowledge, as suggested by Mahasi Sayadaw in the beginning of this post. Part Four to be continued. With metta and deepest respect, Han ------------------------------ > Nina: I talked with Lodewijk about you and told him that you recite each day the anatta lakkhana sutta. He said he would like you to share your views and comments on the texts which you read and contemplate. I really like to listen to someone's personal experiences in the light of the teachings. =========================================== 57225 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:45pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! icarofranca Hi James! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > So, you suggest I could have bought a gun and killed some monks as a > response. Interesting. As I recall, you were in some trouble in > this group a while back for suggesting the slaughter of an entire > race of people (Italians? Germans? I forget...) I think you should > examine your own mind and definitely not lecture anyone about metta. --------------------------------------------------------------------- As I stated before, James, I am totally unable to copy with any Buddhistic precept, with Metta, Satipatthana, etc, now or in any future time. I just cannot follow the five precepts in any form - it´s beyond my nature: I am not a buddistic monk. But you could get a gun and shot that two Metta experts and feel better, or order someone to do it , and feel better anyway. It´s up with you, dear James. They understand your frustations very well - their reply was really inside the Noble Path´s frame: Right words. I don´t copy with Metta, James. The two monks that replied to you can do it very well. And you can examine my mind anytime you want, dear James, and I will continue to lecture about anything, to anyone, about any issue I want. Mettaya and kisses Ícaro 57226 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: a drop of water. - at the first temple tikmok --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Kom, > What you say I want to apply to a slight moment of awareness of a nama or > rupa, however imperfect and mixed with thinking it may be. It should not be > despised, it can accumulate. It is encouraging what you say here. > Nina. > op 29-03-2006 16:30 schreef Kom Tukovinit op kom@...: > > > I personally wouldn't discount any confidence developed in anyway. > > Didn't the Buddha teach that we shouldn't look down on even the > > slightest kusala? For the slightest kusala, when maintained and > > developed bit by bit, will eventually fill its container, just like drops of > > water will eventually fill it > Dear Nina, And I say for all other kusalas too, regardless of whether there is Satipathanna accompanying it, especially if the aim of the kusala is the end of all sufferings. kom 57227 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:56pm Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. icarofranca Hi James, Respectfully butting in about these etiquette matters... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyway, the problem I had > was the nasty way the monk spoke to me- that's it. (and the way the > other monks gave me nasty looks). He didn't need to be nasty. I > have been around many monks for many years, I have never seen a monk > act like that to anyone. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Well James, that could be a good opportunity for you to face a new perspective on human evaluation. If someone goes to your home and acts improperly, messing with the furniture, putting shoes on table an so on, how could you look at this highly courageous person ? Bhikkhus are very special people, and cannot, cannot in any time, be approached with lack of respect, lightly or with easy moods, dear James. Mettaya and kisses Ícaro 57228 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:01pm Subject: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three (correction) hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three (Correction) Dear Nina and Lodewijk, In my last post I had written the following paragraph. Based upon the above quotes, let us see how we may have to consider a hurricane with winds of 200 kph approaching us. We may have to consider that the hurricane from a distance has not come near. The hurricane that arises at a distance undergoes dissolution at the moment and place of its coming into being, and fresh hurricane immediately arises in a new place millimeters nearer to us in a very quick series of appearing and disappearing until it arises at the place of our house and blows it away. This sequence may be true in terms of “realities” but it is very difficult to accept that the hurricane that we saw in the distance is not the same hurricane that destroys our house. Kindly replace the above paragraph with the following. Based upon the above quotes, let us see how we may have to consider a tornado approaching us. We may have to consider that the tornado from a distance has not come near. The tornado that arises at a distance undergoes dissolution at the moment and place of its coming into being, and fresh tornado immediately arises in a new place nearer to us in a very quick series of appearing and disappearing until it arises at the place of our house and blows it away. This sequence may be true in terms of “realities” but it is very difficult to accept that the tornado that we saw in the distance is not the same tornado that destroys our house. Thank you very much. With metta and deepest respect, Han ============================== --- han tun wrote: > Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three > > Dear Nina and Lodewijk, > > Here is the third part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. > > ---------------------------- 57229 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: perfections - at the first temple tikmok Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Kom, > but with such intention the development of kusala is already the development > of the perfections. It is not necessary to think of the names of all these > perfections. But I think the ones who have learned about the perfections (perhaps inspired by one's of the Jataka) and their benefits will be more inclined toward developing them. Personally, not all the perfections are intutitve to me, not having learned about them, I wouldn't be inclined naturally to develop them. >All kusala through body, speech and mind is a perfection if the > aim is not a gain for oneself, but having less defilements. I thought for the end of samsara... Less defilements may lead to the temporary tranquility (samatha), but not without vipassana. > BTW, as to your remark about the Visuddhimagga and all details of for > example rupa, these were not explained with the aim to be aware of all these > rupas, but it is a foundation knowledge that can help to understand the > conditioned nature of dhammas. But, it depends on the individual's > inclination how much he studies. How would one study Vissudhimagga without understanding those things to some degree? I was offered this different explanation about how much one studies: as the goal of the first vipassana nana is to remove doubts/ignorance/wrong views about anything being beyond nama and rupa, then one studies the texts to the degree that the goal is accomplished which varies from one individual to another. I would love to ask you a different question in regard to the "understanding" that satipatthana is strictly the awareness of realities in relation to the explanations in Visuddhimagga. I haven't read your Visuddhimagga threads, however, so maybe some other time when I am better informed :-) kom 57230 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - Thank you for your kind words about Sophie! And, of course, I agree with your statement near the end as what is really occurring while we are doing all the conventional things we (so-to-speak) do. :-) 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/ -----Original Message----- From: sarah abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:17:09 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures Hi Howard, Good to read all your good humour and waiting to see if James really does give you the last word on it:-)) --- upasaka@... wrote: > James > Ps. I am so glad to hear that little Sophie is doing better. I keep > rooting for her! > ------------------------------- > Howard: > Thank you so much, James. I'm very, very happy to report that she > came home this afternoon! The doctors said she should be the poster > child for rapid recovery! She was in the hospital a total of only six > days!! Her echocardiogram taken yesterday has shown very good valve > functioning, and the one of the two (constructed) valves that was known > at the outset to be leaky has now been determined to have an extremely > minimal leakage! So, she's really doing well. Now she just needs to gain > some weight. .... S: Super news and I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say how very glad I am (we all are) to hear of such a quick recovery. I'm sure the doctors must feel very confident about her condition to let her home now. Super news! Enjoy the rest of your stay.... And to relate this to the subject heading, I'd just like to emphasise that when we write, laugh, hold babies or celebrate, there are only dhammas, only 6 worlds of experience ever....if it's not seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or body-sense experiencing, it's mind-door activity. Best wishes to your family from us all here! Metta, Sarah ====== 57231 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:43pm Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. tikmok Hello All in this thread, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > N: The snarling is not the right way, but, there is a rule. When laypeople > offer food or drink to the monks, a laypeson is not supposed to take part in > this. It is an offering to the monks. Offerings to the monks are special. > Later on, when there are left overs, yes, then they can have it. > I had a similar experience. I was in a temple where the late Ven. > Dhammadharo was and he received something to eat together with the samanera > who attended on him. I was very hungry at that time and I felt very sad > that they would not give me anything. But later on I learnt that this is not > done. Besides not being able to ask for anything except for specific circumstances, giving what is gained is prohibited for the monks too. Apparently, suppose a monk has medicine that could save a person's life, he regardless cannot give the medicine to the individual. A layperson, with tacts and knowledge of how to do this, may trade something with a monk who has plenty of something else beyond his needs. If you need to have an aspirin while at a temple, you may be able to initiate a trade of something else to the aspirin. This has to be done very delicately (at least for the monk), as monks are prohibited from trading too, except when done for beneficial (not monitarily!) purposes (to himself or the sangha) and with circumventing languages. kom 57232 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Control or No control? upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - Jon, you wrote "I am delighted to know that you have all along seen things in terms of the dhammas underlying conventional activities, rather than the conventional activities themselves. I am only a little surprised that it has taken you so long (is it 3 years or 4 now?) to express that understanding in so many words ;-)) ;-))." Actually, jon, I think you should go through my prior posts. My view has never been hidden. :-) 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/ -----Original Message----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:03:26 +0800 Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Control or No control? Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: >As for how I formulated my language, it reflects the way I always understand this business, but it was purposely formulated to avoid ordinary locutions that are prone to misinterpretation and "pouncing"! LOL! My perspective has been this all along, but not my language. > I am delighted to know that you have all along seen things in terms of the dhammas underlying conventional activities, rather than the conventional activities themselves. I am only a little surprised that it has taken you so long (is it 3 years or 4 now?) to express that understanding in so many words ;-)) ;-)). >Of course, if I continue with such techno-speak language as this it will get to the point that no one who speaks in a normal way will understand me! I did, as you noted, mix in some ordinary language too, else the intentional point about the Buddha's prescribing just couldn't have been made, at least not in a way succinct enough for anyone to have a clue of what I meant! > > Don't worry, dhamma-speak may seem like 'techno-speak', but it is largely just a re-learning of already familiar terms, as I have been discussing with Suan. And of course, this is a dhamma speak-friendly zone ;-)) Jon 57233 From: Eddie Lou Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. eddielou_us Hi, Ícaro, Sorry, me too, respectfully butting in about these etiquette matters... I kind of agree with James, I have been around many Buddhist monks (Myanmar, Sri Lankan, Chinese, etc) and they are generally very gentle and kind. They as Bikkhus also have certain manner and etiquettes set by Buddha, I believe. We have to be respectful and in return, they, I think should be kind and caring to guide us onto our correct path, because they are supposed to be more more versed and learned about the Buddha's teachings. I think I did see before some myanmar monks (mostly young) joining in the festivities or movie houses, which I think is inappropriate, my ordinary understanding told me those stuff are part of tanhas and kilesa sources. Manner is important, I believe, for them to us but we are mostly only laypeople so we can only look on and wish that their more senior monks teach them, we have no power. For them I guess they are not above dhamma, no one can be, even Buddha is under the dhamma law, but of course Buddha will never and can never commit any inappropriate actions because of the highest wisdom and enlightenment attained. What I mean, is kusala is accumulated. I did heard some monks on crowded buses in Myanmar taking advantage of ladyfolks, so with much reverence still, local myanmar people will 'peel off' their sacred buddhist robes and other sacred stuffs, then fist and spank them on site, it is only my hearsay, have not seen any such happenings myself. Look at Buddha, his statue is supposed to be and is gentle looking. My humble crude opinion only. Correct me if I am incorrect. Thx. Metta, Eddie icarofranca wrote: Hi James, Bhikkhus are very special people, and cannot, cannot in any time, be approached with lack of respect, lightly or with easy moods, dear James. Mettaya and kisses Ícaro 57234 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:06pm Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. icarofranca Hi Kom! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > If you need to have an aspirin while at a temple, you may be able > to initiate a trade of something else to the aspirin. This has to >be done > very delicately (at least for the monk), as monks are prohibited >from > trading too, except when done for beneficial (not monitarily!) >purposes (to > himself or the sangha) and with circumventing languages. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Very good! One of the issues carefully regulated by the Vinaya is about medicine. Following stricly the text, Bhikkhus can only have one type of medicine and Aleister Crowley told that his original master - Bhikkhu Ananda Metteya, or Mr. Allan Bennett - had got only nine objects in his life at the Sangha: three robes,toothbrush, a fan, a razor for shaving, his spectacles, a staff and a pot of medicine - in his case, a balm against insect bites. Crowley many times had bad feelings against the Sri Lanka´s Sangha and all their ponderous and solemn way to manage up day-to-day things at temple. He lived over there with his master some months, learned all about Mindfulness,Samma-sati and Samma-samadhi and departed not desiring at all to come back!!! It´s very good knowing that theravadins nowadays have the same respect by the original ideas of the Vinaya. Old times, new times!!! Thank you very much, Kom, for your brillant exposition of your sunny Sangha´s days. May all of us reach at least some slighty degree of Kusala consciousness! Mettaya Ícaro 57235 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:18pm Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. icarofranca Hi, Carissimus Eddie! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > I kind of agree with James, -------------------------------------------------------------------- That´s possible, you see... --------------------------------------------------------------------- > I did heard some monks on crowded buses in Myanmar taking >advantage of ladyfolks, so with much reverence still, local >myanmar people will 'peel off' their sacred buddhist robes and >other sacred stuffs, then fist and spank them on site, it is only >my hearsay, have not seen any such happenings myself. > > Look at Buddha, his statue is supposed to be and is gentle >looking. My humble crude opinion only. Correct me if I am >incorrect. Thx. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Honestly I couldn´t believe in such thing on Theravadins. On MANY Mahayana schools and sects you will find really a lot of quarrelling and even rude battles between monks of rival temples ( as in Korea, where I could see it in real time!). But at the Theravada Buddhism we are in other scenery! Aleister Crowley learned all about buddhism in your days at Sri Lanka´s Sangha with his master, Mr. Allan Bennett, or Bhikkhu Ananda Metteya, and spent many days angry, really angry with the slow, solemn way to Sri Lanka Bikkhus to resolve day-to-day cases at the Temple. Even mastering all Samma-sati and Samma-samadhi subtleties he departed from Sri Lanka in a hurry!!!! In Theravada Buddhism all Vinaya rules are take as it is, and petty behaviour hardly could escape from chastissement... Mettaya Ícaro 57236 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:47pm Subject: How to radiate metta hantun1 Dear Joop (Tep and Nina) I have posted Part Three of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. But it did not answer your specific question. Your question was: Joop: My statement was and is that one should perceive not oneself as atta but as (only) five aggregates of clinging; but that does not mean that one should perceive SOMEBODY ELSE as only five aggregates. And the Buddha said we should not think "This is mine, this I am, this is my self". But he never said that we should not think: "This is yours, this you are, this is your self" or:"This is his, this he is, this is his self". Do you agree with my conclusion that one can not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but that can have that only with a person, perceived as a sentient being? -------------------- Han: I cannot find specific reference to your question in the books. Mahasi Sayadaw said in case of feelings of internal and external: [The feeling from inside does not reach outside; the feeling from outside does not reach inside. This is how it should be contemplated. The question arises: Does this mean feelings from inside us not reaching the body of another person and other people's feelings not reaching our body? Nobody believes that feelings go from one person to another, so this manner of contemplation is not meant here. What is meant here is change of object, from internal to external and vice versa. When feeling that has arisen dependent on an internal object is replaced by feeling that has arisen dependent on an external object, people ordinarily think that the internal feeling has become an external one. Conversely when pleasant or unpleasant feelings conditioned by an external object are replaced by pleasant or unpleasant feelings dependent on an internal object, people think that the external feeling has become an internal one. Similarly, when feelings arising from an object far away change to feelings dependent on a near object, people think that feeling has moved from a far distance to nearby and vice versa. What is meant here, therefore, is change of objects, external and internal, far and near, dependent on which feelings arise.] end quote. Sayadaw said that it is only the “change of objects”, external and internal, far and near, dependent on which feelings arise. The same explanation was given in case of perceptions, volitional formations, and consciousness. Therefore, I will give my own personal opinion. If it is not correct Tep or Nina or other members can correct me. To radiate metta, karuna, or mudita we will have to focus our attention on the person we are radiating as a person, a sentient being, and not just "a thing" or a group of five aggregates. With metta, Han 57237 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:10pm Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two indriyabala Dear Joop (Han & Nina) - I am glad that you now feel that our communication has produced some good results. Let's chat some more. >Joop (message # 57223) : >The problem with Nina's explanation that she jumps from ultimate to conceptual reality and back on moments that I did not expect it. I can agree with her on the conceptual level but I still think something is lacking. It has to do with my idea that the "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" had not to be understood ontological but soteriological; but I don't know how to come deeper in that idea. Tep: I remember telling you (in another post) that our understandings were getting close; that was referring to the idea underlying those greatly-important words of the Buddha: "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self". Let me share with you what I believe what purposes are behind these words. 'this is not mine' is for abandoning craving (tanha, raganusaya); 'this I am not' is for abandoning conceit (maana, maananusaya); 'this is not my self' is for abandoning 'ego clinging', or clinging to the personality-belief (atta-vaadupaadaana) -- for developing the mental state that is detached from the five aggregates. An advantage of the above interpretation is that it is not contradicting with the lovingkindness meditation and giving dana to others, for instance. Yours truly, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > (snipped) > > Joop: 'Anatta' does not simply mean to me "there is no Joop"; because who is thinking that four words? > It is for example I know I'm playing the role of 'being a buddhist' > when I'm telling a friend I'm a buddhist and he/she asks "what is it, being a buddhist?" > The problem with Nina's explanation that she jumps from ultimate to > conceptual reality and back on moments that I did not expect it. I > can agree with her on the conceptual level but I still think > something is lacking. > It has to do with my idea that the "this is not mine, this I am not, > this is not my self" had not to be understood ontological but > soteriological; but I don't know how to come deeper in that idea. > > Perhaps we can wait for the third part of Han' comtemplation on the > Anattalakkhana Sutta, I do not have enough creativity on this moment, I'm afraid to repeat myself. > 57238 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:43pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! nichiconn Icaro: They could answered you to buy an AK-47 and kill some monks to compensate your frustation....but they are experts on Metta and gave you an adequate reply. You could have used this oportunity to enlarge your understanding . C: we can't say what could've been and pretend we're sticking to reality, can we? there is no occurrence apart from each and all its supporting conditions; and no preventing, stopping or changing what arises, i don't think. buddha could foresee the decline of his dispensation. he put up rules to forestall things a bit, but whatever is of a certain nature is just that way. aananda just said he didn't recognize the fault in what he had done or left undone, but so be it. jesse used to say we recognize our own reflections. which is to say, dhp 1 & 2. my vipaka, "own up". suck up, as some of our fathers would say. be heedless or be on guard. the great pretenders make us see raahu swallow the sun over africa & the meditteranean (sp?)... he's forgotten again what buddha said. but metta can radiate speech, i think. ... being followed by a moonshadow, c 57239 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. hantun1 Dear Kom (and Nina), Kom: Besides not being able to ask for anything except for specific circumstances, giving what is gained is prohibited for the monks too. Apparently, suppose a monk has medicine that could save a person's life, he regardless cannot give the medicine to the individual. A layperson, with tacts and knowledge of how to do this, may trade something with a monk who has plenty of something else beyond his needs. Han: In Burmese temples we have “kappiya”, a layperson attending to the monks. If I ask something which the monk has, through a kappiya, what is your opinion about it? Will it be an offense for the monk or the kappiya? With metta, Han --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Hello All in this thread, > > Besides not being able to ask for anything except > for specific > circumstances, giving what is gained is prohibited > for the monks too. 57240 From: Eddie Lou Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. eddielou_us Hi, Ícaro, Agreed, Buddha's followers not following Buddha's teachings correctly, or in style but not substance. But I always remember the Kalama Sutra by Buddha himself that do not accept anything no matter how tradition bound or any bound, check anything out and see if it makes sense and useful and beneficial to one and all or most people involved then take it, or else no need to accept. I would apply this thinking in many cases, this one no exclusion. By the way, what is meant by 'Carissimus' ? Thx. Metta, Eddie icarofranca wrote: Hi, Carissimus Eddie! 57241 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:56pm Subject: To Tep: sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, I sent this before, but it was returned to me. op 28-03-2006 02:51 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > -- The perfection of truthfulness ... One's own sincerity about > akusala ... A great danger of misleading oneself. ..Thinking about > moments of conceit and clinging. > > Putting these pieces together I can see that mindfulness is being > developed through the awareness of akusala and seeing the danger. ------- N: Any dhamma that appears can be studied with mindfulness, but it is not easy. --------- T: >> Nina: Even knowing this, I feel I mislead myself very often. I think > of the countless moments of conceit and clinging to self that pass > unnoticed. > > Tep: Even with such knowing there still are "countless moments" of > not-enough mindfulness! Is there a way to reduce those lost moments > using the hindsight? -------- N: Then we are still thinking of 'my' wasted moments, and that does not help. There is a better way. Lack of mindfulness can teach us that sati is so anattaa, that we cannot have it at will. In this way we learn to become more detached. This is an important point that should not be neglected. We should not mind lack of sati, and if we mind, it shows clinging. > --------- T: . Since avijja is completely gone, there will be no mental > formations. Then how does another understanding arise in his mind, > after the previous one has fallen away? I think I do not know exactly > what I am asking -- but hopefully you may know what I meant to ask. ------- N: The arahat's wisdom accompanies the kiriyacitta, he has inoperative citta instead of kusala citta. That citta is accompanied by sobhana cetasikas, accompanied also by pañña cetasika, but not all the time. Four types of mahaakiriyacittas are accompanied by paññaa, four are not. > .......... > T: > N: BTW the fact that paramattha dhammas and conventional realities > are not contradictory is an important point. Read the suttas, and you > will see. > > Tep : They are contradictory in the mind of a person who does not yet > have yatha-bhuta-nana-dasana. He will keep on asking the questions > like Joop has asked (e.g. on sending metta to other beings that are > 'not self' -- No Htoo, no Tep, No Nina, No Phil, then whom are we > sending the metta to? Who would benefit from the metta exercise?). N: You think with metta citta of others, helping them. Both you and the others profit. I do not think of metta as an exercise, or of sending out metta. When I meet a person there can be metta. But I do not need to think of metta. We also need sati. Often we have opportunities to have metta, to help, but we may be lazy and just let it go. When sati arises it uses the opportunity, it is non-forgetful. We can think of persons, we do all the time. Citta can think of them with akusala citta or with kusala citta. Person, a concept, can be the object of citta. Thinking of concepts does not mean that the citta is with wrong view, not at all. Do you see the connection of paramattha dhammas and conventional realities now? Some people believe that they have to separate daily life with people and their vipassana life, or meditation life. In that way their life becomes very forced. We develop understanding of our daily life. Otherwise, what is the use? -------- > >> N: It is good to remember that our life we find so important exists > merely in one moment of thinking. Citta is thinking, but only for one > moment. > > Tep: That sounds like you are preaching down from the top of an ivory > Dhamma Tower to me , a worldling who is standing on the ground. Should > I explain to a person who asks the above question that he is sending > 'his metta' to "one moment of thinking", not a person who suffers, say > because of illness or lost of family members? That is what I meant > by "contradiction" between paramattha dhammas and conventional realities. ------- N: This is not at all my intention, see above. When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the momentariness of life. As the often quoted Vis. text states: It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this is really helpful. Nina. 57242 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 0:17am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 65 and 66, and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 65 and 66. Intro: The Visuddhimagga states in the beginning of Chapter XVII (no 4) that the dhammas that are conditions are dependent origination and the dhammas generated by such and such conditions are dependently originated dhammas. In no 3 it states that the things beginning with ageing and death are dependently originated dhammas. In the following paragraphs the Visuddhimagga emphasizes the importance of knowing in which ways conditions operate in the case of the Dependent Origination. Dhammas condition other dhammas in several ways. Each dhamma that arises does so because of a concurrence of several conditions. When we have more understanding of conditions, it will be clearer that there is no owner of dhammas, that dhammas are beyond control. Vis. 66 enumerates the twentyfour classes of conditions and in the next paragraphs the nature of each of these conditions is explained. ******** Visuddhimagga 65: Text Vis.: Here it might be said: 'Let us then firstly agree that ignorance is a condition for formations. But it must now be stated for which formations, and in which way it is a condition'. -------- N: The Tiika states that, while in doubt, he asks, Œfor which formations, and in which way it is a condition?' There are many kamma-formations. Ignorance is a condition for them, but not in the same way for all of them. The Tiika states that there are twenty links of the Dependent Origination and the nature of the condition for each of the conditioned dhammas is to be taught. ---------- Text Vis.: Here is the reply: 'Twenty-four conditions have been stated by the Blessed One as follows'. ------- N: The Tiika states that when he asked about the nature of the condition of ignorance, with the desire to analyse the nature of all dhammas that are conditions, it is said, that the Blessed One stated the twentyfour conditions. [The 24 Conditions] 66. '(1) Root-cause condition, (2) object condition, (3) predominance condition, (4) proximity condition, (5) contiguity condition, (6) conascence condition, (7) mutuality condition, (8) support condition, (9) decisive-support condition, (10) prenascence condition, (11) postnascence condition, (12) repetition condition, (13) kamma condition, (14) kamma-result condition, (15) nutriment condition, (16) faculty condition, (17) jhana condition, (18) path condition, (19) association condition, (20) dissociation condition, (21) presence condition, (22) absence condition, (23) disappearance condition, (24) non-disappearance condition' (P.tn.1,1). ------- N: There are dhammas which are conditions, paccayadhammas, and dhammas which are conditioned, pacayuppanna dhammas. In the Introduction to the ŒConditional Relations¹, the ŒPa.t.thaana¹, Ven. U Narada defines the conditioning dhamma, paccaya dhamma, as the cause on which the effect, the conditioned dhamma, is dependent. A conditioned dhamma, paccayupanna dhamma, is a dhamma which is the effect that results from a cause. There are also the underlying forces (satti) that bring about the relations between the conditioning dhammas and the conditioned dhammas. For example, visible object as conditioning dhamma, is related to seeing-consciousness and its accompanying cetasikas , thus, to the conditioned dhammas, by the conditioning force of object. One dhamma can condition another dhamma by way of several conditioning forces. It is not sufficient to know that one link of the Dependent Origination conditions the following link. We also have to learn which types of condition operate in which way in the case of each of the links of the Dependant Origination. Ignorance is the first link of the Dependent Origination and it conditions kamma-formations which will produce rebirth-consciousness and vipaakacittas arising during life. Ignorance conceals also at this very moment the true nature of seeing, visible object, eyesense, of all namas and rupas. Hence we keep on clinging to self. It seems now that seeing lasts, we do not see its falling away. It seems that we see a lasting person, whereas in reality it is only visible object that is there for an extremely short moment and then it is no more. We should remember the momentary death of each dhamma that appears, but we are blinded by ignorance. We can come to see that being in the cycle at this moment is dependent on conditions and finding the way leading out of the cycle is also dependent on conditions. ****** Nina. 57243 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:01am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 412- Confidence/saddhaa (i) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) Those who want to develop calm to the degree of jhåna have to develop the five “spiritual faculties”. We read in the Visuddhimagga (IV, 45-49), in the section on the conditions necessary for the attainment of jhåna, that the faculties, indriyas, have to be “balanced”. When any one of them is too strong and other faculties weak, they cannot perform their functions. The faculty of faith has to be balanced with the faculty of wisdom: * "… For one strong in faith and weak in understanding has confidence uncritically and groundlessly. One strong in understanding and weak in faith errs on the side of cunning and is as hard to cure as one sick of a disease caused by medicine. With the balancing of the two a man has confidence only when there are grounds for it…" * Further on we read that concentration and faith must be balanced: “One working on concentration needs strong faith, since it is with such faith and confidence that he reaches absorption…” The “spiritual faculties” have to be developed also for the attainment of enlightenment and they must be balanced. How are the faculties balanced in vipassanå? One may have confidence in the Buddha’s teachings but there may not be the development of right understanding of realities and then confidence is not balanced with the other faculties. But when there is the development of right understanding of the present moment, there is also confidence and this is balanced with understanding and the other faculties. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57244 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:08am Subject: Re: How to radiate metta jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Joop (Tep and Nina) > > I have posted Part Three of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. > But it did not answer your specific question. > > Your question was: ... Dear Han, (Tep, Nina, all) Thanks you very much for your reaction. Especially for the end of it: H: "Therefore, I will give my own personal opinion. … To radiate metta, karuna, or mudita we will have to focus our attention on the person we are radiating as a person, a sentient being, and not just "a thing" or a group of five aggregates." J: I agree with it. A question about the quote of Mahasi Sayadaw: "… The question arises: Does this mean feelings from inside us not reaching the body of another person and other people's feelings not reaching our body? Nobody believes that feelings go from one person to another, so this manner of contemplation is not meant here…." J: Using my favorite example of the mother-child relation I'm convinced that feelings CAN go from one person to the other, this is called intuition. Of course we can only trust our intuition if we are free of loba, moha and dosa. But it's important even if we can not always trust it. I will read and reread your contemplations on the Anattalakkhana Sutta! Metta Joop 57245 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:10am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > Hallo Tep, Han, Nina T: "I am glad that you now feel that our communication has produced some good results" J: I like disagreeing, leading to discussion on arguments. So I'm looking for points to disagree. The Abhidhamma can be seen as a guide for our spiritual path, and it has had this function sometimes to me and will have sometimes in the future, I think. The Abhidhamma can also be seen as the deepest handbook on human psychology (a science); the title of the english translation of the first book Dhammasangani by Rhys Davis is And on that level of spiritual science I say: yes the Abhidhamma is a perfect spiritual psychology handbook but it lacks the dimension of social psychology, describing the interaction of human beings. Nina and you and others are describing that interaction, saying that metta and giving dana etc are important, but the examples I read are written in conventional language. What I'm looking for is a description of for example the mother-child relation using only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and conditions; an no sentimental conventional language. You said: "… An advantage of the above interpretation is that it is not contradicting with the lovingkindness meditation and giving dana to others, for instance. J: It's not contradicting, I agree. Perhaps it's not in line of what you said but the reason 'anicca' is more important to me than 'anatta' is that 'anatta' is only about the not-existence of (the already unimportant) "I/mine/me" and 'anicca' is about the impermanence of everything. Metta Joop 57246 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Lou wrote: > > Hi, Ícaro, >;... Hallo Eddie, James, Icarofranca, Kom, and moderators Please let's stop with this discussion. DSG is to study the Dhamma, not the behavior of a particular group of human beings: that is the topic of study sociology or anthropology or comparative religion. The rules concerning monks and the behavior of monks, even of Theravada monks, does not interest me as such; the rules are only important if contemplating these rules can play a role in our spiritual path as laypersons. And the topic you are discussing does hardly, not more than any sociological casestudy proving suffering is everywhere. Metta Joop 57247 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:57am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. icarofranca Hi Joop! -------------------------------------------------------------------- >the rules are only > important if contemplating these rules can play a role in our > spiritual path as laypersons. > And the topic you are discussing does hardly, not more than any > sociological casestudy proving suffering is everywhere. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry pal, but the Vinaya - or the basket concerning monastic rules and discipline - IS a Dhamma compendium. Its lecture and discussion is highly auspicious and well reputed by all buddhistic world - even at Mahayana branches! And, dear Joop, Suffering IS everywhere. Dukkha is the foundation of existence, with sociopathical casestudies or not. Kom´s narrative of his life as an Young Bhikkhu is very inspiring for all DSG and a source of many serious questionings. You could do better reading them and...enlarge your understanding! Mettaya Ícaro 57248 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:59am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. tikmok Dear Han Tun, There are some classes of laypeople that can be treated specially by the monks. People who are "riped to be fallen", i.e., ready to become a monk (already living at the temple) but is still a layperson can be treated like a Samanera, i.e., things can be given to him freely. People who devote their time to the temple taking care of the monk can be treated when they are sick, provided that their relatives are not taking care of them. Parents and their caretakers also can be given all the requisites. I am not sure that in this case, an offence is commited by either the "Kappiya" or the monk, but according to my Vinaya teacher, this shouldn't be done through either a Kappiya or a samenera (who is also supposed to follow many of the same rules that the monk follows). As I don't know, if I need an aspirin, I personally would initiate a trade that would be advantageous to the monk. kom 57249 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. icarofranca Hi carissimus Eddie! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > But I always remember the Kalama Sutra by Buddha himself that do not accept anything no matter how tradition bound or any bound, check anything out and see if it makes sense and useful and beneficial to one and all or most people involved then take it, or else no need to accept. I would apply this thinking in many cases, this one no exclusion. -------------------------------------------------------------------- You are only perceiving that following Buddha´s precepts is not an easy task. As a matter of fact, for me, it´s an entirelly impossible work to be done, at any time or circunstance. And about Metta ? I simply cannot copy with it in full or in parts. Satipatthana ? It´s very very very far beyond my forces to perform even the easiest mindfulness techniques teached by Buddha. Comtemplate events as a flow of Dhammas ? It´s really a obstruse and very complicated way to view the world for me...no use at all for a clumsy guy like me. Translate the Vism. stanzas ? But I barely manage to speak my native language! Kusala consciousness ? What is it ? As you can see, since we aren´t bhikkhus, it´s almost impossible for all of us follow up even a line or a stanza fo Buddha´s dispensation. And now...back to reading Abhidhamma!!! Hoooray!!!!!!!!! (You see ? You see ? I miss even a ponderate and serious behaviour!!!) --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > By the way, what is meant by 'Carissimus' ? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Did I forget anything...? Oh well... nevermind! Mettaya Ícaro 57250 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:45am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! icarofranca Hi Connie, --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > C: we can't say what could've been and pretend we're sticking to >reality, > can we? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Bhikkhus are the best buddhists of all, the true knowers of external world or reality as it is, the real experts on Metta. If we say that we, laymen, know the Dhamma or follow the five precepts at its plenitude, or have a mastering on Satipatthana... we are only pretending to be something we aren´t. ------------------------------------------------------------------- > aananda just said he didn't recognize the fault in what he had >done or > left undone, but so be it. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Even Aananda, the GREAT Aananda, the best of all bhikkhus, only reached Arahatship after the Buddha´s passage to Parinibbana... and at hard circunstances! He was entirely right saying this quote...he wasn´t able to follow any Vinaya rules at all: even His understanding of right and wrong was burdened on with wrongdoings, misconceptions and millions, bilions, zillions of serious faults. A pray for witches, a stuffed pampering aristocrat at his own nature, a bloodthisty warrior at his very bones, Aananda could be the LAST person to become a Bhikkhu. But even he, clogged with so many faults, had reached Arahatship! Be strong, Connie! Ícaro 57251 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! sarahprocter... Hi Kom, Cerini(Pablo) & all, On the question of the rules regarding the necessity of both parents' agreement before becoming a bhikkhu: --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Although I don't know about the exceptions to this rule, there was one > monk, Ravata, who was ordained with the permission of his brother > (Sariputta) instead of his mother who was at the time trying to marry > the 7-year-old away just to prevent that very problem. So, it seems > there maybe some exceptions, but I just don't know about them. ..... S: Yes, this appears to be an exception. Here is a brief summary of this story from the Dict of Pali Proper Names: > "Revata (called Khadiravaniya). An arahant Thera. An eminent disciple of the Buddha, declared by him foremost among forest dwellers (araññakānam) (A.i.24). He was the youngest brother of Sāriputta, and a marriage was arranged for him by his mother who was miserable at seeing her children desert her one after another to join the Order, and wished to keep the youngest at home. He was only seven years old, and, on the wedding day, the relations of both bride and bridegroom showered blessings on the couple and said to the bride: "May you live as long as your grandmother." >Revata asked to see the grandmother, and was shown a woman of one hundred and twenty, decrepit, and showing all the signs of advanced old age. Realizing that his wife would probably share the same fate, he left the bridal procession on some pretext on the way home, and ran away to a place where some monks lived. Sāriputta, foreseeing this, had instructed the monks to ordain his brother without reference to his parents, and, when Revata revealed his identity, the monks at once admitted him into the Order." < .... S: With regard to the details of the rules about the exceptions in the Vinaya, last year Ven Dhammanando gave a comprehensive translation of the relevant section from the Mahaavagga and its commentary on just this point. I’ll repost all the relevant details after signing off: Metta, Sarah Ven Dhammanando wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/46052 > “Permission from both parents is needed. The Mahaavagga states: na, bhikkhave, ananu~n~naato maataapituuhi putto pabbaajetabbo. Yo pabbaajeyya, aapatti dukka.tassa. "Monks, a son must not be given the going forth without permission from his mother and father. Should one do so, it is an offence of wrong-doing." -- Vin. i. 83 The Atthakathaa states: sace dve atthi, dvepi aapucchitabbaa. "If both exist [i.e. are alive], then leave must be obtained from both." -- VinA. v. 1011 But there are quite a number of exceptions given in the Vinaya Atthakatha. Below I have appended a translation of it. <...> ____________________________ > A quick and rough translation of Buddhaghosa's explanation of the phrase, "without permission from his mother and father" (VinA. v. 1011-12) Here, the phrase "from his mother and father" was said in regard to the man and woman who conceived him. If both are living, then leave must be obtained from both of them. If the father or mother is deceased, then leave must be obtained from [the parent] who is still living. Even if they have themselves gone forth, leave must still be obtained from them. * * * * When obtaining leave, he may either go and obtain it himself, or may send another person, saying to him, "Go to my mother and father and having obtained their leave come back." * * * * If he says, "I am one who has obtained permission," he may be given the going forth if it is believable. * * * * A father has himself gone forth and wishes his son to go forth; having obtained leave of the mother, let him go forth; or, a mother wishes her daughter to go forth; having obtained leave of the father, let her go forth. * * * * A father, not concerned for the welfare of his wife and son, runs away. The mother gives her son to some monks, saying, "Let him go forth." When asked, "Where has his father gone?" she replies, "He has run away to disport himself." -- It is suitable for him [the son] to be given the going forth. A mother has run away with some man or other. The father gives [his son to some monks, saying], "Let him go forth." The principle in this case is just the same as above. The Kurundii* states: 'A father is absent. The mother gives her son permission, saying, "Let him go forth." When asked, "Where has his father gone?" she replies, "I shall be responsible for whatever is due to you from the father." -- It is suitable for him [the son] to be given the going forth.' [* Kurundii: the Sinhalese commentary most frequently cited by Buddhaghosa as the source of his Vinaya exegesis.] * * * * The mother and father are deceased. Their boy has grown up in the company of [relatives] such as his maternal aunt. When he is being given the going forth, his relatives start a quarrel or criticize it. Therefore, in order to stop the quarrel, he should obtain their leave before being given the going forth. But if given the going forth without having obtained their leave there is no offence. They who undertook to feed him in his childhood are called "mother" and "father", and with respect to these the principle is just the same as above. The son [is reckoned as] one living dependent on himself, not on a mother and father. * * * * Even if he be a king, he must still obtain leave before being given the going forth. * * * * Being permitted by his mother and father, he goes forth, but [later] reverts [to being a householder]. Even if he goes forth and reverts seven times, on each occasion that he comes [to go forth] again he must obtain leave [from his mother and father] before he may be given the going forth. * * * * If [his mother and father] say: "This [son of ours], having reverted and come home, does not do any work for us; having gone forth he will not fulfil his duty to you; there is no point in him obtaining leave; whenever he comes to you, just give him the going forth." When [a son] has been disowned in this way, it is suitable for him to be given the going forth again without even obtaining leave. * * * * He who when only in his childhood had been given away [by his mother and father, saying], "This is a gift for you; give him the going forth whenever you want," may be given the going forth whenever he comes [to ask for it], without even obtaining leave. But [a mother and father], having given permission [to their son] when he was only in his childhood, afterwards, when he has reached maturity, withdraw their permission; he must not be given the going forth without obtaining leave. * * * * An only son, after quarrelling with his mother and father, comes [to the sangha, saying], "Let me go forth." Upon being told, "Come back after you have obtained leave," he says, "I'm not going! If you don't let me go forth, I shall burn down your monastery, or stab you with a sword, or cause loss to your relatives and supporters by cutting down the plants in their gardens, or kill myself by jumping from a tree, or join a gang of robbers, or go to another country." It is suitable to let him go forth in order to safeguard life. If his mother and father then come and say, "Why did you let our son go forth?" they should be informed of the reason for it, saying, "We let him go forth in order to safeguard life. You may confirm this with your son." * * * * Then, [one saying] "I shall jump from a tree," has climbed up and is about to let go with his hands and feet. It is suitable to let him go forth. * * * * An only son, having gone to another country, requests the going forth. If he had obtained leave before departing, he may be given the going forth. If he had not obtained leave, having sent a young monk to get [the parents] to give their leave, he may be given the going forth. If it is a very distant country, it is suitable to just give him the going forth and then send him with other bhikkhus to inform [the parents]. But the Kurundii states: 'if [the country] is far away and the way to it is [across] a great wilderness (or desert), it is suitable to give him the going forth, [thinking], "having gone there [later] we shall obtain leave [of the parents]."' * * * * If a mother and father have many sons and speak thus: "Venerable sir, may you give the going forth to whichever [one] of these boys you choose," then having examined the boys, he may give the going forth to the one he chooses. If an entire [extended] family or an entire village is given permission [by someone, saying], "Venerable sir, may you give the going forth to whichever [one] of the boys in this family or this village you choose," he may give the going forth to the one he chooses." < * * * * ============================ 57252 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta hantun1 Dear Joop, I am glad that you agree with my reply. I am thinking about what you said: “I'm convinced that feelings CAN go from one person to the other, this is called intuition.” Yes, I also think so. In this connection, I wish to reproduce an extract from The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma by Dr. Mehm Tin Mon (page 369). “Meditational practice of the first three brahma-vihaaras (mettaa, karunaa, muditaa) can lead to four ruupaavacara jhaanas, whereas upekkhaa exercise leads to the fifth jhaana. To develop one’s concentration up to jhaana, it is advisable to choose a suitable person and concentrate on him pervading him with mettaa, karunaa or muditaa.” From this, I understand that our feelings (mettaa, karunaa or muditaa) can go and pervade the person we have chosen for the exercise. With metta, Han --- Joop wrote: > J: Using my favorite example of the mother-child > relation I'm > convinced that feelings CAN go from one person to > the other, this is > called intuition. 57253 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. hantun1 Dear Kom, Thank you very much for your reply. I think we understand “kappiya” a little bit differently. In Burma, kappiya is a layperson who is like a personal assistant to a monk or monks. If money is donated to a monk he will handle the money. He will take care of all other matters which the monk is supposed not to handle. He is not treated like a samanera. He will remain as a layman. If you meet Burmese monks in USA or other countries you will probably see a kappiya traveling with the monk. With metta, Han --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Han Tun, > > There are some classes of laypeople that can be > treated specially by the > monks. People who are "riped to be fallen", i.e., > ready to become a monk > (already living at the temple) but is still a > layperson can be treated like a > Samanera, i.e., things can be given to him freely. > People who devote their > time to the temple taking care of the monk can be > treated when they are > sick, provided that their relatives are not taking > care of them. Parents and > their caretakers also can be given all the > requisites. > 57254 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. tikmok Dear Han Tun, Then, this might fit in the second case of people (people taking care of the monk).... kom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Kom, > > Thank you very much for your reply. > > I think we understand "kappiya" a little bit > differently. In Burma, kappiya is a layperson who is > like a personal assistant to a monk or monks. If money > is donated to a monk he will handle the money. He will > take care of all other matters which the monk is > supposed not to handle. He is not treated like a > samanera. He will remain as a layman. If you meet > Burmese monks in USA or other countries you will > probably see a kappiya traveling with the monk. > > With metta, > Han > > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > Dear Han Tun, > > > > There are some classes of laypeople that can be > > treated specially by the > > monks. People who are "riped to be fallen", i.e., > > ready to become a monk > > (already living at the temple) but is still a > > layperson can be treated like a > > Samanera, i.e., things can be given to him freely. > > People who devote their > > time to the temple taking care of the monk can be > > treated when they are > > sick, provided that their relatives are not taking > > care of them. Parents and > > their caretakers also can be given all the > > requisites. 57255 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:22am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! tikmok Dear Sarah, Thanks for the reference. It is somewhat an entertaining read: one can give a violent threat and get away with it! kom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Kom, Cerini(Pablo) & all, > > On the question of the rules regarding the necessity of both parents' > agreement before becoming a bhikkhu: > 57256 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ontological Status of the Tilakkhana -- The term "Reality" jonoabb Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: >Hi Jon > >All good points! > > Thanks, TG. Yours too! > >Bottom line is...for most of us, when the term "reality" is used it will be >near impossible to disassociate it from the idea of "entity." And seeing >things as "entities" is a self-viewpoint. > > Speak for yourself! In the context of what are the dhammas/'realities' of the present moment -- for example, seeing consciousness, visible object, thinking, feeling, hardness, etc. -- I just don't see where the 'entity' thing comes into it. I think problems arise when there is too much conceptualising about 'dhammas', and not the realisation that it is a term being used to describe something about the present moment. >[J:] You find that the term 'reality' carries too much 'ontological >baggage'. Now I'm not sure what exactly that means, but I believe you >are referring to connotations associated with the term as it is used in >the Mahayana texts. However, those who are less familiar with the >Mahayana texts than you may not have the same difficulty. > >TG: I'm too rusty on Mahayana texts to speak much about them. I'm just >referring to what the "general Joe" would think of by the word "reality." I >think my opening statement has cleared that up now. > > Yes, that has clarified things somewhat. I think you're saying that the term 'reality' has certain (undesirable) connotations to those who have never met it in a Dhamma context before. >[J:] To my understanding, the term 'dhamma', as used in the >sense of 'presently arising dhammas', refers to the bare components >('phenomena') of the present moment, as distinct from our perception of >a world of people and things as being the 'reality'. Do you find this >distinction a valid and useful one? > >TG: Dhamma is multifaceted. The way you describe using it about is maybe >1/10th of its meaning. Problem is, some take that 1/10th and turn it into a >whole religion. This is typical of all later Buddhist schools. I.E., to take >a small piece of the Buddha's teachings and claim that's the true essence of >the teachings. > >In further reflection...the "bare components" are just terms used for >analysis. They are not supposed to be "things of themsleves." > >I am frustrated because I continually quote from the Suttas... discourses >which fully support my points...and they almost always get totally ignored be >those I write to (not necessarily you Jon, I'm just venting). Instead of >folks responding to the quotes, they just give more of the same. > > I do sympathise with your frustration. Let me give you a chance to be heard loud and clear. You say the teaching about the phenomena arising at the present moment, and the understanding of those phenomena, is but a small part of the overall teaching. What then to your understanding is the development of insight that leads to enlightenment? I don't mean what are your views on *how* insight is to be developed, but what is actually happening when insight is being developed. What is going on at such moments that happens at no other time? >Its almost like they don't want to hear the suttas. And these same folks >continually say that the suttas say the the Buddha taught us to see ultimate >realities with their own characteristics. The Buddha DID NOT TEACH THAT. That >is merely an interpretation based on analysis that is subjective. The >Buddha clearly had opportunity to teach the above had he wanted to...yet he didn't >teach it like that. So seems to me, the Buddha was either unable to say >what he meant, or meant something other than the words that are being put into >his mouth. > > Wow! Powerful stuff, TG. But I think if we are honest all statements about what the Buddha taught involve interpretations of the suttas. (The reason for this may be that his listeners were on the whole a lot closer to enlightenment than we are, and so had a much better grasp of the subject matter than we do.) We need to use other words to make the Buddha's message comprehensible among ourselves. I defy you to say anything meaningful without doing so! Just a final comment, which I hope may help steer things along in the right direction. I think part of the problem in the dialogue to date has been that what I might mean by 'paramattha dhammas having their own characteristic', and what you say I must mean when I say that, are not always the same thing. In other words, I may not share your views on what are the necessary connotations of the terminology. This can hamper further discussion sometimes ;-)) >TG: I'm quite comfortable using English translations...my problem with >"reality" as a translation is that upholds a way of letting "self viewpoint" >escape unscathed. > > Well that is a matter of opinion, I would say ;-)) >I predicted the term reality would not be dropped without a strong fight. I >believe that is because it is a source of much attachment and a way for >self-view to subliminally linger. I believe abhidhamma is "unwittingly a theory >of micro-selves popping in and out of existence." That's what I think, but I >can't say for sure that I'm right. > > I suppose it is possible to interpret the Abhidhamma this way, but I'm not sure what would lead one to this view. What in particular suggests 'micro-selves' to you? Good talking to you, as always. Jon 57257 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Control or No control? jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: >Actually, jon, I think you should go through my prior posts. My view has never been hidden. :-) > > I'm happy to accept that that is so, Howard. Let's just continue the great discussions! Jon 57258 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:33am Subject: Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi, Nina - I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior of the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : >Nina: > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You know what? My post so far has not shown up. Best wishes, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. (snipped) > ------- > N: Any dhamma that appears can be studied with mindfulness, but it is not > easy. > --------- (snipped) > ------- > N: This is not at all my intention, see above. > When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is > seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the > momentariness of life. > As the often quoted Vis. text states: moment that flicks by.> It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on > dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next > moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this > is really helpful. > Nina. > 57259 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:02am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! icarofranca Corrigendum! --------------------------------------------------------------- >A pray for witches, a stuffed > pampering aristocrat at his own nature, a bloodthisty warrior at his > very bones, Aananda could be the LAST person to become a Bhikkhu. > But even he, clogged with so many faults, had reached Arahatship! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Surely Aananda could pray for witches, but he was usually a PREY for such beings! Even so, after so many hardship, he reached the Arahat level! mettaya Ícaro 57260 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: ignorance, moha cerini_pablo Hi Nina nina van gorkom wrote: > N: Moha is the root of all akusala. > Thank you for your kind and detailed reply. I need some time to reflect. Pablo p.s. Pablo is my firts name 57261 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! cerini_pablo Hi Robert, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Cerino , > Thank you Pablo 57262 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sankharanimitta .. Satipatthana & Ultimate Realities, no 1. nilovg Hi Tep, There was some confusion about my post (postmaster), but here you still got it, I see. You answered it. I answer now only part by part, there are many points. op 29-03-2006 06:14 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: >> N: Then we are still thinking of 'my' wasted moments, and that does > not help. There is a better way. Lack of mindfulness can teach us that > sati is so anattaa, that we cannot have it at will. In this way we > learn to become more detached. >> This is an important point that should not be neglected. We should > not mind lack of sati, and if we mind, it shows clinging. > > Tep: ... You seem to suggest that we forget > about those moments of lost mindfulness because it is not self, a > conditioned dhamma, and so there is no way that mindfulness may become > sati-bala (through development, bhavana). This view contradicts to the > several suttas (on indriya and bala) that I already have reviewed and > discussed with at least Sarah and Matheesha. > > BTW I don't know how to learn to be "more detached" such that the > mindfulness faculty becomes "sati-bala". Can you elaborate a bit, > based on a sutta? > ............... N: Satipatthaanasutta, seeing dhammas in dhammas, under the enlightenment factors: first under sati: at the end: Paññaa leads to detachment. Contemplating dhammas in dhammas, not seeing the self in dhammas. Sati is a dhamma, and there is no person who owns it, who can manipulate it. But there are the right conditions to be cultivated so that it develops. The Co. mentions an abundance of right reflection (yoniso manaasikaara bahuliikaaro). This can only be in abundance when applied just now, in daily life. Not in a special, quiet place. We hear about seeing that sees what appears through the eyesense. This can be considered while seeing now. It can be verified: is it true that we do not see person, only colour or what is visible? When we only begin, there can be a degree of detachment from the idea of a person who exists, or a lasting thing. Further conditions: avoiding confused people, association with persons who cultivate mindfulness. We may find it difficult to understand the characteristic of mindfulness. It is important to know the difference between the moments of mindfulness and of forgetfulness. I gave before an example of sati of the level of daana: there is an opportunity to give something, or to appreciate someone else's good deeds, but we are lazy, we don't do this. Then there is forgetfulness. Or, we use the opportunity for daana, and that means sati is not forgetful. There are also confidence, saddhaa, and other sobhana cetasikas assisting the kusala citta. As to siila: we may be about to retort an unkind word with harsh speech, but when there is sati we may speak with mettaa. Unkind speech can be uttered before we realize it, but sati can be very fast. This shows that nobody can exercise power over it. As to samatha, sati is necessary, it is mindful of the meditation subject, so that one is not absentminded. Sati in vipassana: realities impinge on the six doors, but we are mostly forgetful. If we have listened to the Dhamma we know that right understanding of realities can only develop when sati is aware of the dhamma appearing right now. In that way direct understanding of that dhamma can develop and this kind of understanding is clearer and more precise than understanding arising with thinking about it. Sati is like waking up from lethargy. Nina. 57263 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To indriyabala: confusion: sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, it must have been the heading, I am careful now. Nina. op 30-03-2006 16:33 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > Hi, Nina - > > I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior of > the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : > >> Nina: >> I sent this before, but it was returned to me. > > I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You > know what? My post so far has not shown up. 57264 From: Eddie Lou Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. For Kom and Icaro. eddielou_us Hi, Kom, What Han Tun is saying (correct me if wrong), Kappiya is acting like a proxy or intermediary or go-between person because Bikkhu or monk (unlike laypeople) is not supposed to handle money, properties, stuff like that. Kappiya also helps with other things somewhat like - a butler, normally are quite young teenage man. Actually a Buddhist monk has only a few very basic possessions for very basic living subsistence, cutting down to bare minimum in terms of tanhas, kilesas, lobha, consistent with Buddha's teachings. So all the back and forth in money, properties, materials, etc is done through Kappiya. So any Bikkhu who bargains for a service fee is a taboo. It is according to the cetana of the donor, meaning it also could be zero money or property compensation and still is okay, that is if the layperson in question is extremely poor at that moment that there is nothing to compensate for the help. Obviously, this is very rare, normally. Thx. Hi, Icaro, You missed my question on the meaning of 'carissimus'. Just curious. Thx Metta, Eddie Kom Tukovinit wrote: Dear Han Tun, Then, this might fit in the second case of people (people taking care of the monk).... kom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Kom, > > Thank you very much for your reply. > > I think we understand "kappiya" a little bit > differently. In Burma, kappiya is a layperson who is > like a personal assistant to a monk or monks. If money > is donated to a monk he will handle the money. 57265 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. For Kom and Icaro. icarofranca Hi Eddie! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You missed my question on the meaning of 'carissimus'. Just >curious. Thx ------------------------------------------------------------------- So let be thy curiosity satisfied, Eddie! "Carissimus" seems to me ( I don´t speak latin, you see...) a latin word for highly esteemed,loved, appreciated. And your comm. about the word "Kappiya" is very appropriated too. By Crowley´s own words, a Bhikkhu only can have the minimum of own objects - nine, to be more specific -because he is not to be occupied with mundane things and so on, and his master and confident - Ananda Metteya - were his main example of right action in these matters. If you really think about it, such rule is always a rememberance that in our own lives we can bypass much modern obstacles in daily life with a similar behaviour - only afford a minimum of personal "Equipage" for performing our actions, without any loss of time and resources. Mettaya, Ícaro 57266 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:32am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > > but metta can radiate speech, i think. > > ... being followed by a moonshadow, > c > Dear Connie I don't know who is or was Jesse, but it's wise said! With much metta Joop 57267 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sankharanimitta .. Satipatthana & Ultimate Realities, no 1. indriyabala Hi, Nina ( and Howard, James, Matheesha, Sarah) - Again, it seems that there is a strong, incurable tendency -- as indicated in your reply below -- to talk about the end result (the "where we want to be" that Howard has rightly warned) and forget about the "where we are" (that is very, very far away from the entry of the path). Right now we do not have the kind of paññaa that leads to detachment -- that paññaa talking is a preaching from the top of the ivory Dhamma Tower again. >Nina: > Satipatthaanasutta, seeing dhammas in dhammas, under the enlightenment factors: first under sati: at the end: > Paññaa leads to detachment. Tep: Your above comment -- "Paññaa leads to detachment" -- shows the where you want to be, and that goal may be realized only after long and earnest practices of the dhammanupassana satipatthana, in addition to kayanupassana satipatthana and the other two anupassanas. I don't think the full understanding that "leads to detachment" (paññaa-vimutti), or true knowledge and liberation, is at the beginning where we are now. The following sutta quote from Kundaliya Sutta SN 46.6 very, very clearly shows that practicing restraint of the six sensing media helps develop the three good condcuts, which in turn helps develop the four foundations of mindfulness. The enlightenment factors are then fulfilled following the practice of the four satipatthana. There had been an old discussion that I went through several times with Sarah, but I finally gave up trying to change her belief. "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated fulfil true knowledge and liberation?" "The seven factors of enlightenment, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil true knowledge and liberation." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the seven factors of enlightenment?" "The four establishments of mindfulness, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the seven factors of enlightenment." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the four establishments of mindfulness?" "The three kinds of good conduct, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the four establishments of mindfulness." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the three kinds of good conduct?" "Restraint of the sense faculties, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfils the three kinds of good conduct. ............. >Nina: > > Contemplating dhammas in dhammas, not seeing the self in dhammas. > Sati is a dhamma, and there is no person who owns it, who can manipulate it. > But there are the right conditions to be cultivated so that it develops. > Tep: I agree completely that there are "the right conditions to be cultivated" from where we are, in order to reach the "where we want to be" i.e. the full understanding that "leads to detachment" (paññaa-vimutti). The above Kundaliya Sutta quote tells us precisely what these "right conditions" are. ............. I truly appreciate your time and effort in discussing the Dhamma with me. If my reasoning and sutta support have a flaw, please do not hesitate to let me know. On the other hand, if you agree with me then you should also tell me so. BTW I have chosen not to respond to the second half of your post (but it is left undeleted below). Why? Because I think it is just a talk about sati in general, but its usefulness as instructions for developing mindfulness cannot be compared to the Kundaliya Sutta. Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > There was some confusion about my post (postmaster), but here you still got > it, I see. You answered it. > I answer now only part by part, there are many points. > op 29-03-2006 06:14 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > (snipped) > > Tep: ... You seem to suggest that we forget > > about those moments of lost mindfulness because it is not self, a > > conditioned dhamma, and so there is no way that mindfulness may become > > sati-bala (through development, bhavana). This view contradicts to the > > several suttas (on indriya and bala) that I already have reviewed and > > discussed with at least Sarah and Matheesha. > > > > BTW I don't know how to learn to be "more detached" such that the > > mindfulness faculty becomes "sati-bala". Can you elaborate a bit, > > based on a sutta? > > ............... (snipped) > The Co. mentions an abundance of right reflection (yoniso manaasikaara bahuliikaaro). This can only be in abundance when applied just now, in daily life. Not in a special, quiet place. We hear about seeing that sees what appears through the eyesense. This can be considered while seeing now. It can be verified: is it true that we do not see person, only colour or what is visible? > When we only begin, there can be a degree of detachment from the idea of a person who exists, or a lasting thing. > Further conditions: avoiding confused people, association with persons who cultivate mindfulness. > > We may find it difficult to understand the characteristic of mindfulness. It is important to know the difference between the moments of mindfulness and of forgetfulness. > I gave before an example of sati of the level of daana: there is an opportunity to give something, or to appreciate someone else's good deeds,but we are lazy, we don't do this. Then there is forgetfulness. Or, we use the opportunity for daana, and that means sati is not forgetful. There are also confidence, saddhaa, and other sobhana cetasikas assisting the kusala citta. > As to siila: we may be about to retort an unkind word with harsh speech, but when there is sati we may speak with mettaa. Unkind speech can be uttered before we realize it, but sati can be very fast. This shows that nobody can exercise power over it. > As to samatha, sati is necessary, it is mindful of the meditation subject,so that one is not absentminded. > Sati in vipassana: realities impinge on the six doors, but we are mostly forgetful. If we have listened to the Dhamma we know that right understanding of realities can only develop when sati is aware of the dhamma appearing right now. In that way direct understanding of that dhamma can develop and this kind of understanding is clearer and more precise than understanding arising with thinking about it. Sati is like waking up from lethargy. > Nina. > 57268 From: Eddie Lou Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. For Icaro and Joop. eddielou_us Hi, Icaro, First off, thanks for the meaning, I know it will be that way, but my ego or mana? is on substantially stable keel, hopefully in consistent with Buddha's teachings. I notice you are a kind of maverick (I am a little bit like that, I would call it out of the box thinker, at least I try). As long as you understand the very essence of the teachings is all what it takes. I hope. All mind based, I can see, but do not get into a pit where one can not climb out easily, like - the hell or woeful realm pit. I also learn human realm is the ONLY realm to get to Nirvana, what a lucky strike for us all and yet still very few know or know how to seize the chance! me included! All because as far as I can understand (correct me if wrong) we need to have a physical aspect or physical body (rupa) in addition to the mental aspect or consciousness or mind (nama). To be frank, I was and am still skeptical (allowed by Kalama Sutra as mentioned before) about Buddha's teachings because it has a lot of unverifiable or hard to verify the teachings like 29 of 31 realms. We can only verify 2 realms being our human being realm and animal kingdom realm. How about others? My eldest sister did have a 'live' encounter with a supernatural being or I do not what to call the entity - patron-saint? of a region in Southern Fukien Province, Chin-Hsiu Chaw Su Fukienese language meaning translated directly - Clear Water Patron Saint, when she was under 10 years old. He even noded smilingly to her across a mosquito netting with the net opened up with wind inside a Chinese house. That is another realm. Some deductions thus shaky? verification with rebirth cycle from the prodigies with no discernible cause which can only be from previous talent in previous life or lives. One and Only one solid thing I can say for sure about Buddha's teachings is the very immense detailed structure descriptions of phenomena (mental, physical aspects, say in Abhidamma) almost all numbered and structured. A tale can be told and tweaked and changed around to suit the time, the audience, the situation in general but Buddha's teachings by NUMBER can be setting itself up for wise scrutiny and so setting itself up for trouble, criticism, rejection and ridicule. It could also misstepping all over many areas by itself with many loopholes all over the places. Even then, Buddha once told his closest disciple Ananda that he can only describe so far, the handful of twigs and leaves he grabbed from a tree, which the remaining still not described by him! And we are already overwhelmed by such details! It has been over 2,500 years already!!! What I am trying to say is Buddha has to know EVERYTHING totally well to describe all these in numbered structured details. That is what is captivating!!! But for all the details, I do not know about you guys, I still think I am sometimes confused, I can only catch the essence. Hopefully, that is all it takes for us to make the jump to Nirvana?!!! Hi, Joop, You mentioned that these are kind of sidetracks, to be sidetracked but actually Buddha's teachings are all, so encompassing, realities, result is - everything helps, only difference is BIG or SMall. I agreed with you to a certain degree that sometimes it is good to stay focused, especially not to dwell boringly on an old subject stagnantly, know what I mean. Notice you even bring out something like - suffering which is one of the cornerstone of the teachings. a copy and paste from your posting on the subject: ..And the topic you are discussing does hardly, not more than any sociological casestudy proving suffering is everywhere... Sometimes IMHO it is good to be defocused to see the forest (the bigger picture) from a distance. In other words, too close to the tree to see the forest, so to speak. And also see it from many different angles and perspective to help with comprehension and catch any loopholes. Thx All. Metta Eddie icarofranca wrote: Hi Eddie! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You missed my question on the meaning of 'carissimus'. Just >curious. Thx ------------------------------------------------------------------- So let be thy curiosity satisfied, Eddie! "Carissimus" seems to me ( I don´t speak latin, you see...) a latin word for highly esteemed,loved, appreciated. And your comm. about the word "Kappiya" is very appropriated too. By Crowley´s own words, a Bhikkhu only can have the minimum of own 57269 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 0:36pm Subject: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. For Icaro and Joop. icarofranca Hi Eddie! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > First off, thanks for the meaning, I know it will be that way, >but my ego or mana? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Think about the Great Aananda, that only could achieve his goal after Buddha´s depart from this world. Your Ego or mana ? All your substance, all your being could not be sufficient: that arrow must go out from your flesh and bones and the "how" and "why" about it ...that´s not so important. ------------------------------------------------------------------- > All mind based, I can see, but do not get into a pit where one can not climb out easily, like - the hell or woeful realm pit. I also learn human realm is the ONLY realm to get to Nirvana, what a lucky strike for us all and yet still very few know or know how to seize the chance! me included! All because as far as I can understand (correct me if wrong) we need to have a physical aspect or physical body (rupa) in addition to the mental aspect or consciousness or mind (nama). --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hmmm...the Human realm is the ONLY place one can HEAR THE DHAMMA and acts accordly about it. All the other thirty planes, from Hell to the Neither Form or No-Form world are too much occupied with their own business. Nevertheless, Nibbana remains above and beyond any concept, any idea... Many Mahayana branches had got their audience by reasonings and arguments grounded on this notion, jumping directly to the dangerous conclusion that "Samsara is Nibbana". We need a physical aspect, a physical body for hear the dhamma and tread the Noble Path. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To be frank, I was and am still skeptical (allowed by Kalama Sutra as mentioned before) about Buddha's teachings because it has a lot of unverifiable or hard to verify the teachings like 29 of 31 realms. We can only verify 2 realms being our human being realm and animal kingdom realm. How about others? --------------------------------------------------------------------- By the text, Mara dwells in a higher plane of devas, far above ours...who said that the devil has his address on Hell ? I just bet it could be 31 planes. Take your pick. -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > My eldest sister did have a 'live' encounter with a supernatural being or I do not what to call the entity - patron-saint? of a region in Southern Fukien Province, Chin-Hsiu Chaw Su Fukienese language meaning translated directly - Clear Water Patron Saint, when she was under 10 years old. He even noded smilingly to her across a mosquito netting with the net opened up with wind inside a Chinese house. That is another realm. Some deductions thus shaky? verification with rebirth cycle from the prodigies with no discernible cause which can only be from previous talent in previous life or lives. > > One and Only one solid thing I can say for sure about Buddha's teachings is the very immense detailed structure descriptions of phenomena (mental, physical aspects, say in Abhidamma) almost all numbered and structured. --------------------------------------------------------------------- A very interesting tale, that ressembles a dream Leonardo Da Vinci got at his childhood. Such visions has the power to raise some totally unexpected personal aspects ... making born a genius, who knows ? --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > What I am trying to say is Buddha has to know EVERYTHING totally well to describe all these in numbered structured details. That is what is captivating!!! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Think about how the buddhistis are organizated, Eddie: One single and beautiful day a common human being decides to turn upside down thier common viewpoint, throwing away wrong doctrines and opinions, false faith in rituals and so on - guided by Buddha´s doctrine, he becomes a Sotapanna. Continuing treading this new path, he becomes more and more conscious about how anger and greed takes a role on his life and with calm he put them aside till the last point - no more return to Samsara. And Beyond all this, the Arahat Path: the Arahat isn´t occupied with purify his or hers life from Lobha, dosa and moha, with the Sotapanna, Sakadagami and Anagami road. That´s a "Horizontal" development. And Buddha, with a understanding all different of all these ones, in a "vertical" development. Buddha knows more ? Knows better ? Or knows TRUTH ? Think about it, Carissimus Eddie! Mettaya Ícaro 57270 From: Nyanatusita Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:21am Subject: Guide through the Abhidhamma nyanatusita Dear all, Recently I found an old file with the first 64 pages of the /Guide through the Abhidhamma/ by Nyanatiloka in the BPS computer file backups. This is less than half the book, which is 172 pages. The book had been partly typed in the mid nineties and Ven. Bh. Bodhi did some minor editing on it. I converted it to Word Office and made a nice file of it. Is there any Abhidhamma student who would like to help to help completing the digital input of this important work so that the BPS could put it on the internet and possibly reprint it? The scanning could be done here, but the OCR and/or the OCR spellchecker proofreading (on Omnipage Scansoft or the like) and then the proofreading and formatting of the Word file would need to be done elsewhere. Many BPS books are out of print and I have no time to do this myself. With metta, Bh. Nyanatusita 57271 From: sharad goswami Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:26am Subject: how human heart works????????? pisean282311 hi! all, 1. The Noble Truth of dukkha (suffering, unsatisfactoriness, stress): life is fundamentally fraught with unsatisfactoriness and disappointment of every description; 2. The Noble Truth of the cause of dukkha: the cause of this dissatisfaction is tanha (craving) in all its forms; 3. The Noble Truth of the cessation of dukkha: an end to all that unsatisfactoriness can be found through the relinquishment and abandonment of craving; 4. The Noble Truth of the path leading to the cessation of dukkha: there is a method of achieving the end of all unsatisfactoriness, namely the Noble Eightfold Path; all above said are related to heart. now how heart works? http://www.cam-associates.com/km/heart.html <...> 57272 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:22pm Subject: Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > > Hi, Nina - > > I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior of > the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : > > >Nina: > > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. > > I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You > know what? My post so far has not shown up. > > Best wishes, > > > Tep Yeah, something strange is going on. I wrote a rather long post to Nina, on the thread about the Buddha's path supposedly taking aeons, and that post never showed up. I hit send, got a reply message that it was sent, and yet it never showed up on the board. (I didn't want to write it again so I didn't). Metta, James 57273 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:22pm Subject: Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > > Hi, Nina - > > I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior of > the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : > > >Nina: > > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. > > I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You > know what? My post so far has not shown up. > > Best wishes, > > > Tep Yeah, something strange is going on. I wrote a rather long post to Nina, on the thread about the Buddha's path supposedly taking aeons, and that post never showed up. I hit send, got a reply message that it was sent, and yet it never showed up on the board. (I didn't want to write it again so I didn't). Metta, James ps. I wonder if this message will make it?? ;-)) 57274 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:53pm Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two... Is anicca most important? indriyabala Hello Joop (Nina and Han)- You like disagreeing and look for points to disagree? If so, then you will find yourself busy with DSG debates till the rest of your living days. >Joop: >I say: yes the Abhidhamma is a perfect spiritual psychology handbook but it lacks the dimension of social psychology, describing the interaction of human beings. Tep: The Abhidhamma (in the Tipitaka) is neither about "spiritual psychology" nor about "the interaction of human beings", but it is about definitions, categories and relationships between the 'higher' dhammas taught by the Buddha in the various discourses. I'd be happy to hear comments from Nina and Han too. ............. >Joop: Nina and you and others are describing that interaction, saying that metta and giving dana etc are important, but the examples I read are written in conventional language. What I'm looking for is a description of for example the mother-child relation using only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and conditions; an no sentimental conventional language. Tep: I understand your view better now. Thanks. ......... >Joop: Perhaps it's not in line of what you said but the reason 'anicca' is more important to me than 'anatta' is that 'anatta' is only about the not-existence of (the already unimportant) "I/mine/me" and 'anicca' is about the impermanence of everything. Tep: I am glad that you are not giving up easily -- you have taken my attention back to the 'anicca' again. I kind of agree with you in principle that anicca is the indispensable beginning (as the following sutta quote confirms). "Five perceptions making for maturity of liberation: the perception of impermanence, of suffering in impermanence, of impersonality in suffering, of abandoning, of dispassion. These are sets of five things which were perfectly proclaimed by the lord..." [Sangiti Sutta] http://www.buddhistinformation.com/ida_b_wells_memorial_sutra_library/ sangiti_su\ tta.htm Tep: The Sangiti Sutta indicates that the very first contemplation is to be on impermanence of all formations. Next, the bhikkhu contemplates suffering in things that are impermanent -- thus, 'anicca' must be clearly seen first before 'dukkha' is seen. Next, the bhikkhu contemplates impersonality (not self, egolessness) in impermanent things that induce suffering -- thus, 'anatta' is to be seen after the bhikkhu has developed clear knowings in 'anicca' and 'dukkha'. Q.E.D. Tep: But I disagree with you about the un-importance of 'anatta'. How would you eradicate the latent tendency of conceit (maananusaya) with only impernanence contemplation? Best wishes, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > (snipped) > Perhaps it's not in line of what you said but the reason 'anicca' is > more important to me than 'anatta' is that 'anatta' is only about the > not-existence of (the already unimportant) "I/mine/me" and 'anicca' > is about the impermanence of everything. > > Metta > > Joop > 57275 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:03pm Subject: Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi, James - Thank you for sharing your experience about the "not showing up" posts with us. > Yeah, something strange is going on. I wrote a rather long post to > Nina, on the thread about the Buddha's path supposedly taking aeons, > and that post never showed up. I hit send, got a reply message that > it was sent, and yet it never showed up on the board. (I didn't want > to write it again so I didn't). > > Metta, > James Tep: I have thought about becoming less active in posting from now. It is discouraging. If you keep on losing money in the lotto, it wouldn't be long before you decide to forget about it. Sincerely, Tep, your friend. ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Nina - > > > > I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior > of > > the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : > > > > >Nina: > > > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. > > > > I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You > > know what? My post so far has not shown up. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Tep > (snipped) > 57276 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:06pm Subject: Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi, James - You wrote : > James > ps. I wonder if this message will make it?? ;-)) Well, it showed up twice! Regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Nina - > > > > I have been confused several times before by the strange behavior > of > > the Yahoo! Group in handling DSG posts. You wrote : > > > > >Nina: > > > I sent this before, but it was returned to me. > > > > I even already have replied to your email that returned to you! You > > know what? My post so far has not shown up. > > 57277 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta upasaka_howard Hi, James - You said below " I wonder if this message will make it?? ;-))" Answeer: Yes, twice! Interestingly. on another list I've just seena few messages that appeared multiple times. Yaaahooo! ;-) 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/ 57278 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:15pm Subject: Re: How to radiate metta indriyabala Dear Han (Joop and Nina) - Thank you very much for your Anattalakkhana Sutta, Part 3. You wrote that the sutta did not answer Joop's question. I am not sure why not. Joop simply asked whether his conclusion [that one can not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but that can have that only with a person, perceived as a sentient being] made sense. And your answer was : >Han: Sayadaw said that it is only the "change of objects", external and internal, far and near, dependent on which feelings arise. The same explanation was given in case of perceptions, volitional formations, and consciousness. >Therefore, I will give my own personal opinion. If it is not correct Tep or Nina or other members can correct me. >To radiate metta, karuna, or mudita we will have to focus our attention on the person we are radiating as a person, a sentient being, and not just "a thing" or a group of five aggregates. .................. Tep: First of all, I humbly confess that I do not have the ability to correct anyone like you who has very broad knowledges in Buddhism. I only can give a simple analysis. I think your opinion is the same as Joop's, and it is a correct one. Why is it correct? It is analogous to clapping: one hand does not make a sound. So there must be a real person on the other side. Sincerely, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Joop (Tep and Nina) > > I have posted Part Three of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. > But it did not answer your specific question. > >(snipped) > > Therefore, I will give my own personal opinion. If it > is not correct Tep or Nina or other members can > correct me. > > To radiate metta, karuna, or mudita we will have to > focus our attention on the person we are radiating as > a person, a sentient being, and not just "a thing" or > a group of five aggregates. > > With metta, > Han > 57279 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two indriyabala From: postmaster@... Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert To: indriyabala@... Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:24:36 -0800 Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Unable to deliver message to the following recipients, due to being unable to connect successfully to the destination mail server. ................. Hi, all - This message was emailed yesterday. It did not go through, so here I reposted it below. Thanks. Tep ====== Dear Joop (and Jon) - Thank you for your patience -- giving me another opportunity to explain. {:>) > Joop: > Tep, calling me more stubborn than Jon must be meant as a >compliment! But was that about my first question >(the poor social dimension in Theravada) or about the second >(that some DSG-participants have an obsession of talking about > -wrong, of course, of course - atta- belief) ? Tep: It is neither a compliment nor a reprimand. Jon is stubborn (not willing to change his views) about the dhamma in which he has believed as right or wrong (e.g. Jon always puts down jhana as not necessary for enlightenment, even after I have shown him several suttas that contradict with his views.) But he rarely continues to debate the same issues (that have been debated several times) over and over again like you do. .............. >Joop: > I did not know the concept 'dhammatanha'; and found one occurence of > it in my personal buddhism-database: > The Discourse on Right View > The Sammaditthi Sutta and its Commentary > Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Nanamoli > Edited and Revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi > The Wheel Publication No. 377/379 > " In the section on craving, craving for forms ... craving for mind- > objects (rupatanha ... dhammatanha): these are names for the kinds of craving which occur in the course of a javana cognitive process > (javanavithi) in the eye door, etc." > > Do you mean I have dhammatanha? > (Even when I say that dhammas are empty too?) Tep: We all have dhammatanha -- craving for pleasures that arise from the various pleasing mind-objects. Paramatthadhamma (ultimate realities) are incompatible with lovingkindness, as you have pointed out yourself. Yet, Nina, for example, wants to combine them (see her earlier post), and I call that dhammatanha : the craving for pleasure or satisfaction that she can give the combined answer that (she thinks) avoids the conflict. >Joop: > You advised me: Tep: "I think it is the matter of priority -- first > thing first. When you are greedy to combine two conflicting dhammas > you will end up with no solution, only confusion. > Joop: I don't know exactly which two you mean; > But if it's between anatta and (3 of the) Brahmavihara's then my > choice is the latter; but I don't think they are conflicting, when > used with intelligence, without stubborness. > Tep: Yes, the two dhammas: anatta and lovingkindness. They are conflicting (you, yourself have stated it many times before) because there are no beings in the anatta (a paramattha dhamma). Now, can you advise me how intelligence might be used? Thanks. ............. >Joop: > Perhaps my choice is another one: > Till now I say: I'm for two thirds a Theravadin and for one quarter a Mahayanist. Perhaps the percentage being a Mahayanist is increasing. > Isn't there at least one conflict between Theravadin and Mahayan? Don't you think you have dhammatanha-- being "greedy" to try to have them both? Regards, Tep, your friend. P.S. Please ignore a very similar post that I already deleted (because of some typos). ========== 57280 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta hantun1 Dear Tep (Joop and Nina), I am glad if you find that the sutta answers Joop’s question. As regards your remark: “First of all, I humbly confess that I do not have the ability to correct anyone like you who has very broad knowledges in Buddhism” I would like to use one of the internet abbreviations that you had recently taught me, i.e. LOL. {:-)} I also like your reasoning: “It is analogous to clapping: one hand does not make a sound. So there must be a real person on the other side.” With metta and deepest respect, Han --- indriyabala wrote: > Dear Han (Joop and Nina) - > Thank you very much for your Anattalakkhana Sutta, > Part 3. You wrote > that the sutta did not answer Joop's question. I am > not sure why not. 57281 From: "ericlonline" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:09pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) ericlonline --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > The reason I queried it was because I couldn't see any connection > between the experience of jhana and saddha in the teachings. Any > thoughts of your own? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel277.html Also noteworthy... Notice where 'real' insight occurs, not until after concentration is developed. So if a Buddhist does not cultivate concentration (jhana) how can they even begin to talk about insight? 57282 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:04pm Subject: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Here is the fourth part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ---------------------------- “Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness.’ “Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion [his mind] is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’” That is what the Blessed One said. Elated, those bhikkhus delighted in the Blessed One’s statement. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of the bhikkhus of the group of five were liberated from the taints by nonclinging. ---------------------------- Han: In the fourth part, the Blessed One taught how the meditator develops the knowledge of insight step by step, and how nibbidaa-nana, knowledge of disenchantment, is developed, leading to the attainment of the knowledge of the Path and Fruition and final liberation as an Arahat. The fourth part starts with “seeing thus …” Seeing what? As this is the fourth part of the sutta, the logical answer might be to see the tail end of Part Three. But, it is not so. One must see the entire teaching on anattalakkhanaa from the very beginning. He must see: (1) that there are only five aggregates, and no “I”, “he”, “she” etc. (2) that the aggregates are anatta and beyond one’s control, and tend to lead to afflictions. (3) that the aggregates are impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama), and should not consider them as "mine," "me," "my self." If the person sees the above what will happen? Evam passam bhikkhave sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupa-smimpi nibbindati vedanaayapi nibbindati sannaayapi nibbindati sankhaaresupi nibbindati vinnaanasmimpi nibbindati. "Monks, the instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, grows wearied of form, wearied of feeling, wearied of perception, wearied of volitional formation, wearied of consciousness". What is nibbindati? It refers to nibbidaa nana. Mahasi Sayadaw gives the following definition. [In the above Sutta passage, "Seeing thus" is a summarized statement of the development of vipassanaa up to the state of bhanga nana. And the words, "experiences revulsion” indicate the development of vipassanaa nanas from bhanga to aadinava, nibbidaa, and right up to vutthaanagaaminii. Thus in the commentary to the Muulapannaasa, we find this exposition: Nibbindatiiti ukkanthati. Ettha ca nibbindaati vutthaanagaaminii vipassanaa adhippeta. Nibbindati means to feel weariness, feeling bored, feeling displeased, unhappy. To explain further, the above Pali expression should be taken to mean the vipassanaa which attains to the Noble Path, known as vutthaana. In the Patisambhidaamagga and Visuddhimagga, nibbidaa nana is enumerated in seven successive stages of development: bhanga, aadiinava, nibbidaa, muncitukamyataa, patisankhaara, sankhaarupekkhaa and vutthaanagaaminii vipassanaa nanas.] Sayadaw further explained: [With the arising of nibbidaa nana, one no longer feels happy, no longer lives with joyful expectation. The so-called happiness of human life is made up of incessantly arising and ceasing corporeality and mentality. The meditator also visualizes that the so-called happiness in a celestial being is similarly constituted of fleeting corporeality and mentality, for which he has developed detestation and weariness. It is just like the fisherman holding a dangerous snake, thinking it to be an eel: once he realizes that he has a dangerous snake in his hand, not an eel, he wants to throw it away as quickly as possible. As he sees the ever arising and disintegrating of five aggregates as they truly are, he feels dispassionate and a distaste for them.] At this juncture, it is important to know the difference between a “true” nibbidaa, which is developed by the instructed noble disciple through step-by-step progressive contemplations of three characteristics of existence (anicca, dukkha, anatta), the dangers of five aggregates (anicca, dukkha, viparinaama), and three contemplations of ‘This is not mine, This I am not, This is not my self’ … and … a “pseudo” nibbidaa that occurs in a spiritually uninstructed person who gets fed up with life because he cannot face anymore so many failures and misfortunes in life. If the instructed noble disciple develops true nibbidaa nana what happens? Nibbindam virajjati viraagaa vimuccati "Being wearied, he becomes passion-free and the Noble Path is developed. In his freedom from passion, and the Noble Path being developed, he is emancipated." Mahasi Sayadaw summarized the whole process as follows: [The meditator develops from the stage of sammasana naana to that of bhanga naana by contemplating on the impermanent, suffering and not-self nature of phenomena. The Blessed One was referring to this development in the words Evam passam -- "Seeing thus" -- in the above text. The stage from bhanga to sankhaarupekkhaa and anuloma was described as "nibbindati," feeling wearied or repulsed. Then comes nibbindam virajjati, viraagaa vimuccati: "when repulsed, he grows wearied; when wearied, he becomes free from passion; when free from passion, he becomes emancipated, to describe the development of the knowledge of the Path and Fruition. A very concise description, perfectly matching with the practical experience of meditators.] The instructed noble disciple has now become an Arahant. Then the process of reflection by an Arahant is described in the concluding words of the Anattalakkhana Sutta: Vimuttasmim vimuttamiiti naanam hoti "khiinaa jaati vusitam brahmacariyam katam karaniiyam naaparam ittattaayaa” ti pajaanaatiiti. "When emancipated, the knowledge arises on reflection that freedom from defilements has been achieved, and he knows, ‘Birth is exhausted; lived is the Holy Life (of contemplation and meditation), what has to be done has been done, there is nothing more to be done.' He knows thus by reflection." CONCLUSION Here, I would like to make my own self-assessment, bearing in mind that all self-assessments may not be 100 per cent bias-free. (1) I have no difficulty in realizing that there are only five aggregates. (2) I have no difficulty in realizing that the aggregates are anatta and beyond one’s control, and tend to lead to afflictions. (3) I have no difficulty in realizing that the aggregates are impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama). (4) I have no difficulty in contemplating ‘This is not mine’ (netam mama). (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating ‘This I am not’ (nesohamasmi). (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate ‘This is not my self’ (na meso attaati) in the strict sense of the word. I cannot yet completely abandon the self identity. I cannot yet bring myself to consider that the one who is typing this post is not Han Tun but citta, cetasika, and ruupa. Maybe it is because I am not THERE yet. Some years back, a friend asked me “If there is no ‘I’ for whom are you studying and practicing?” I had no answer. I still have no answer. I think I will have two different answers depending on who asks the question. (1) If asked by a well-informed person, I would answer I am doing these for nobody, because there is no ‘I’. I would even quote a paragraph from Visuddhimagga XVI, 90 - ‘For there is suffering, but none who suffers; Doing exists although there is no doer; Extinction is but no extinguished person; Although there is path, there is no goer’. (2) If asked by a beginner I would answer I am doing for myself. I would even quote a verse from Dhammapada (verse 160). Attaa hi attano naatho, ko hi naatho paro siyaa. Attanaa hi sudantena, naatham labhati dullabham. One indeed is one’s own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one? With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can attain a refuge which is so difficult to attain. THE END With metta and deepest respect, Han 57283 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! ken_aitch Hi Joop and all, It is good to be back with DSG after four weeks absence (due to computer problems). There are about seven hundred messages to catch up on but I might offer some comments as I go. Joop wrote to Nina: ---- > I know the Abhidhamma is not (only) a book: to me it's a superior model of reality (not reality itself), very useful as a soteriological raft. > ---- Joop, are you saying that namas and rupas are only theory and not absolutely real? If that is so then what, if anything, is real? Another question: In your opinion, does the Abhidhamma take the same line that you take? That is, does it say that namas and rupas are only a theoretical model? Or does it say (mistakenly, in your opinion) that they are absolutely real? In either case I admire your perseverance. I can't imagine studying Abhidhamma with the belief that it offered, at best, a theoretical model. That would make it dry and tedious. Therefore, I am impressed that you (and TG and others) have persevered as far as you have. The big question remains: Is absolute reality the presently arisen namas and rupas, or is it something else? What could that something else be? Ken H PS: I hope I have expressed my question clearly. It was inspired by a similar question that Jon has put to TG. Perhaps you would like to reply to it as well: Jon wrote to TG: > You say the teaching about the phenomena arising at the present moment, and the understanding of those phenomena, is but a small part of the overall teaching. What then to your understanding is the development of insight that leads to enlightenment? I don't mean what are your views on *how* insight is to be developed, but what is actually happening when insight is being developed. What is going on at such moments that happens at no other time? > 57284 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:19pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 413- Confidence/saddhaa (j) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) When we are forgetful of realities there is no confidence in awareness of the present moment. This may happen, for example, when we are listening to the stories other people tell us and we are quite absorbed in these stories. But sometimes there may be mindfulness of one reality at a time, for example of sound, and then this can be realized as only a rúpa, a reality which can be heard, not a voice or a person. At such a moment there is confidence which sees the value of right understanding. When we develop right understanding, we do not have to aim at confidence, it arises already. Confidence grows to the extent that right understanding develops. Through mindfulness of nåma and rúpa, thus, through the development of the four “Applications of Mindfulness” (satipaììhåna) the five spiritual faculties develop together. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57285 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Suttas about Atta sarahprocter... Hi Tep, Thank you for addressing this post to me...I was going to write back sooner and just say ‘great quotes’, but then I decided to delve a little more into them and as usual got side-tracked:) --- indriyabala wrote: > Hi, Sarah (and all Sutta enthusiasts) - > > This post briefly presents three suttas that may be used to indicate > that 'atta-ditthi' or 'sakkaaya-ditthi' (self views, personality > views) is formed by the obsession with form, feeling, perception, > formations and consciousness. Any comment, correction, disagreement, > suggestion for improvement? > > 1. SN XXII.36 Bhikkhu Sutta > > "Whatever one stays obsessed with, that's what one is measured by. > Whatever one is measured by, that's how one is classified. Whatever > one doesn't stay obsessed with, that's not what one is measured by. > Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is classified." ..... S: Comments: 1. I don’t believe the terms atta-ditthi and sakkaaya-ditthi are synonymous, but all sakkaya-ditthi are included in atta-ditthi. 2. There are obsessions (vipallaasa) which do not include any wrong views or self-views. Even the anagami still has the perversion of sukkha for dukkha and the anagami, still the perversion of subha for asubha without any wrong views or sakkaaya-ditthi. 3. I looked at B.Bodhi’s translation of the ‘Bhikkhu Sutta’ which you quote here. He gives: “If one has an underlying tendency towards something, then one is measured in accordance with it.” I checked the Pali for underlying tendency and it is “anusetita.m anumiiyati”. I recall that anuseti/anusayati, meaning ‘lies dormant’ is from the same root as anusaya, meaning latent tendency. So here the sutta is not about the vipallaasas or about wrong views as such, but about the 7 anusayas towards various objects. Ah and now I look at the notes, I see that BB gives the following note to anuseti as used in the same way in the previous sutta: “ ‘Yam kho bhikkhu anuseti tena sa’nkha.m gacchati’. The verb anuseti implies anusaya, the seven underlying tendencies, or, more simply, the three underlying tendencies of lust, aversion, and ignorance. Spk [commentary]: If one has an underlying tendency towards form by way of sensual lust, etc, then one is described in terms of that same underlying tendency as ‘lustful, hating, deluded.’ But when that underlying tendency is absent, one is not reckoned thus.” [BB also discusses the term ‘anumiiyati and disagrees with the fact that: “Spk explains anumiiyati as if it were equivalent to Skt. Anum.ryate ‘to die along with’: ‘When the underlying tendency is dying, the form to which it tends dies along with it (anumarati); for when the object is breaking up, the mental factors that take it as object cannot persist.” S: I take it to be referring to how as the consciousness (with anusaaya) falls away, there is no more ‘holding’ or ‘obsession’ of the object – i.e it’s referring to the momentariness of citta again..]. Lots and lots of Abhidhamma here.....:) Thanks for bringing it to my attention. > ................................ > > 2. SN XXIII.2 Satta Sutta: A Being > > "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to > be 'a being'?" > > "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is > caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' > "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... > fabrications... > "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: > when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' > ............................. S: I believe that this sutta is referring to all kinds of clinging (i.e not just wrong view clinging) which need to be seen, understood and eradicated in order for there to be an end of becoming. ..... > 3. MN 72 Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta > > "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away > with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origin, > such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its > disappearance; such is perception... such are mental fabrications... > such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' > Because of this, I say, a Tathagata � with the ending, fading out, > cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all > excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsession with conceit � > is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released." > ............................... > > Tep's Notes: > > The self-view, or self belief, results from the clinging to and > obsession with one's aggregates. > > A being is 'measured' by the obsession with form, feeling, perception, > formations, and consciousness. > > Classified = identified as a being (given a 'position') by means of > the five aggregates that are empty of self. ..... S: There can be clinging with wrong view as you suggest, but also with conceit or just clinging without either. As I said (and as you know) there is still plenty of clinging to one’s aggregates for a sotapanna when self view has been eradicated. Here, it is stressed that by understanding dhammas, the khandhas, as arising and passing away directly, all kinds of clinging/attachment are (eventually) eradicated. It’s so useless to cling to any reality, any dhamma which falls away as soon as it has arisen. This is why understanding of realities leads to detachment. A being is a conventional term we use for the combination of the aggregates. When there is no more obsession, no more attachment, as you indicate, no more becoming. Thankyou for helping me to consider these sutta extracts further with you. I look forward to any more of your reflections on these or other suttas. Please point out any errors in my logic as you see them. Metta, Sarah ========= 57286 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. cerini_pablo Hi Nina (and Robert and all) nina van gorkom wrote: >N: You said that you understood the balance between khanti and >viriya. Well, put in that way it's like if I said that I now own the ultimate truth about khanti and viriya :) ... it wasn't my purpose. I just meant that my doubt ( of seeing too much passivity in the attitude exposed in your books ) was resolved by the fantastic quote from Dhammapada. > N: As I said before to others, understanding that also sati and > paññaa arise when there are the right conditions does not mean that > one should be idle,just waiting for them to arise. > Studying, listening, discussing, considering realities does not > mean being idle. It is the straightening of views. I agree with all. If you put also "sitting in formal meditation" in the list I think it would be perfect. > N: Effort or energy is important, and we can learn that is a > conditioned dhamma, that we cannot exercise power over it. We > cannot exercise power over awareness, over any dhamma. > For the arising of each kind of kusala there is a concurrence of > conditions,some stemming from the past. From what I understand, here you are directly assuming the point of view of ultimate truths. So , I agree. No kusala vipaka, no kusala viriya. > N: Perhaps I did not answer all your questions, let me know. About this thread I'm ok ( also, very useful the chapter about viriya in your Cetasikas ). I' ve something to ask about the paramattha sacca vs. vohara sacca thing, but I need some time to elaborate the question . Pablo 57287 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Suttas about Atta sarahprocter... Hi Tep & all, --- sarah abbott wrote: > 3. I looked at B.Bodhi’s translation of the ‘Bhikkhu Sutta’ which you > quote here. He gives: “If one has an underlying tendency towards > something, then one is measured in accordance with it.” > > I checked the Pali for underlying tendency and it is “anusetita.m > anumiiyati”. <...> > “ ‘Yam kho bhikkhu anuseti tena sa’nkha.m gacchati’. The verb anuseti > implies anusaya, the seven underlying tendencies, or, more simply, the > three underlying tendencies of lust, aversion, and ignorance. Spk > [commentary]: If one has an underlying tendency towards form by way of > sensual lust, etc, then one is described in terms of that same > underlying tendency as ‘lustful, hating, deluded.’ But when that >underlying tendency is absent, one is not reckoned thus.” ..... S: I also just thought of another sutta I like a lot on the anusayas(latent tendencies) particularly in relation to feelings, which of course we find so important and are 'obsessed by' most of the day. Ven Samahita recently gave a translation of it here in full: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/57142 I like BB's translation of the verses at the end, so I'd like to quote these too: "When one experiences pleasure, If one does not understand feeling The tendency to lust is present For one not seeing the escape from it. When one experiences pain, If one does not understand feeling The tendency to aversion is present For one not seeing the escape from it. The One of Broad Wisdom has taught With reference to that peaceful feeling, Neither-painful-nor-pleasant: If one seeks delight even in this, One is still not released from suffering. But when a bhikkhu who is ardent Does not neglect clear comprehension, Then that wise man fully understands Feelings in their entirety. Having fully understood feelings, He is taintless in this very life. Standing in Dhamma, with the body's breakup The Knowledge-master cannot be reckoned." ***** Metta, Sarah p.s for anyone new to the list, lots on the 'anusayas' under this heading in 'Useful Posts' in the files section. ======= 57288 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple part 2 sarahprocter... Hi Connie, Howard & all, Thx Connie for your futher quotes. I liked this one a lot on the arahant -having abandoned 'the moisture of craving' and the kiriya cittas now that 'old action is consumed like germs burnt by fire'. It reminds me of a discussion Howard and I were having on this topic, mostly in agreement as I recal:) Look f/w to more of your quotes. I'll leave the main part of your post below for Howard's attention as he may not have seen the original while he was travelling. Metta, Sarah --- connie wrote: > ...C quoting Illustrator, vi.117: > << Herein [...snip...] (nibbanti): they stop burning. Steadfast > (dhiiraa): > those perfected in steadfastness (dhiti). As did this lamp (yatha'yam > padiipo): like this lamp. > 118. What is meant? [It is like this.] The old past-time action (kamma: > > neut.) is, although it has already arisen and ceased, still unconsumed > for > [ordinary] creatures since it is still capable of inducing their > rebirth-linking owing to their not having abandoned the [germ-softening] > > moisture of craving; [but] there are those in whom the moisture of > craving > has been dried out by the Arahant path and for whom that old action is > [thus] consumed, [195] like germs burnt up by fire, since it is no more > > capable of giving any ripening in the future; then any action of theirs > > occurring right now as honouring the Enlightened One, etc, is called > 'the > new'; [but] they are those for whom it no more gives being since, owing > to > the abandonment of craving, it is no more capable of fruiting in the > future than the flower of a plant whose roots have been cut: and these, > > from whose cognizance lust for new (future) being has faded with the > abandoning of craving are the bhikkhus with taints consumed (exhausted) > > [called] '[with] the germ consumed' because the [action-resultant] > rebirth-linking consciousness, stated thus 'Action is the field, > consciousness is the seed' (A.i.223), has been consumed with the > consumption (exhaustion) of action; and then, because the zeal that > there > formerly was for the renewal of being called 'growth' has been abandoned > > precisely by abandoning the origin [of suffering], they have no more > zeal > for growth as they formerly had because they are steadfast with > perfection > of steadfastness, they go out, as did this lamp, with the ceasing of the > > final consciousness. They go beyond any mode of description (cf. Sn. > 1067) > again such as 'with form', 'formless', and so on (cf. S. iii. 46). And, > it > seems, one lamp among those that had been lit to honour the city deities > > on that occasion, actually went out, and it was with reference to that > that he said 'as did this lamp.'>> <...> 57289 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple - Part 1 sarahprocter... Hi again Connie (& Joop):), Also thanks for all the info from the Parivara and on sacittaka and acittaka offences - those broken intentionally and unintentionally. --- connie wrote: > The Parivara (IV.7.4) also lists six ways in which offenses can be > committed: > 1) unconscientiously, i.e., knowing that an action is contrary to the > rules, but going ahead with it anyway; > 2) unknowingly, i.e., not realizing that the action is contrary to the > rules; > 3) absentmindedly; > 4) assuming something improper to be proper, e.g., drinking a glass of > apple wine perceiving it to be apple juice; > 5) assuming something proper to be improper, e.g., perceiving a glass of > apple juice to be apple wine, and drinking it nonetheless; and > 6) acting out of uncertainty, i.e., not being sure if an action is > proper, > but going ahead with it anyway. In this last case, if the action is > improper, one is to be treated according to the relevant rule. If it is > proper, one incurs a dukkata in any event for having acted > irresponsibly. .... S: And lots more info in your post (#57112). From the sutta quote I gave the other day (AN), it seemed to suggest that even an arahant can break minor rules unintentionally. Thx for all your help in this area.... Joop wonders how any of it is relevant to the development of understanding or practice of the Buddha's teachings in our daily life. How have you found your in-depth reflections on the Vinaya useful, Connie? Can you show him the connection with your daily life at the laundry, whilst nursing a weak liver or holding a new grand-daughter????:)) I'm sure he'll appreciate any comments or anecdotes on this point. Metta, Sarah ======== 57290 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:13am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four ken_aitch Hi Han, Thank you for this Anattalakkhana Sutta series. Being behind in my reading I have not seen all of it yet, but I would like to make some comments on Part Four. You write: ----- > (1) I have no difficulty in realizing that there are only five aggregates. (2) I have no difficulty in realizing that the aggregates are anatta and beyond one's control, and tend to lead to afflictions. (3) I have no difficulty in realizing that the aggregates are impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama). ----- No doubt you are talking about intellectual realisations of the tilakkhana - as distinct from direct realisations that occur in the final stages of satipatthana. But then you write: ----------------- > (4) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This is not mine' (netam mama). (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This I am not' (nesohamasmi). (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate `This is not my self' (na meso attaati) in the strict sense of the word. -------------------- I still assume that you are talking about intellectual, not direct, realisations (or contemplations). But I don't know why you find it more difficult to contemplate, "This is not my self" than to contemplate "This is not mine," or, "This I am not." What is your object of contemplation at the time? Is it a description (as found in the texts) of an absolute reality, or are you contemplating a conventional reality? If it is the latter, then I think I can see your difficulty. It is not helpful to point to your body, for example, and say, "This is not my self." Of course it is your self! Who else could it be? The concept of a living being necessarily involves the conventional use of 'my self' or 'your self' etc., and so it is not helpful to make illogical contradictions. In the same way, it is not always helpful when contemplating a conventional object to think "this is not mine" (for example, when contemplating your wallet). Nor is it helpful to rule out conceit in conventional situations (for example, when a shop assistant asks, "Who is next?") :-) By contrast, those contemplations are helpful when a paramattha dhamma is the object. Such an object should be considered as, (1) not one's personal property, (2) not deserving of special treatment and, (3) devoid of self. ---------- H: > Some years back, a friend asked me "If there is no `I' for whom are you studying and practicing?" I had no answer. I still have no answer. ---------- Perhaps you could say; "In the ultimately real world described by the Buddha there is no I that studies and practises and there is no being that benefits from it: there are only dhammas. Dhammas can study and practice, but only to the extent that they include panna - right understanding of the Buddha's teaching." Ken H 57291 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four hantun1 Dear Ken, Thank you very much for your valuable comments. Han: (3) I have no difficulty in realizing that the aggregates are impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama). Ken: No doubt you are talking about intellectual realisations of the tilakkhana - as distinct from direct realisations that occur in the final stages of satipatthana. Han: Your assumption must be correct, because I am sure I have not yet reached the final stages of satipatthana. ================== Han: (4) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This is not mine' (netam mama). (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This I am not' (nesohamasmi). (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate `This is not my self' (na meso attaati) in the strict sense of the word. Ken: I still assume that you are talking about intellectual, not direct, realisations (or contemplations). But I don't know why you find it more difficult to contemplate, "This is not my self" than to contemplate "This is not mine," or, "This I am not." Han: I had already written that I cannot bring myself to consider that the one who is typing this post is not my self, not Han Tun, but citta, cetasika and ruupa. ================== Ken: What is your object of contemplation at the time? Is it a description (as found in the texts) of an absolute reality, or are you contemplating a conventional reality? If it is the latter, then I think I can see your difficulty. Han: It must be the latter, as I am finding difficulty. ================== Ken: It is not helpful to point to your body, for example, and say, "This is not my self." Of course it is your self! Who else could it be? Han: Exactly. ================== Ken: The concept of a living being necessarily involves the conventional use of 'my self' or 'your self' etc., and so it is not helpful to make illogical contradictions. Han: I don’t realize I was making any illogical contradictions. ================== Ken: In the same way, it is not always helpful when contemplating a conventional object to think "this is not mine" (for example, when contemplating your wallet). Nor is it helpful to rule out conceit in conventional situations (for example, when a shop assistant asks, "Who is next?") :-) Han: No, I will not consider my wallet as “this is not mine.” No, I will not rule out conceit if I get angry when someone is rude to me. ================== Ken: By contrast, those contemplations are helpful when a paramattha dhamma is the object. Such an object should be considered as, (1) not one's personal property, (2) not deserving of special treatment and, (3) devoid of self. Han: That’s what I am finding difficulty with. I cannot yet fully embrace paramattha dhammas. ================= Han: Some years back, a friend asked me "If there is no `I' for whom are you studying and practicing?" I had no answer. I still have no answer. Ken: Perhaps you could say; "In the ultimately real world described by the Buddha there is no I that studies and practises and there is no being that benefits from it: there are only dhammas. Dhammas can study and practice, but only to the extent that they include panna - right understanding of the Buddha's teaching." Han: Yes, I would say that to a person who is already advanced like you. But I may not be able to convince a beginner with such a reply. He may not be able to appreciate it. The paramattha dhamma food may be too rich for him to digest. ================ With metta and deepest respect, Han 57292 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:29am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two... Is anicca most important? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > Dear Tep Tep: "You like disagreeing and look for points to disagree? If so, then you will find yourself busy with DSG debates till the rest of your living days." Joop: I agree (I like paradoxes too), perhaps the rest of my living days is not so long. You say the "Abhidhamma is not about "spiritual psychology" … but it is about definitions, categories and relationships between the 'higher' dhammas taught by the Buddha in the various discourses." To be more precise, I think it's about: DHAMMAS OCCURRING IN A INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEING, not - unfortunately - between human beings. I forgot to mention my reference about the term 'psychology': Dhammasangani, the first book of the Abhidhamma, is translated by C.A.F. Rhys Davids as: 'A Buddhist Manual of Psychological Ethics' Tep: But I disagree with you about the un-importance of 'anatta'. How Would you eradicate the latent tendency of conceit (maananusaya) with only impernanence contemplation? Joop: It is not a latent tendency, I just have this on some moments. And I try to eradicate it in my sceptical moments to say to myself: "don't forget to doubt on everything, especially on your own opinion" On my more spiritual moments, for example in meditation, I realize the emptiness of what I think. No misunderstanding: I think the anatta-doctrine is right and important; all I say is that to me contemplating the anicca-doctrine of more important; because I know my main problem is not my conceit but my great ontological need. And the idea of a hierarchy between anicca-anatta-dukkha I reject. Hierarchy or sequence; I know sequence is important to you, I remember a not really satisfying discussion with Jon about which of the aspects of the NEP is the first one (I think more in cycles, or more positive: in a spiral path) BTW I rember that you told Sarah and Jon or your planning going to East Asia (I forgot which countries) Is that still a plan or have you already been? Metta Joop 57293 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple - Part 1 jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi again Connie (& Joop):), > >..... > > Joop wonders how any of it is relevant to the development of understanding > or practice of the Buddha's teachings in our daily life. How have you > found your in-depth reflections on the Vinaya useful, Connie? > Can you show him the connection with your daily life at the laundry, > whilst nursing a weak liver or holding a new grand-daughter????:)) > > I'm sure he'll appreciate any comments or anecdotes on this point. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Dear Connie, Sarah That will be a Theravada version of 'Zen and motorcycle maintenance' A 'Theravada and the art of nursing' I can hardly wait . But Sarah, I hope you understood it was especially the sick interaction between James and Icaro (that were the result of the 'rules' topic itself!) that was my point of rejection? With metta (and mudita for the baby-caring) Joop 57295 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:08am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. icarofranca Hi Pablo! Respectfully butting in your excelent exposition! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Well, put in that way it's like if I said that I now own the > ultimate truth about khanti and viriya :) ... it wasn't my > purpose. I just meant that my doubt ( of seeing too much > passivity in the attitude exposed in your books ) was resolved > by the fantastic quote from Dhammapada. -------------------------------------------------------------------- I really don´t see any passivity in Nina´s exposition...serious! I have got a profound respect for exactly four Canon pali texts: Dhammasangani Daathukathaa Abhidhamma Sangaha Visuddhimagga, And all Nina´s attitude on his books are in total harmony with them...with viriya and bala included! It can seem strange for the newbie, but for Abhidhamma´s view Reality( or our knowledge of external world) are very well defined in Dhammasangani´s first chapter: 1. Kusala Dhammaa Akusala Dhammaa Avhyakatta Dhammaa 2. Sukhaya vedanayaa Sampayuttaa Dhammaa Dukhaya vedanayaa Sampayuttaa Dhammaa Adukkhamasukhyaaya vedanayaa sampayutaa Dhammaa... and so on. Before we enter in the realm of the opposite pair of categories, all Reality is encompassed in a flow of Dhammas... classified at the more basic structural components - good, bad or neutral and its derivations. That´s wonderful simple and philosophical profound... even the Dhammapada lacks this approach of reality: if you read it with attention, you will perceive that this book throws the reader directly at the battlefield of opposite pair of ideas, leaving alone the own real thing out of our senses and mind. I could suggest for you, dear Pablo, a reading on Dhammasangani...but for me it´s so complicated that I can dismay at the very thought of it. Nina´s books are more accessible for basic readers like you and me ...even so I intend to acquire soon the Dhammasangani-Atthakatha, also called Atthasalini, or The Expositor, where I hope finding all Nina´s ideas at this very ground and order. Will my poor and sad, feeble intellect survive at this Theravadic Marathon ? Mettaya, Ícaro 57296 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Suttas about Atta ... From Sand Castel to Real Castle indriyabala Hi Sarah - I have read with awe the two posts you wrote replying to my original 'Three Suttas about Atta'. Through this quick first reading I already like very much your research, analysis, extensions and comments. I plan to spend more time for the upcoming second reading and, after that, write a full reply to you. Indeed, you have advanced from the 'sand castle' to build a 'real castle'. Big contributions! Thanks. Sincerely, Tep, your friend. ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep & all, > > --- sarah abbott wrote: > > > 3. I looked at B.Bodhi's translation of the `Bhikkhu Sutta' which you > > quote here. He gives: "If one has an underlying tendency towards > > something, then one is measured in accordance with it." > > > > I checked the Pali for underlying tendency and it is "anusetita.m > > anumiiyati". > <...> > (snipped) 57297 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta sarahprocter... Hi James, (Eddie & Eric), --- buddhatrue wrote: > Yeah, something strange is going on. I wrote a rather long post to > Nina, on the thread about the Buddha's path supposedly taking aeons, > and that post never showed up. I hit send, got a reply message that > it was sent, and yet it never showed up on the board. (I didn't want > to write it again so I didn't). .... S: I just checked in my gmail account and there were 3 longish posts from you to Nina on this topic on March 23rd. Are you sure it wasn't one of them? Sorry, no post numbers. If anhyone is having difficulties, I recommend keeping copies of posts sent automatically so that if they're lost, it's easy to re-post. Eddie and Eric (not to be confused with EriK!), good to see you both back again and especially active in Eddie's case:). Metta, Sarah ======== 57298 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:28am Subject: Re:Anattalakkhan a Sutta: Part Four indriyabala Dear Friend Han - Thank you a thousand times for your job well done: Anattalakkhana Sutta, Part I - Part IV. Your conclusion at the ned of the Part IV is like the New York City's grand firework on the night sky of the fourth of July !! It is very bright and it pops loudly. With deep appreciation, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four > > Dear Nina and Lodewijk, > > Here is the fourth part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. > > ---------------------------- (snipped) > > CONCLUSION > > Here, I would like to make my own self-assessment, > bearing in mind that all self-assessments may not be > 100 per cent bias-free. > > (1) I have no difficulty in realizing that there are > only five aggregates. > > (2) I have no difficulty in realizing that the > aggregates are anatta and beyond one's control, and > tend to lead to afflictions. > > (3) I have no difficulty in realizing that the > aggregates are impermanent (anicca), suffering > (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama). > > (4) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This is not > mine' (netam mama). > > (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This I am > not' (nesohamasmi). > > (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate `This > is not my self' (na meso attaati) in the strict sense > of the word. > I cannot yet completely abandon the self identity. > I cannot yet bring myself to consider that the one who > is typing this post is not Han Tun but citta, > cetasika, and ruupa. > Maybe it is because I am not THERE yet. > > Some years back, a friend asked me "If there is no `I' > for whom are you studying and practicing?" > I had no answer. I still have no answer. > > I think I will have two different answers depending on > who asks the question. > > (1) If asked by a well-informed person, I would answer > I am doing these for nobody, because there is no `I'. > I would even quote a paragraph from Visuddhimagga XVI, > 90 - > `For there is suffering, but none who suffers; > Doing exists although there is no doer; > Extinction is but no extinguished person; > Although there is path, there is no goer'. > > (2) If asked by a beginner I would answer I am doing > for myself. > I would even quote a verse from Dhammapada (verse > 160). > Attaa hi attano naatho, > ko hi naatho paro siyaa. > Attanaa hi sudantena, > naatham labhati dullabham. > One indeed is one's own refuge; how can others be a > refuge to one? > With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can attain a refuge > which is so difficult to attain. > > THE END > > With metta and deepest respect, > Han > 57299 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three and Four. nilovg Dear Han, thank you very much for parts three and four, you took a great deal of trouble. I find it difficult to go into all Mahasi Sayadaw's points. He follows the teachings in his dealing with the stages of insight, but what about the beginner. But all these points are worth discussing further, if you like. I like your personal observations best. You are sincerely asking yourself: how to get there. I appreciate your attitude. See below. op 29-03-2006 23:05 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > Anyway, if given the choice, I would rather not go for > difficult aspects of the eleven-fold analyses of the > aggregates, and choose to understand the corporeal and > mental phenomena happening inside my own body and see > their true nature with my own (insight) knowledge, as > suggested by Mahasi Sayadaw in the beginning of this > post. -------- N: Larry's an my study of the Vis. and Tiika dealt with these eleven aspects. Sometimes it is difficult to see that they all pertain to the reality appearing at this moment, they seem theoretical. However, the intention of the Visuddhimagga is just the relevance to the reality now. This does not mean that we have to think of all these aspects, they help us to see realities as conditioned elements. And as you said, and also Khun Sujin emphasizes this all the time, we have to develop our own understanding. I do not see namas as happening inside my own body, but perhaps you mean within yourself, pertaining to yourself, and 'self' between brackets. I wonder about the choice of words of: noting, concentrating on. This is perhaps a question of language. Also the shifting towards another object. As I see it, awareness is aware and at that moment understanding can develop. The citta shifts all the time to different objects, then to rupas, then to feeling, etc. This is not our own choice, and it is good. Then we see that sati and paññaa are anattaa. We never know what will be the next object of citta, and we never know how citta will react to an impingement by an object on one of the six doors. Sometimes citta is accompanied by sati and paññaa, mostly not. It is good so. If we try to concentrate on naama and ruupa, that seems more the method of samatha the Ven. Sayadaw seems (but I am not sure) to apply to satipatthaana. I will think more about some points you brought up. Nina. 57300 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:what is sati. nilovg Hi Tep (and James in passing), op 30-03-2006 21:42 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > Again, it seems that there is a strong, incurable tendency -- as > indicated in your reply below -- to talk about the end result (the > "where we want to be" that Howard has rightly warned) and forget about > the "where we are" (that is very, very far away from the entry of the > path). Right now we do not have the kind of paññaa that leads to > detachment -- that paññaa talking is a preaching from the top of the > ivory Dhamma Tower again. ------- N: Agreed 100 % :-)) -------- T: There had been an old discussion that I went > through several times with Sarah, but I finally gave up trying to > change her belief. -------- N: I think that this is not the goal of our discussions, to make people change. I suggest another goal. I feel that the interaction here is very useful, for me at least, to consider dhammas for oneself. One can let others share in one's reflections and considerations, share in suttas as you do, but we know: some like it others don't. It shows the difference in accumulations, it shows anattaa. James spoke to me about my passive attitude, and he is right from his point of view. When emphasizing that sati depends on conditions must give the impression of passivity. I welcome such remarks and these make me think more, consider how I can express my own feelings about this. The same about Abhidhamma and mettaa, the social aspects.We can consider more by this interaction. Our discussions can become more fruitful and more relaxed, without frustrations, if we do not try to convince the other party. I remember that you wanted to convince me and tried in many posts, as you mentioned yourself, and then gave up. Let's shift our goal. ---------- > Tep: Your above comment -- "Paññaa leads to detachment" ... I don't > think the full understanding that "leads to detachment" > (paññaa-vimutti), or true knowledge and liberation, is at the > beginning where we are now. The following sutta quote from Kundaliya > Sutta SN 46.6 very, very clearly shows that practicing restraint of > the six sensing media helps develop the three good conducts, which in > turn helps develop the four foundations of mindfulness. ------- N: As paññaa grows, there will be more detachment, as shown by the Kundaliya > Sutta. but also from the beginning a degree of detachment is indispensable.I shall add more about this. -------- > Tep: I agree completely that there are "the right conditions to be > cultivated" from where we are, in order to reach the "where we want to > be" i.e. the full understanding that "leads to detachment" > (paññaa-vimutti). The above Kundaliya Sutta quote tells us precisely > what these "right conditions" are. > ............. If my reasoning and sutta support have a flaw, please do not > hesitate to let me know. On the other hand, if you agree with me then > you should also tell me so. -------- N: The Kundaliyasutta states as the first step (last mentioned): "Restraint of the sense faculties, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfils the three kinds of good conduct." I see this as sati sampajañña that arise on account of an object impinging on one of the six doors. Very basic, but we first have to discuss more what sati is, what its function, how it arises. That is why I added about this subject at the end of my post. The sutta, even for the first step, deals with sati sampajañña that has been rightly understood, and this is no wonder at the time of the Buddha. There were many people who had right understanding about satipatthaana. During the session in Thai last time, someone asked me to explain what sati is. This person helped me very much to consider what sati is by his question. We have to understand more about sati before there can be the guarding of the sensedoors. When we reflect on sati of the level of daana and siila it will also become clearer what sati of the level of satipatthaana is. A person cannot be generous when sati does not arise. He cannot refrain from harsh speech when sati does not arise. It is impossible to force the arising of sati. As I tried to indicate, mostly we are asleep, we let good opportunities for kusala pass, but sometimes sati arises and performs its function of non-forgetfulness of kusala. The same in the case of satipatthana. Sati is not concentration on nama and rupa. Sound may appear and many moments there is forgetfulness of its characteristic. Or we cling to pleasant sound, dislike harsh sound. When sati arises it is aware of sound and at that moment there can be a little more understanding of its characteristic: it is a dhamma appearing through earsense. It can be understood as dhamma, a conditioned reality. It is not the voice of a person or the sound of wind, or a dog's barking, it can be known as just sound. In this way we can learn the difference between paramattha dhamma and conventional truth of person, wind, dog. There are conditions for thinking with attachment and aversion, and thinking is a paramattha dhamma, a nama. Mindfulness of one object can occur without being able to predict the next moment, and this conditions a degree of detachment. What appears is conditioned, it has happened already, be it sati or forgetfulness, it has happened already. Nobody is master of this or that dhamma that appears. Understanding this leads to detachment, even if it is slight. Nina. 57301 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: James post lost? nilovg Hi James, op 31-03-2006 15:22 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: James: I wrote a rather long post to >> Nina, on the thread about the Buddha's path supposedly taking aeons, >> and that post never showed up. I hit send, got a reply message that >> it was sent, and yet it never showed up on the board. (I didn't want >> to write it again so I didn't). ------- N: Hi James, I answered one post, and another one, shorter. If you send me a post and I did not react, it may have been lost. Nina. 57302 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:18am Subject: [dsg] Re:what is sati. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > James spoke to me about my passive attitude, and he is right from his point > of view. When emphasizing that sati depends on conditions must give the > impression of passivity. I am in agreement with you that the development of sati depends on conditions. My disagreement is when you state that these conditions for sati cannot be controlled and/or purposefully cultivated. Metta, James 57303 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: To Tep: sankharanimitta buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, (Eddie & Eric), snip> > .... > S: I just checked in my gmail account and there were 3 longish posts from > you to Nina on this topic on March 23rd. Are you sure it wasn't one of > them? Sorry, no post numbers. I think that only two of the posts I wrote to Nina appeared on DSG. The last one I wrote didn't appear. Just look for the extremely brilliant post and you will know which one it is (oh, I guess that doesn't narrow the search does it?? ;-)) lol. It doesn't matter. I just chalked it up to karma- it wasn't meant to be posted anyway. Metta, James ps. Thanks for looking. No big deal. Forget about it. 57304 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:54am Subject: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta jwromeijn Dear Han, Tep, Nina, all We were discussing if in Abhidhamma something like 'intuition' exist, defined (loosely by me) as: 'the direct knowing, without communication, what's in the mind of an other person' The topic was: is metta radiated to 'five khandas' (a thing) or is that only possible with radiating to a living being. Han, Tep and me thought: the latter. When studying Bhikkhu Bodhi's Guide to §16 of chapter III of the Abhidhammata Sangaha I read: "It should be noted that a citta in its immediacy cannot become an object, for the cognizer cannot cognize itself; but A CITTA in an individual mental continuum CAN EXPERIENCE earlier cittas in that same continuum as well as THE CITTAS OF OTHER BEINGS." (p.136; capitals me) Q.E.D. ! Metta Joop 57305 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > > Hi Joop and all, > > It is good to be back with DSG after four weeks absence (due to > computer problems). There are about seven hundred messages to catch > up on but I might offer some comments as I go. Hallo KenH, TG, Jon, all Ken, your questions to me are rather "rhetoric": you have the answers and you are curious if I agree with that Buddhaghosian-correct (comparable with the expression "political correct") answers. There are two ways of responding: ironic or serious; I try to be serious, knowing you will not like it. Ken: [You] wrote to Nina: "I know the Abhidhamma is not (only) a book: to me it's a superior model of reality (not reality itself), very useful as a soteriological raft. " (1) … are you saying that namas and rupas are only theory and not absolutely real? (2) If that is so then what, if anything, is real? Joop: (1) Yes, that's my idea now; and (2) nothing, I guess And when you think the term "theory' is too meagre te live with, I can also use the term 'raft', like the Buddha used that too. Ken: (3) Another question: In your opinion, does the Abhidhamma take the same line that you take? That is, does it say that namas and rupas are only a theoretical model? (4) Or does it say (mistakenly, in your opinion) that they are absolutely real? Joop: (3) No; and (4) I'm not sure Abhidhamma is saying anything about but; the interpretation of Nyanaponika Thera (as I understand his term phenomenologic) is: not real; and of Bhikkhu Bodhi (prefering the ontologic strand): real) Ken: (5) The big question remains: Is absolute reality the presently arisen namas and rupas, or is it something else? What could that something else be? Joop: Two answers. The first is: I am not sure of everything, I think I still have too much opinions. The second is a quote of the (Mahayanian) Heart Sutra: "… seeing the five skandhas to be empty of nature. Form is emptiness; emptiness also is form. Emptiness is no other than form; form is no other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are emptiness. Thus, Shariputra, all dharmas are emptiness. There are no characteristics. There is no birth and no cessation. There is no impurity and no purity. There is no decrease and no increase. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness, there is no form, no feeling, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no appearance, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no dharmas, no eye dhatu up to no mind dhatu, no dhatu of dharmas, no mind consciousness dhatu; no ignorance, no end of ignorance up to no old age and death, no end of old age and death; no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no non-attainment." (6) I hope I have expressed my question clearly. It was inspired by a similar question that Jon has put to TG. Perhaps you would like to reply to it as well. Jon wrote to TG: > You say the teaching about the phenomena arising at the present moment, and the understanding of those phenomena, is but a small part of the overall teaching. What then to your understanding is the development of insight that leads to enlightenment? I don't mean what are your views on *how* insight is to be developed, but what is actually happening when insight is being developed. What is going on at such moments that happens at no other time? > Joop: As far as I know TG has not (yet) answered; but it's strange that Jon does not say first what is happening with him leading to his insights. All I can answer (and my path is not yet finished) is: the conviction that all, including any conviction, is emptiness Metta Joop 57306 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Anattalakkhan a Sutta: Part Four hantun1 Dear Friend Tep, Thank you very much for your kind words. They are very great encouragement for me. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- indriyabala wrote: > > Dear Friend Han - > > Thank you a thousand times for your job well done: > Anattalakkhana > Sutta, Part I - Part IV. Your conclusion at the ned > of the Part IV is > like the New York City's grand firework on the night > sky of the fourth > of July !! It is very bright and it pops loudly. > > With deep appreciation, > > > Tep > 57307 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:10am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two... Is anicca most important? nichiconn dear joop, tep, > Joop: What I'm looking for is a description of for example the > mother-child relation using only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and > conditions; an no sentimental conventional language. connie: namarupa & nutriment/aahaara. and i can't help thinking in my sentimental way, of a certain desert crossing where conditions led to strained relations. sorry, tasteless baby food joke. but there you have it, season with love. certain aspects of the mother-child relationship are only born in mind... so there is citta and hadaya rupa. kamma is one's real mother. or there is mother sariputta with a veritable feast fit for gods. what's a chain of bone alongside an ocean of tears and who is safe from the undertow of aasava? for me, there still arise loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m - avarice and sorrow regarding the world. peace, connie 57308 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Three and Four. hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind response. At the outset, I wish to reiterate what I had written in my very first post on the Introduction to Anattalakkhana Sutta. I had written: [I will quote the English translation whenever appropriate. I will also put in my own views and comments. I never had a teacher (books and tapes are my teachers), and my personal views may or may not be in line with the proper understanding of more learned persons. If not in line with the proper understanding, kindly ignore my personal views.] Therefore, what I had written were my own untutored personal views and it may not stand scrutiny by more learned persons like you. Moreover, I am not used to some of your teachings such as: (1) to see realities as conditioned elements. (2) the relevance to the reality now. (3) we never know how citta will react to an impingement by an object on one of the six doors. (4) the citta shifts all the time to different objects and this is not our own choice. (5) that sati and paññaa are anattaa. (6) sometimes citta is accompanied by sati and paññaa, mostly not. (7) if we try to concentrate on naama and ruupa, that seems more the method of samatha. (8) inappropriate choice of words of: noting, concentrating on. I do not disagree with the above points. I am just saying that I am not used to them. Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw was a very great vipassanaa teacher. If I gave you the impression that his teachings were samatha, it was my very big mistake. If you will kindly give allowance to my shortcomings I will be most happy and honoured to discuss with you more. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, > thank you very much for parts three and four, you > took a great deal of > trouble. 57309 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta hantun1 Dear Joop, I find your quote from Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi’s Manual of Abhidhamma. Thank you very much for bringing this up. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- Joop wrote: > Dear Han, Tep, Nina, all >>>>>> > When studying Bhikkhu Bodhi's Guide to §16 of > chapter III of the Abhidhammata Sangaha I read: > "It should be noted that a citta in its immediacy > cannot become an object, for the cognizer cannot > cognize itself; but A CITTA in an individual mental > continuum CAN EXPERIENCE earlier cittas in that > same continuum as well as THE CITTAS OF OTHER > BEINGS." (p.136; capitals me) Q.E.D. ! > Metta > Joop > 57310 From: Eddie Lou Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: monk's behaviour. IMHO. For Icaro. eddielou_us Hi, Icaro, Great, well said. It is like a Dhamma compendium / abstract I would liken it to refreshing relaxing? revisit from different perspective / approach to the Dhamma as explained by Buddha. A lengthy story-like explanations accompanying the more serious discourses on like I always say - the tip of a gigantic iceberg of detailed structure of wisdom tree (say Abhidhamma, Pahtan or Pathan?, etc). So interested persons can sit back, relax and listen. As stated before, Focus is important but don't some of us want more relaxed form of teachings like stories of this and that, like the many lives of Buddha-to-be through his almost countless aeons of merits accumulation. Take your pick, it is true democracy and freedom in Buddha world, only suggestion is - each true buddhist should have more or less knowledge of accompanying responsibilities and repercussions from Inevitable Cause and Effect. Metta, Eddie icarofranca wrote: Hi Joop! -------------------------------------------------------------------- >the rules are only > important if contemplating these rules can play a role in our ..rules and discipline - IS a Dhamma compendium. Its lecture and ..reading them and...enlarge your understanding! 57311 From: Eddie Lou Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. eddielou_us Hi, Icaro, Agreed, even in this life, if I look back as hind sight, I think I have committed quite many if not zillions faults, as well as good deeds. Faults that I could have done better. With much regret but too late for the past but not too late for the present and future. More of the Present because we are in full engagement Presently. So start with the present, that is what they say, I think Buddha also said so? Past is passed, Future is not here, so Present is what is ALL important! I do not think all monks are good role models, some maybe worse than we, laypeople. Only those true Buddhist monks are good, like those who have truly become Arahant, Sotapana, Sadhagam, Anhagam, etc. Monks come from human beings except with more teachings taught formally to them. So they are good sources of formal teachings and respectful in this sense. I do not understand and so disagree on the fact that those that drive a wedge into the Buddhist Bikkhu (Bikkhu = Monk??, I think so) group will go to Hell realm. I think honest well meaning action but ending in that wedging effect should not be. Or is it a special 'preferential' treatment for Buddha's teachings in Dhamma? This one sounds a bit like other religions, you know what I mean. Can anyone elaborate? I wish I have more time to discuss more. Metta, Eddie icarofranca wrote: Hi Connie, --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > C: we can't say what could've been and pretend we're sticking to ..bilions, zillions of serious faults. A pray for witches, a stuffed .. 57312 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: James posts lost nilovg Hi James, no 1: yea, where you wrote about hogwash. LOL. No 2, where you wrote that I have too much influence. LOL. ;--)) ;--)) Nina. op 31-03-2006 16:25 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > I think that only two of the posts I wrote to Nina appeared on DSG. 57313 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple part 2 upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Connie) - Thanks for leaving the material for me, sarah! While I don't recall the discussion you refer to, I like this commentarial material quite a bit! :-) 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/ -----Original Message----- From: sarah abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 08:53:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple part 2 Hi Connie, Howard & all, Thx Connie for your futher quotes. I liked this one a lot on the arahant -having abandoned 'the moisture of craving' and the kiriya cittas now that 'old action is consumed like germs burnt by fire'. It reminds me of a discussion Howard and I were having on this topic, mostly in agreement as I recal:) Look f/w to more of your quotes. I'll leave the main part of your post below for Howard's attention as he may not have seen the original while he was travelling. Metta, Sarah --- connie wrote: > ...C quoting Illustrator, vi.117: > << Herein [...snip...] (nibbanti): they stop burning. Steadfast > (dhiiraa): > those perfected in steadfastness (dhiti). As did this lamp (yatha'yam > padiipo): like this lamp. > 118. What is meant? [It is like this.] The old past-time action (kamma: > > neut.) is, although it has already arisen and ceased, still unconsumed > for > [ordinary] creatures since it is still capable of inducing their > rebirth-linking owing to their not having abandoned the [germ-softening] > > moisture of craving; [but] there are those in whom the moisture of > craving > has been dried out by the Arahant path and for whom that old action is > [thus] consumed, [195] like germs burnt up by fire, since it is no more > > capable of giving any ripening in the future; then any action of theirs > > occurring right now as honouring the Enlightened One, etc, is called > 'the > new'; [but] they are those for whom it no more gives being since, owing > to > the abandonment of craving, it is no more capable of fruiting in the > future than the flower of a plant whose roots have been cut: and these, > > from whose cognizance lust for new (future) being has faded with the > abandoning of craving are the bhikkhus with taints consumed (exhausted) > > [called] '[with] the germ consumed' because the [action-resultant] > rebirth-linking consciousness, stated thus 'Action is the field, > consciousness is the seed' (A.i.223), has been consumed with the > consumption (exhaustion) of action; and then, because the zeal that > there > formerly was for the renewal of being called 'growth' has been abandoned > > precisely by abandoning the origin [of suffering], they have no more > zeal > for growth as they formerly had because they are steadfast with > perfection > of steadfastness, they go out, as did this lamp, with the ceasing of the > > final consciousness. They go beyond any mode of description (cf. Sn. > 1067) > again such as 'with form', 'formless', and so on (cf. S. iii. 46). And, > it > seems, one lamp among those that had been lit to honour the city deities > > on that occasion, actually went out, and it was with reference to that > that he said 'as did this lamp.'>> <...> 57314 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:40pm Subject: [dsg] Re: James posts lost buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > no 1: yea, where you wrote about hogwash. LOL. > No 2, where you wrote that I have too much influence. LOL. > ;--)) ;--)) > Nina. LOL! I hope you are joking. (But you wrote before that you don't approve of joking??). I just hope that those weren't the messages you got from my posts! Metta, James ps. Yeah, there is one post missing- where I accuse you of being a Mahayanist Heretic! ;-)) lol 57315 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: James posts lost sarahprocter... Hi James & Nina, --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: > > > > Hi James, > > no 1: yea, where you wrote about hogwash. LOL. > > No 2, where you wrote that I have too much influence. LOL. > > ;--)) ;--)) ... > ps. Yeah, there is one post missing- where I accuse you of being a > Mahayanist Heretic! ;-)) lol > .... S: Oh perhaps that one was even too much for the yahoo censors lol lol....at this rate Jon & I be able to retire from our duties and just leave it up to yahoo, lol, lol:-)) .......Unless of course you're referring to this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/57035 Metta, Sarah ====== 57317 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. icarofranca Hi Eddie! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > I do not think all monks are good role models, some maybe worse >than we, laypeople. Only those true Buddhist monks are good, like >those who have truly become Arahant, Sotapana, Sadhagam, Anhagam, >etc. Monks come from human beings except with more teachings taught >formally to them. So they are good sources of formal teachings and >respectful in this sense. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Definitively you didn´t understood one single word I wrote to you... Bhikkhus are at a higher level than us, laypeople. They are the best of buddhists and their faults really don´t concern you and me - they have a true chastissement by their pairs and believe: the Vinaya Rules are hard! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I do not understand and so disagree on the fact that those that >drive a wedge into the Buddhist Bikkhu (Bikkhu = Monk??, I think so) >group will go to Hell realm. I think honest well meaning action but >ending in that wedging effect should not be. Or is it a special >'preferential' treatment for Buddha's teachings in Dhamma? This one >sounds a bit like other religions, you know what I mean. --------------------------------------------------------------------- A laypeople that wegdes a Bhikkhu goes to Hell and will be blocked for any benefit or merit, for true justice. But Buddha understand your deep frustation in killing beings that better than you in all senses...in Buddhism Hell is not a permanent state! Eddie, Eddie... Well... let´s continue! Mettaya Ícaro 57318 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:05pm Subject: Re: The dhammas underlying postures philofillet ¡¡Hi Howard, Tep, TG, James and all Another long and rambling post! To save time, I recommend skipping every other line. Thanks, gents, for your comments on the post I wrote about being puzzled about why the Satipatthana Sutta uses such conventional frames of mindfulness, at least in one section. Because of time limits forgive me for not answering you individually or addressing points in detail. I think my puzzlement stems from having spent so much time the last year and a half in the salayatana samyutta. (SN 35) In fact, all my sutta study during this period in my life has been devoted to that vagga. (I was impressed by the sutta in which the Buddha urges us to be ¡°triple investigators of ayatanas (sense bases), dhatus (elements) and D.O. I am starting with the ayatanas. I suspect I¡¯ll be studying and restudying SN 35 for another year or two before I go any further in my sutta studies. That¡¯s what I suspect, there is no telling what we will do or not do.) As you know, in hundreds of suttas in SN 35, the Buddha lays out in very explicit, paramattha terms what happens when the sense bases arise, and leads us, if there is patience and other conditions for understanding, towards an understanding which might indeed condition the guarding of the sense doors that is preached in these suttas. (Always helpful to remember that the guarding of the sense doors taught in these suttas arises after seeing, not before ¨C we are not talking about keeping one¡¯s eyes one-plough¡¯s length ahead of us here.) Also, there are many suttas that make it clear that it is by moving towards understanding the sense bases and other paramattha dhammas that arise conditioned by them (such as seeing etc) as impermanent, not- self and suffering that we follow the Buddha¡¯s teaching. Indeed, in one sutta, SN 35:142, we learn that the ¡°purpose of the holy life¡± is for understanding the suffering that is the eye, visible form and seeing and other dhammas that arise conditioned by them, and so on. Suffering is defined in paramattha terms here, not in the conventional terms of growing old, getting sick, dying, being separated from the loved one etc that we usually think of. So you see, I come to the Satipatthana sutta having been absorbed (when conditions permitted) in the study of dhammas in some of their purest, least diluted expression as found in SN ¨C thus the trouble for me with understanding why ¡°the monk knows he is going¡± would be considered an object of mindfulness of any import. I know I am going! I know I am sitting! So? Who doesn¡¯t? ¨C is what I thought. Of course I was wrong to think this. There must surely be a good reason the Buddha offers modes of deportment for objects of mindfulness. I mentioned the ¡°jackal¡± reference in a passing way. I found the copy of the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta (thank you, Dhamma friend, for sending it to me.) and tracked down that reference. Here is what is written: Commentary: When he is going a bhikkhu understands ¡®I am going.¡¯ In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness. Philentary: OK, we are not jackals, most of the time. I see that. But we are perhaps more foolish than jackals at times if we believe that concentrating on modes of deportment in itself is enough to ¡°shed the belief in a living being¡± to ¡°knock out the percept of a soul.¡± Foolish because, unlike the jackal, we have the gift of the Buddha¡¯s teaching but pass it up because of our compliance with the self¡¯s demand for methods that pay off here and now. I say that because when I first came to DSG, or soon after, there was a fellow who said he tried to go through his whole day, from morning to night, aware of every motion he was making. I¡¯m sure there are many who fall into that error, tempted by a misinterpretation of the seemingly crystal clear wording of the Satipatthana sutta. Commentary: From the sort of mere awareness denoted by reference to canines and the like, proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative practice cannot be called one who makes become anything like a subject of meditation. Philentary: ¡°One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non-opposition to that perception.¡± Very interesting. I think that some teachers, and Acharn Sujin is one, encourage us at all time to oppose that perception. Other teachers allow us to be comfortable with using the self to get rid of the self. I prefer the former approach ¨C I think it is the Buddha¡¯s way, personally, but I don¡¯t really know about that yet. Commentary: In the elucidation of these questions the following is said: Who goes? No living being or person whatsoever. Whose going is it? Not the going of any living being or person. On account of what does the going take place? On account of the diffusion of the process of oscillation born of mental activity. Because of that this yogi knows thus: If there arises the thought ¡®I shall go¡¯ that thought produces expression , the bodily movement which indicates going and so forth. The moving on of the whole body through the diffusion of the process of oscillation is called going. The same is the method of exposition as regards the other postures: standing and so forth. Philentary: Ah, now we are back in a paramattha dhamma territory ¨C an understanding that there are impersonal, conditioned processes at work. The sense that there is a self that can be relied on to make decisions to do this and that is nicely diluted here. Even ¡°I shall go¡± arises only if it arises ¨C that cetana is as conditioned and beyond our control as anything else in the process. One ¡°I shall go¡± is conditioned by thousands or millions of ¡°I shall goes¡± that preceded it. No need to feel that this is hopeless or discouraging ¨C if we stay in the light of the Buddha¡¯s teaching, wholesome ¡°I shalls¡± will be conditioned without the need for us to fret about it. If, on the other hand, we wish to be the master of ¡°I shalls¡± we will miss the Dhamma boat. Anyways, thank you guys - because of your comments I have taken out the commentary and will hopefully be reading it more. I don¡¯t think it¡¯s a good idea to approach such complex, important suttas without the aid of a commentary. Even with the commentary we are likely to interpret it the way we like ¨C which is the way that works best for us - but there is perhaps a little bit less of a likelihood of that happening. ¨Cperhaps. Phil p.s I will leave the last word to you guys if you want it. With 30 minutes designated for DSG a week (a conditioned "I shall") I'm afraid I can't participate in an ongoing discussion/debate way. Wisdom can tell us when it's time to stop "beating heads against brick walls" as James, I think, put it. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > Hi all > > On occasion I have been puzzled by the Satipatthana Sutta, the > references to "the monk knows he is standing etc." 57319 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ephemeral feelings philofillet Hi TG and all I see that last week in my rush to post I botched up this and posted it buried under the thing about posutres. So I will repost it now, along with comments from TG. > Hi all > > I was interested by this teaching on feelings: "At each moment > of citta the condition for the accompanying feeling changes and thus > feelings change all the time. It does not appear to us this when > when we cling to the feeling that has fallen away. It exists no more > but we keep pondering it." > > Very interesting. The sutta that many of us have quoted here, > about feelings being like clouds passing by, or passing winds, > blowing this way and that, I forget, has to be seen in a new light > for me. Feelings, are much much more ephemeral than we think. There > are in fact millions (billions) of feelings rising and falling away > in the space of what we would conventionally think of a feeling that > is being considered. Needless to say our clouded minds don't see > this, so we think about feelings and form them into wholes, cling to > them and make them so important although they have fallen away, are > constantly falling away to exist not more. There are even feelings > accompanying bhavanga cittas! The conventional mind rejects this â€?E > there cannot be feelings if they cannot be experienced, the > conventional understanding says. > > TG: So much of the above seems to me based on theory; and not on what can > be directly experienced. The Buddha seems to me to be much more common sense > oriented. Ph: I know what you mean - but I really do find there is something liberating in acccepting certain truths in theory even though we cannot yet prove them in experience. I don't know why I find this so helpful - a form of clinging to the comfort reflecting on them provides, I imagine. But when I read suttas about the incredibly complex proceseses arising from the sense bases, when I study Abhidhmma about the momentariness of all dhammas - it kind of turns me on for some reason! Why? I don't know. I just know that when I first read Abhidhamma in Daily Life I was in a kind of frenzy and had trouble sleeping for 2 or 3 days. A frenzy of deep recognition of some kind, it felt like. But it could very well just be clinging to the notion of ephemeral dhammas the way I used to cling to what I then thought was the brahma-viharas. Another neat thing I heard about feeling - when we hear a loud sound, for example, there is the rupa of the sound as well as the rupa of the earth element of hardness, one experienced through the ear sense, one through the body sense. Of course our own experience doesn't tell us this, though it can, someday. I think it's really cool. As for things that will forever remain unknowable to our experience, such as feelings accompanying bhavanaga cittas, so be it. We can note them in theory and move on, our sense of awe at the depth of the Buddha's wisdom reinforced. The key is to not be *too* interested in them, just a little. > Dhamma goes against the ways of this world. > > TG: Dhamma goes against the * delusional * ways of this world. > > > I think the commom sense that you mention above can be dangerous to rely on entirely, because of course common sense is the way of the world. As you say, the way of the *deluded* world, yes, that's true. We can see through many shortcomings of the way of the deluded world. But I think it is helpful to reflect *briefly* on unfathomably deep and for-us-unrealizable and for-us-beyond common sense teachings at times to help us to understand how very, very far we are from the Buddha! Last word to you, if you'd like to add anything, TG. Phil 57320 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:30pm Subject: Clinging to sanna of postures philofillet Hi Nina I heard an interesting thing about a term that in Thai sounded like "Perk Iliyabot" (I think that would be a good name for a character in a spy novel.) It is about how clinging to sanna of postures interferes in some way with awareness of dhammas. Very interesting, I thought. When you have a moment, could you share a few thoughts on this? Thanks in advance. Phil 57321 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:00pm Subject: Vism.XVII,67 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XVII 67. (1) Herein, it is a root-cause and a condition, thus it is 'root-cause condition'. It is by its being a root-cause that it is a condition; what is meant is that it is a condition owing to its status as root-cause. The same method applies in the case of object condition and the rest. Herein, 'cause' (hetu) is a term for a part of a syllogism, for a reason, and for a root. For with the words 'proposition' (pa.ti~n~naa), 'cause' (hetu = middle term), etc., in the world it is a member of a syllogism that is called a cause. But in the Dispensation, in such passages as 'Those states that are produced from a cause' (Vin.i,40), it is a reason (kaara.na); and in such passages as 'Three profitable [root-]causes, three unprofitable [root-]causes' (Dhs.1053), it is a root (muula) that is called a cause. The last is intended here. ******************* 67. tattha hetu ca so paccayo caati hetupaccayo, hetu hutvaa paccayo, hetubhaavena paccayoti vutta.m hoti. aaramma.napaccayaadiisupi eseva nayo. tattha hetuuti vacanaavayavakaara.namuulaanameta.m adhivacana.m. ``pa.ti~n~naa, hetuu´´tiaadiisu hi loke vacanaavayavo hetuuti vuccati. saasane pana ``ye dhammaa hetuppabhavaa´´tiaadiisu (mahaava0 60) kaara.na.m. ``tayo kusalahetuu, tayo akusalahetuu''tiaadiisu (dha0 sa0 1059) muula.m hetuuti vuccati, ta.m idha adhippeta.m. 57322 From: Eddie Lou Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro. Of Buddha, World & Dhamma. eddielou_us icarofranca wrote: Hi Icaro! Definitively you didn´t understood one single word I wrote to you... Bhikkhus are at a higher level than us, laypeople. They are the best of buddhists and their faults really don´t concern you and me - they have a true chastissement by their pairs and believe: the Vinaya Rules are hard! --------------------------------------------------------------------- I think you mean Bhikkus are governed by their own system, beyond our critical analysis? In other words none of our concern AT ALL. If that I agree. We are not Arahant so we will feel irked more or less when we see such happenings. --------------------------------------------------------------------- A laypeople that wegdes a Bhikkhu goes to Hell and will be blocked for any benefit or merit, for true justice. But Buddha understand your deep frustation in killing beings that better than you in all senses...in Buddhism Hell is not a permanent state! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you mean Buddha's world got special preferential treatment above all non-Buddhists BY Dhamma, which is universal truth? I think everyone, regardless of anything including if you are Buddhist or not, are equal under Dhamma and according to Dhamma. That is why I heard, there will always be Dhamma under any circumstances, independent of Buddha (meaning existence or non-existence of Buddha). Buddhas with their highest wisdom can understand it to explain Dhamma to us. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Thx. Metta, Eddie 57323 From: sharad goswami Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:27pm Subject: Right and Perfect Paths - Tan Chade Meng pisean282311 Dear All, I would humbly suggest that the word "Right" in "Right Livelihood", "Right Speech", etc, was the result of a mistranslation. The Pali word used is "Samma", as in "Samma Ajiva" for "Right Livelihood". The proper translation of the word "Samma" should be "Perfect". For example, "Samma Sambuddha" for "Perfectly Enlightened One". -Tan Chade Meng A good article i hv extracted and posted for all of us. kindly view http://www.cam-associates.com/articles/religion/right_perfect.htm <...> 57324 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: James posts lost buddhatrue Hi Sarah and Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Oh perhaps that one was even too much for the yahoo censors lol > lol....at this rate Jon & I be able to retire from our duties and just > leave it up to yahoo, lol, lol:-)) > > .......Unless of course you're referring to this one: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/57035 > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== No, that isn't the post. I had written a post in reply to 57044, an in-text reply, where I detailed that the development of the Perfections over aeons is the path of buddhahood and not the path of an arahant. That, if Nina is suggesting that we must develop the Perfections for aeons, she is suggesting that we should all become buddhas and is closer to being Mahayanist than being Theravadan. Metta, James 57325 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:21pm Subject: Bodily and Mental Feeling ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Detached from both Bodily and Mental Feeling! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, the uninstructed ordinary person feels pleasant feelings, painful feelings, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings... Such does the instructed Noble Disciple also feel. What then is the difference, the variation, and the distinction between the instructed Noble Disciple and the uninstructed ordinary person ??? Bhikkhus, when the uninstructed ordinary person is being touched by a painful feeling, he cries, grieves, moans, weeps, beats his breast & becomes bewildered! He feels actually two feelings: A bodily pain and a mental frustration...!!! Imagine they hit a man with a dart, and then they pricked him immediately with another dart, then that man would indeed feel two feelings caused by both the two darts. Similarly is it in this case where the uninstructed ordinary person touched by a painful feeling, actually feels two feelings: A bodily pain and another mental frustration over that. Whenever touched by pain, he responds with aversion towards that painful feeling, the latent tendency to aversion towards painful feeling grows deeper. When touched by painful feeling, he seeks to sense delight! Why? Because the uninstructed ordinary person does not know any other escape from painful feeling than seeking to pleasure. When he seeks towards delight in sensual pleasure, the latent tendency to lust for pleasant feeling grows deeper. He does not really understand as it really is neither the cause, nor the fading away, nor the satisfaction, nor the danger, nor the escape in the case of these feelings.... Not understanding these things, when touched by a neutral neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling the latent tendency to ignorance also grows deeper. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he feels it as if attached to it and as the owner being involved in it. When feeling a painful feeling, he also feels this as if attached to it and involved in it. If he feels a neither-painful-nor- pleasant feeling, he feels it as if attached to it and involved in it... This, bhikkhus, is called an uninstructed ordinary person who is attached & clings desperately to birth, aging, death, sorrow, pain, discontent, & despair. I tell you: He clings to Suffering ... !!! Bhikkhus, when the instructed Noble Disciple is being touched by a painful feeling, he neither cries, nor grieves, nor moans, nor weeps, nor beats his breast, nor becomes bewildered! He feels actually only one feeling: Bodily pain, yet no mental frustration! Imagine they hit a man with only one single dart, and not any other dart, then that man would feel a single feeling caused by only one single dart. So too, when the instructed Noble Disciple is contacted by a painful feeling, then he feels one feeling: A bodily pain, but not any mental frustration. Touched by that same painful feeling, he neither develops nor maintains any aversion towards it! Since he develops no aversion towards any painful feeling, the latent tendency to aversion towards painful feeling does not grow deeper...! When touched by painful feeling, he does not wish for sense pleasure. For what reason? Because the instructed Noble Disciple knows another escape from painful feeling other than sensual pleasure! Since he does not seek delight in sensual pleasure, the latent tendency to lust for pleasant feeling does not grow deeper. He understands as it really is, the cause, fading away, satisfaction, danger, and the escape in the case of feelings. Since he understands these things, the latent tendency to ignorance, when touched by neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, does not grow deeper. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he feels it as if detached, remote & alien. it. When feeling a painful feeling, he also feels this as if detached, remote & alien. If he feels a neither-painful-nor- pleasant feeling, he feels even that neutrality as if something detached, remote & alien.... This, bhikkhus, is called a Noble Disciple, who is released from birth, aging, and death! Who is separated from sorrow, lamentation, pain, discontent, and desperate despair... I tell you, such one is disconnected from Suffering. This, is the difference, variation, & distinction, between the learned Noble Disciple & an uninstructed ordinary person! The wise, clever & learned one does not feel the pleasant and painful mental feeling! This is the great difference between the wise & learned one and the ordinary person. For the learned one, who has comprehended the Dhamma, who clearly sees this world and the next, desirable things does neither incite, nor stir up, nor stimulate his mind... Towards anything disgusting, he has no aversion. All mental attraction and repulsion has ceased... Both have been extinguished, brought to silence. Having known this stain- and sorrow-less state, such transcender of existence directly understands ... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [208-10] section 36: Feeling. Vedana. The Dart. Sallatena. 6. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> 57326 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:46pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. buddhatrue Hi Icaro, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi Eddie! > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > I do not think all monks are good role models, some maybe worse > >than we, laypeople. Only those true Buddhist monks are good, like > >those who have truly become Arahant, Sotapana, Sadhagam, Anhagam, > >etc. Monks come from human beings except with more teachings taught > >formally to them. So they are good sources of formal teachings and > >respectful in this sense. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > Definitively you didn´t understood one single word I wrote to you... > Bhikkhus are at a higher level than us, laypeople. They are the best > of buddhists and their faults really don´t concern you and me - they > have a true chastissement by their pairs and believe: the Vinaya Rules > are hard! I know I am going to regret writing this post, but here goes anyway. Icaro, I don't know where you are getting your thinking about monks, but monks are not at a "higher level" than laypeople simply because they are wearing a robe. Actually, to compare anyone to anyone else in such a manner (as being "higher", "lower", or the "same" level) is conceit and something the Buddha specifically taught against. Monks are supposed to be humble and are not supposed to place themselves above others- be those others laypeople, novice monks, initiates, or ANYONE! You speak of monks in a culturally biased way which is not in accordance with the buddhadhamma. That monk who was nasty to me should not have been so. He didn't teach me any kind of lesson other than realizing that he had yet to overcome his ego. Actually, I should have taught him a lesson and refused to leave. I should have snatched the coffee right out of his hand and drank it! Then he would have been given the chance to learn humility and deference of ego. Actually, since I walked away, I did nothing but reinforce his ego. Laypeople don't owe monks anything and the Buddha taught that monks should be respected only to the extent that they earn that respect. Metta, James 57327 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:02pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four ken_aitch Hi Han, Thanks for continuing the conversation. It seems that we agree on the basics, but there are places where neither of us knows what the other is talking about. -------------- Ken: > > It is not helpful to point to your body, for example, and say, "This is not my self." Of course it is your self! Who else could it be? > > Han: > Exactly. > > Ken: > > The concept of a living being necessarily involves the conventional use of 'my self' or 'your self' etc., and so it is not helpful to make illogical contradictions. > > Han: > I don't realize I was making any illogical contradictions. > -------------- I was simply reiterating my first point - the one to which you replied, "Exactly." It seems to me that illogical contradictions will inevitably occur if we mix Abhidhamma terminology with conventional terminology. I think that is generally accepted. Therefore, we don't say, "The five khandhas are walking down the street," and we don't say, "I can't wash the dishes tonight because there is no I." Many misunderstandings occur when we mistakenly think the speaker (or writer) is mixing terminologies. For example, I said to you, "Dhammas can study and practice." But I did not mean that dhammas can sit at a desk and turn the pages of a book or anything like that. I meant that dhammas perform functions and those functions include hearing, thinking, understanding, putting forth effort and so on. You wrote: ----- > I cannot bring myself to consider that the one who is typing this post is not my self, not Han Tun, but citta, cetasika and ruupa. > ----- A clash of terminologies! :-) Citta, cetasika and rupa do not type, do they? We don't need to think in terms of "Do I exist, or do I not exist? Does the typist exist, or does the typist not exist?" It is enough to know that, in the ultimately real world described by the Buddha, only namas and rupas exist. ----------- Ken: > > By contrast, those contemplations are helpful when a paramattha dhamma is the object. Such an object should be considered as, (1) not one's personal property, (2) not deserving of special treatment and, (3) devoid of self. > > Han: > That's what I am finding difficulty with. I cannot yet fully embrace paramattha dhammas. > ------------ I am not sure of what you mean by "fully embrace." I don't think you mean that you have trouble believing in paramattha dhammas. (You said in your previous post that you had "no difficulty in realising there are only the five aggregates.") So would you mind explaining this difficulty a little further? Ken H 57328 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:59pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! cerini_pablo Hi James (and all) Thank you for the details about your experience. At a first reading I felt disappointed with what you wrote, but then I realized that anyway I wasn't there with you, so I have to respect what you felt (until the day I will be able to experience it by myself :) ). "buddhatrue" wrote: > James: Well, it certainly shouldn't be a wound for your faith in > dhamma. I went there, experienced that nonsense, and still my > faith in dhamma wasn't wounded. Right, I should have written "my faith in the sangha". About the parents' agreement, the rule actually makes sense. It's a pity because I would enjoy an experience like Kom's one. Anyway , it's true : parents' love is the best one will ever receive and one has to repay them with respect. (My parents' opposition to dhamma must be some sort of akusala vipaka that I still don't understand :) ) Pablo 57329 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: remarks. nilovg Dear Han, op 31-03-2006 17:11 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw was a very great vipassanaa > teacher. If I gave you the impression that his > teachings were samatha, it was my very big mistake. ------ N: No, the fault is not with you, it is my attitude towards a certain method for vipassanaa. Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw gave a certain method and this made me think of samatha. Personally, and these are my accumulated inclinations, I would feel very constrained to follow a certain method, I could not live like that. This shows again that accumulated inclinations are anattaa. I myself feel honoured if you would be willing to continue our discussions. But this depends on your inclination. If you feel like it we could take one or two points at a time. By the way, your dialogue with Ken H is priceless, and I like the directness, sincerity and good spirit of both of you. It was a delight to read. You summarized very aptly the main points for discussion. I shall type them out and use for some discussions with Lodewijk. I can add to them: your difficulty with paramattha dhammas in the situation, such as typing. Metta in daily life and paramattha dhammas. It all hangs together. But all these points are not my teachings. Whose teachings they are can become clear as our discussions evolve. as to point 8: I would like to put this more carefully: noting could be misunderstood. As to concentration: sati and samaadhi are two different cetasikas with different functions. With apppreciation, Nina. > Moreover, I am not used to some of your teachings such > as: > (1) to see realities as conditioned elements. > (2) the relevance to the reality now. > (3) we never know how citta will react to an > impingement by an object on one of the six doors. > (4) the citta shifts all the time to different objects > and this is not our own choice. > (5) that sati and paññaa are anattaa. > (6) sometimes citta is accompanied by sati and paññaa, > mostly not. > (7) if we try to concentrate on naama and ruupa, that > seems more the method of samatha. > (8) inappropriate choice of words of: noting, > concentrating on. > > I do not disagree with the above points. I am just > saying that I am not used to them. 57330 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:jokes and hogwash. nilovg Hi James, acknowledging your post. op 31-03-2006 16:18 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > > I am in agreement with you that the development of sati depends on > conditions. My disagreement is when you state that these conditions > for sati cannot be controlled and/or purposefully cultivated. ------ N: Yes they can, but not by a self. Understanding controls them. Understanding, a mental factor arising with consciousness, knows the right purpose. Acknowledging your other post: LOL! I hope you are joking. (But you wrote before that you don't approve of joking??). I just hope that those weren't the messages you got from my posts! Metta, James ps. Yeah, there is one post missing- where I accuse you of being a Mahayanist Heretic! ;-)) lol ------ N: I considered a while before posting a joke, but I thought this a means of conveying to you: I understand your colourful style, and your vehemence at times, calling me a wolf in sheepscloths, which is from the Bible. I am used to your strong expressions (like triumvirate in the past!). You know beforehand what I am going to say, and I know the same of you, that is all right. I have no unhappy feelings about this. You speak very sincerely from your own conviction. Mahayanist Heretic: I see this as a compliment. This was about the fact that all of us are to develop the perfections. I do not want to use labels as Theravada and Mahayana. My influence is not as great as you would think: not true that my book is in every hotel in Thailand. We did not see it in the Oriental Hotel. Nina. 57331 From: Eddie Lou Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. eddielou_us Hi, James, That reminds me of the Lent set by Buddha because of complaints about Bhikkus trek and travel all over the paddy fields damaging crops. Bhikkus actually should be humble with no or less ego centric, lobha, dosa, moha, mana, understand more Dhamma than laypeople. Sanghas or Bhikkus should lead us and impart dhamma teachings to us. Less or no rituals, down to earth teaching us the real and right stuff which is Dhamma. This high, this low, caste system, class system should be kepl low as possible, if not totally out. With all due respect, unless Icaro knows something I do not know yet. I am still learning and hope to learn from you, Icaro. I learn a lot from a lot of more learned persons in DSG, like Nina, Sarah, Christine, Icaro, Htoo Naing, buddhatrue(James), etc, to name just a few. I still think mana and ego is hard to get rid of but less is better, IMHO. Correct me if I am wrong. James, what you did is correct, do more neutral thing IMHO. Those monks I think can not be taught lesson. Further pursuit, can only create more headache and maybe akusala. Like Icaro said it is none of our business beyond our watch, let their monks superior take care of them or let Kamma and Dhamma which has no bias, take care of them. Also I heard splitting or wedging Sangha unity or group is enough akusala to go to Hell, which I understand is not eternal like other religions taught so. This eternal hell going on account of splitting, is another misgiving I have about. Just my opinion. Metta, Eddie buddhatrue wrote: Hi Icaro, I know I am going to regret writing this post, but here goes anyway. Icaro, I don't know where you are getting your thinking about monks, but monks are not at a "higher level" than laypeople simply because they are wearing a robe. Actually, to compare anyone to anyone else in such a manner (as being "higher", "lower", or the "same" level) is conceit and something the Buddha specifically taught against. Monks are supposed to be humble and are not supposed to place themselves above others- be those others laypeople, novice monks, initiates, or ANYONE! You speak of monks in a culturally biased way which is not in accordance with the buddhadhamma. That monk who was nasty to me should not have been so. He didn't teach me any kind of lesson other than realizing that he had yet to overcome his ego. Actually, I should have taught him a lesson and refused to leave. I should have snatched the coffee right out of his hand and drank it! Then he would have been given the chance to learn humility and deference of ego. Actually, since I walked away, I did nothing but reinforce his ego. Laypeople don't owe monks anything and the Buddha taught that monks should be respected only to the extent that they earn that respect. Metta, James 57332 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 0:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! cerini_pablo Hi Kom and Sarah, "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for the reference. It is somewhat an entertaining read: one can > give a violent threat and get away with it! >Kom I agree. Of course, now I won't get on a tree menacing to jump down :), but sure dhamma is always able to surprise me ! Pablo 57333 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 1:05am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 414- Confidence/saddhaa (k) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) As we have seen, when the faculty of confidence has been more developed, it can become unshakable and firm, it can become a “power” or “strength” (bala). So long as one has not attained enlightenment confidence can still be shaken. One may have doubt about the value of the development of right understanding, doubt about the eightfold Path. The confidence of the sotåpanna cannot be shaken anymore; he has eradicated doubt. He has an unshakable confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. At each stage of enlightenment the faculties and thus also confidence have become more developed. At the moment of the attainment of arahatship they have reached completion. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57334 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! sarahprocter... Hi Kom & Pablo, --- Cerini Pablo wrote: > Hi Kom and Sarah, > > "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, > > > > Thanks for the reference. It is somewhat an entertaining read: one > can > > give a violent threat and get away with it! > >Kom > > I agree. > Of course, now I won't get on a tree menacing to > jump down :), but sure dhamma is always able to surprise me ! .... S: :) I'm not sure this loop-hole or exception should be advertised:). Do either of you have any comment or knowledge on whether the ordination of Sariputta's brother, Rewatta, was included in one of the exceptions mentioned in the translation Ven D. gave? Metta, Sarah ========= 57335 From: han tun Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 1:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four hantun1 Dear Ken, Thank you very much for your patience and for your cetana. I read again the first part of your current post taking out my short replies, and adding your further explanations, and I get the following. ------------------------ Ken: It is not helpful to point to your body, for example, and say, "This is not my self." Of course it is your self! Who else could it be? The concept of a living being necessarily involves the conventional use of 'my self' or 'your self' etc., and so it is not helpful to make illogical contradictions. It seems to me that illogical contradictions will inevitably occur if we mix Abhidhamma terminology with conventional terminology. I think that is generally accepted. Therefore, we don't say, "The five khandhas are walking down the street," and we don't say, "I can't wash the dishes tonight because there is no I." Many misunderstandings occur when we mistakenly think the speaker (or writer) is mixing terminologies. For example, I said to you, "Dhammas can study and practice." But I did not mean that dhammas can sit at a desk and turn the pages of a book or anything like that. I meant that dhammas perform functions and those functions include hearing, thinking, understanding, putting forth effort and so on. -------------------- Han: Now, I understand what you mean and I thank you for your kind explanation. But I am not clear what did I have actually written in my Part Four on which you based your above explanation. Can you kindly point out the sentences or paragraphs that I had written that correspond to the above explanation, so that I can fully understand the subject matter. ======================================== Han: I cannot bring myself to consider that the one who is typing this post is not my self, not Han Tun, but citta, cetasika and ruupa. Ken: A clash of terminologies! :-) Citta, cetasika and rupa do not type, do they? We don't need to think in terms of "Do I exist, or do I not exist? Does the typist exist, or does the typist not exist?" It is enough to know that, in the ultimately real world described by the Buddha, only namas and rupas exist. Han: What I meant was if there is no “I” who was typing the post? Anyway, I accept your above explanation. ======================================= Ken: By contrast, those contemplations are helpful when a paramattha dhamma is the object. Such an object should be considered as, (1) not one's personal property, (2) not deserving of special treatment and, (3) devoid of self. Han: That's what I am finding difficulty with. I cannot yet fully embrace paramattha dhammas. Ken: I am not sure of what you mean by "fully embrace." I don't think you mean that you have trouble believing in paramattha dhammas. (You said in your previous post that you had "no difficulty in realising there are only the five aggregates.") So would you mind explaining this difficulty a little further? Han: What I meant was I accept that there are only five aggregates. But since I cannot yet fully appreciate the anatta doctrine, I still have in my mind “my” five aggregates, “my” vedanaa, “my” citta etc. That was what I meant by I cannot yet fully embrace paramattha dhammas. ===================================== Thank you very much. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- ken_aitch wrote: > Hi Han, > > Thanks for continuing the conversation. It seems > that we agree on the > basics, but there are places where neither of us > knows what the other > is talking about. 57336 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. sarahprocter... Hi Eddie, I'm enjoying all your reflections on this and other threads:) I'd just like to make one brief comment here: --- Eddie Lou wrote: <...> > Here there is this dilemma with most folks, how do we balance the > daily life with practice, and be not tempted with tanha or temptations > surrounding us by media, daily events, etc. .... S: As I see it, the more acceptance we have of our daily lives consisting of conditioned dhammas, the less the dilemma there is about 'practice'. For example, by conditions now, there is seeing, there is touching, there is thinking about what is seen, touched and so on. There are countless moments of tanha arising, regardless of whether we are discussing dhamma now, watching TV or doing both at once:). Any of these dhammas can be known, any can be the object of awareness at any time when they are experienced. Our life, our world is only ever one moment of experiencing, such as seeing, touching or thinking at a time. Awareness can slip in anytime and be aware of that world of experiencing or the visible object, tangible object or tanha experienced, for example. So practice can only ever be now, regardless of what temptations we are surrounded by. Even in the quiet forest, there are just the same temptations of desirable visual stimulus, enticing sounds, thinking about what has been seen and heard and so on.... The roots of the dilemmas or difficulties are not the media and daily events, but our accumulated lobha, dosa and moha. Out of these, it is the wrong views we hold about other times, places and objects for our practice which cause our dilemmas or doubts about the right path now. Whatever is conditioned now can be understood - even great tanha! This was a quote of A.Sujin's which I heard on a tape yesterday and liked a lot: "Anything which we think can help moves us away from the reality of this moment." I think it's really worth reflecting on, so I'll repeat it: ....... "Anything which we think can help moves us away from the reality of this moment." ....... To elaborate a little, if we have an idea of a)a special reflection now, such as on feelings, death or anything else, or b)opening a particular book, even a sutta, or c)going to another quieter room or d)anyting else in order for there to be better practice, it indicates there is no awareness of what is being experienced or appearing at this moment. Metta, Sarah p.s Did you receive your copy of 'Survey' by A.Sujin? Would anyone else like a (free) copy? (pls let me or Sukin or Nina know if so). ====== 57337 From: han tun Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 2:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: remarks. hantun1 Dear Nina, I must say to you the same thing that I had just said to Ken a few minutes ago: “Thank you very much for your patience and for your cetana.” ----------------- Han: Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw was a very great vipassanaa teacher. If I gave you the impression that his teachings were samatha, it was my very big mistake. Nina: No, the fault is not with you, it is my attitude towards a certain method for vipassanaa. Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw gave a certain method and this made me think of samatha. Personally, and these are my accumulated inclinations, I would feel very constrained to follow a certain method, I could not live like that. This shows again that accumulated inclinations are anattaa. Han: This was my fault also. In his book The Great Discourse on Not Self, Mahasi Sayadaw explained in each chapter how to do vipassanaa meditation on the teachings of Anattalakkhana. I should have mentioned that point. But then, my post would become too long. I don’t know whether you have the book. I can send it to you by post if you give me your postal address. =============================== Nina: I myself feel honoured if you would be willing to continue our discussions. But this depends on your inclination. If you feel like it we could take one or two points at a time. By the way, your dialogue with Ken H is priceless, and I like the directness, sincerity and good spirit of both of you. It was a delight to read. You summarized very aptly the main points for discussion. I shall type them out and use for some discussions with Lodewijk. Han: Yes, I would be most happy and honoured to continue discussions with you. I have always noted important points from your posts. But please be patient with me as I am still a very raw, unpolished material. ==================== Nina: I can add to them: your difficulty with paramattha dhammas in the situation, such as typing. Metta in daily life and paramattha dhammas. It all hangs together. But all these points are not my teachings. Whose teachings they are can become clear as our discussions evolve. as to point 8: I would like to put this more carefully: noting could be misunderstood. As to concentration: sati and samaadhi are two different cetasikas with different functions. Han: I look forward to discussing on these points and more! Thank you very much. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, > op 31-03-2006 17:11 schreef han tun op > hantun1@...: > > Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw was a very great vipassanaa > > teacher. If I gave you the impression that his > > teachings were samatha, it was my very big > mistake. > ------ > N: No, the fault is not with you, it is my attitude > towards a certain method > for vipassanaa. Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw gave a > certain method and this made > me think of samatha. 57338 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 2:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple sarahprocter... Dear Kom, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > At both temples, the entire Patimokkha was recited. ..... S: I thought the passage I quoted from the PTS Patimokkha intro was interesting on this point - the possible variations including the possibility of just reciting the very brief introduction (one page in the book)and just announcing the rest without any recital. I hadn't realised this and had assumed the entire Patimokkha was always recited as at the temples you stayed in. Is this the standard way at the main temples in Thailand, do you know? Han, do you know in Myanmar? Matheesha, in Sri Lanka? I was also interested in the details about when there are only two bhikkhus or if a bhikkhu is alone ["if a bhikkhu is alone, he should do the four preliminary duties, then make a determination that the day is an Uposatha day for an individual."] Do you have any idea of the position in this regard if the bhikkhu is not actually alone as such but in a mixed assembly, for example living with bhikkhus from other traditions. Can it be considered 'alone' above for Patimokkha recital? Thanks for your other responses which I was delighted to read. I hope to add a little more. Thanks again, Kom! Metta, Sarah ======== 57339 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple sarahprocter... Hi Icaro, --- icarofranca wrote: <..> > ? Our Prakrit-speaker Bhikkhu with strong memorization skills will > attack his task, cracking the nut by taking by heart all Pali language > teachings without necessarily understand its meaning! .... S: And there will be a time when the teachings can still be read or recited but no one understands the meaning at all: ***** >The Peg Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS page: S ii 266 "Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. "In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about."< ***** S: So, I think the memorization and recital of texts without any understanding by the bhikkhu or the listeners is quite useless.! ... I:> And...speaking seriously...if the "tape-recorder Bhikkhu" develops > Samma-Sati in this path ( it can be perfectably feasible by > definition),he and the Sangha will greatly profit with it!!! ... S: Only feasible if there is some understanding of the meaning by him and the Sangha. .... > Sometimes, between friday and saturday - not in rainy nights of > course - I think about trying to get Samma-sati from these perspective! ... S: Ah, on sunny nights between friday and saturday..:-/ Even in sunny Brazil, do you have many of those??? Of course it can be nice to read, repeat, memorize and reflect on lines from a sutta or the Dhammasangani. Trying to get samma-sati from it? Hmm, sounds like lobha, trying to get special results, Ic. Perhaps you just mean you enjoy reciting and reflecting like this... Thanks for your good post on the non-passive Abhidhamma teachings:)) Metta, Sarah ======= 57340 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 3:10am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Cerini, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > Anyway , it's true : parents' love is the best one > will ever receive and one has to repay them with respect. > (My parents' opposition to dhamma must be some sort of akusala > vipaka that I still don't understand :) ) > > Pablo > If you really want to ordain you might ask them for permission to ordain temporarily, like three or four months, first- like Kom has done. They may be okay with a temporary ordination more than a permanent one. Then, afterwards, they may be more okay with a permanent one. In other words, you might want to ease them into the idea slowly. (Which I didn't do because of the travel). Metta, James 57341 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 3:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple sarahprocter... Dear Kom (& all), --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > S: By `memorizes', I take it to refer to the firm development of > > satipatthana, not to the ability to be able to repeat or recite. With > > understanding, the Dhamma can be `remembered' and `recalled' even > if there > > is no ability to find particular suttas or recall particular names. <...> ... K:> In another school > of > thoughts which interprets Visuddhimagga (and other places in the > texts? sorry, haven't got there yet :-) ) more literally, the > development > of the first vipassana nana appears to require more extensive > knowledge of the paramatha dhamma, like the fact that the eye can be > decomposed into 54 rupas, or 11 sense-bases, or the 11 elements, > which would require quite a bit of exact knowledge in those regards. .... S: When you refer to the example of the ‘eye decomposed into 54 rupas’, I wonder what kind of knowledge of paramatha dhammas this is? Isn’t it just a theoretical or book knowledge about dhammas? Can it really ever be known, I wonder? I think we read a lot of detail which only the Buddha or a few key disciples could ever know. Isn’t it more useful to understand what is apparent now? For example, visible object is apparent, thinking is apparent, tangible object is apparent. Is eye-base apparent? Through what door-way? Through the mind-door, isn’t it just thinking about eye-base and its composition of rupas? When it comes to the ayatanas (I assume this is what you’re referring to as the 11 sense bases, i.e 12 minus nibbana?), then I think it does become more and more apparent that there has to be a meeting of them for any experience to take place. For example, without visible object, eye-base, contact and other supporting mental factors, there cannot be any seeing consciousness. Also with the elements, I don’t think we have to count or recite or know all the details, but it helps a lot to begin to understand dhammas as elements in order to see them more and more as anatta – just elements which appear and then disappear immediately. I’m interested to hear more about this ‘school of thoughts’. I think the point about clearly understanding nama and rupa is that without this very distinct and clear understanding, any dhammas are bound to be taken for self. On other points, I agree with your comments about the transmission of the teachings and like you, I’m very grateful for those who helped us by reciting and memorizing them in the past. I also have a lot of admiration for those like the Vinaya teacher you mentioned who are able to memorize the texts and help with interpretations all the better because of this immediate access to the texts. (btw, I assure you that my memory of texts, especially suttas and names, is like a sieve. Sometimes, all I can do is vaguely remember whereabouts in a book a certain sutta or passage is:)). ... K:> How does this apply to us, the lucky ones who basically have all the > teachings in writing? A good example maybe the practice of Metta > Brahmvihara, a teaching that the Buddha obviously explicitly taught > (perhaps in more details than any other teachings on metta today), > there were so many perspectives that one can take to put the mind at > ease when anger is simmering. However, without remembering those > teachings, or having well rehearsed, well practiced mind, there is no > way those perspectives can be put into helping easing the mind. .... S: This is an interesting example. I remember before you wrote a good post with lots of helpful detail from the commentary on metta. Yes, we do read lots of details on these ‘perspectives’, but I think that if we read or reflect on them with a recipe or coping approach that again we easily go off-track. We all have our different ways, styles, accumulations or coping tendencies when ‘anger is simmering’ as you put it, but if we take any of these as being the way to foster metta, rather than merely descriptions of our styles whilst metta can be developed, I think that self comes in again. Isn’t there a big difference between understanding and seeing the value of metta in our daily lives and trying to have it arise by following different recipes? The same applies, as I see it, to the memorization and study issues: .... <...> K:>And with the scarcity of > resources > and teachers for the monks nowadays, I think having a good memory is > gold --- it is impossible to understand all the teachings that is useful > to > one, but it maybe possible to remember them. .... S: I’d like to have such a good memory, but I think that real wisdom is far more precious. Think of Culapantaka (Little Wayman) who couldn’t remember anything his brother (an arahant) taught him, but eventually listened to the Buddha and became an arahant with patisambhidas. Or the lady who burnt the curry – I’m like that, hopeless in the kitchen because I always forget what I’m doing there:) ... >>*EVEN IF > IT BE BUT A > > STANZA OF FOUR LINES*, - and be set on living in accordance with > Dhamma, > > he may well be called `one *WIDELY LEARNED*, *WHO KNOWS > DHAMMA BY HEART*" > > > K:> Yes, this venerable one, who knows the dhamma by heart, would > definitely benefit himself, but maybe unfortunately, without a good > memory of the Buddha's teachings (or good writings!), the teachings > may end up not being carried on. .... S: I have confidence that if people have a good understanding of the teachings they will be carried on and not vice versa. As I just wrote to Icaro, if they are recited, memorized and passed on without any understanding on anyone’s part, I believe this will not help. The purpose for study and reciting is surely only for the development of understanding, not for gaining knowledge or memorization expertise? I think this is a helpful and important thread. Thanks a lot for helping me to reflect further, Kom. I’ll be glad to hear any further comments you have or ideas from ‘other schools’ etc. Also, Icaro and all, pls add your further comments too. Metta, Sarah ===== 57342 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 3:58am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. cerini_pablo Hi Icaro, "icarofranca" wrote: > I could suggest for you, dear Pablo, a reading on > Dhammasangani...but for me it´s so complicated that I can dismay at > the very thought of it. Nina´s books are more accessible for basic > readers like you and me ...even so I intend to acquire soon the > Dhammasangani-Atthakatha, also called Atthasalini, or The Expositor, > where I hope finding all Nina´s ideas at this very ground and order. > Will my poor and sad, feeble intellect survive at this Theravadic > Marathon ? Hi, thank you for your suggestion. Now I' m slowly reading Nina's Cetasikas. When I finish it,I think I'll read Bikkhu Bodhi's translation of Abhidhammattha - sangaha. Then I don't know if I'll dare to approach Dhammasangani. I don't think I'm good in such studies. I remember just all the difficulties I had at higher school with Kant and Hegel :) Pablo 57343 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 4:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple icarofranca Hi Sarah! The Peg was a very good reminder about the reality of emptiness!! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Of course it can be nice to read, repeat, memorize and reflect on lines > from a sutta or the Dhammasangani. Trying to get samma-sati from it? Hmm, > sounds like lobha, trying to get special results, Ic. Perhaps you just > mean you enjoy reciting and reflecting like this... --------------------------------------------------------------------- YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!!! My eyes gleam with lobha, dosa and moha in the highest grade at the very thought of masterize the entire Dhammasagani, making it MY Samma-sati... MINE,a path entirely Mine!!!! MY wehicle to cross the ocean of after-life to a rebirth on the uppermost Deva World!!!The Dhammasangani!!!! But...alas!... that´s a totally impossible task to be done. I could dismay at the very thought to remember one single verse of it, even the first stanza: 1. Kusala...kusala... what comes after ?????? Oh, goodness... I will never manage to do it!!!!! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for your good post on the non-passive Abhidhamma teachings:)) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Passive Abhidhamma teachings ? They are strong like rock or steel and Nina´s hand is firm as a weightlifter´s to expose them so well!!!! Mettaya Ícaro 57344 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 4:20am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro. Of Buddha, World & Dhamma. icarofranca Hi Eddie! >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > I think you mean Bhikkus are governed by their own system, beyond >our critical analysis? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Exactly! Beyond yours and mine critical analysis, for sure! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > In other words none of our concern AT ALL. If that I agree. We are >not Arahant so we will feel irked more or less when we see such >happenings. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you feel irked with truth, Eddie ? I don´t need to be an arahant - a high score impossible for me in any time and opportunity - to understand such happenings. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Do you mean Buddha's world got special preferential treatment above all non-Buddhists BY Dhamma, which is universal truth? I think everyone, regardless of anything including if you are Buddhist or not, are equal under Dhamma and according to Dhamma. --------------------------------------------------------------------- For everyone THAT´S NOT A BHIKKHU, Eddie! The Sangha is very special, formed by very special people that follows the more precious of rules - The Vinaya and the original precepts directly dictated by Buddha. If you accumulate sufficient merit you will be able to hear the Dhamma, and with good deeds you become a buddhist, beginning at this auspicious way your road to Nibbana...but becoming a Bhikkhu! That´s a very serious task, not to be carried off with light spirits or a profit mind. The Bhikkhu´s yellow robe is a HONOR, to be dispensed only for a few ones that are really full of excelent merits and strong will. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Buddhas with their highest wisdom can understand it to explain Dhamma to us. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- But first you must be able to HEAR the Dhamma to be explained to! And the only way to do it it´s cultivating your field of merit and good deeds. Milarepa, that famous mahayana wise, fought with great hardship all his poor life to obtain the right to hear the true dhamma! We don´t need to be so radical as he was...and that´s not necessary because we haven´t so many bad kamma to purge! I hope having made myself clear now...any doubts don´t hesitate in asking someone here at DSG! Mettaya, Ícaro 57345 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 4:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. icarofranca Hi Pablo! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Hi, thank you for your suggestion. > Now I' m slowly reading Nina's Cetasikas. > When I finish it,I think I'll read Bikkhu Bodhi's translation of > Abhidhammattha - sangaha. > Then I don't know if I'll dare to approach Dhammasangani. > I don't think I'm good in such studies. I remember just all the > difficulties I had at higher school with Kant and Hegel :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Abhidhamma Sangaha is an excelent compendium for anyone to understand the idea of Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Anurudha took the task of condensate all important matters on Abhidhamma in one single volume at a good end...and Bhikkhu Bodhi´s translation provides a real banquet of interesting and profound insights. A nust for all intersted on buddhism! But the Dhammasangani...it was a case of "Love at first sight": even so burdened with Lobha, Dosa and Moha, with misdeeds and wrondoings of all sorts ( and a little knowledge of Pali Language) I decided to attack its baroque stanzas and profound ideas with courage, with Viriya, with bala, defiantly going where no Mahayanist had gone before! Ouch! My head! Ouch! My brains! Ouch! My spleen! The Dhammasangani is a fundamental work on theravada Buddhism. If possible, read it at the original ( not the Mrs. Rhys-Davies translation: it´s so victorian, so scholarly conceived as a bunch of dried bones) in Pali. Your viewpoint on Buddhism ( if you are a mahayanist) will change at a whole. My notion of what I really know about buddhism changed entirely after my first reading... Good luck! And Hegel is boring! Mettaya, Ícaro 57346 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 4:53am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. icarofranca Hi James! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > I know I am going to regret writing this post, but here goes > anyway. Icaro, I don't know where you are getting your thinking > about monks, but monks are not at a "higher level" than laypeople > simply because they are wearing a robe. --------------------------------------------------------------------- James, wear the bhikkhu´s yellow robe is a HONOR only dispensed to a few ones with great merit. Laypeople are obliged to tread the path of accumulating merits and good doings and, by this way, gaining the right to hear the true dhamma. Don´t worry: all the bhikkhus recognizes in this kind of discuss of yours that basic frustation that plagues all of us in some part of the buddhistic path. That´s normal. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, to compare anyone > to anyone else in such a manner (as being "higher", "lower", or > the "same" level) is conceit and something the Buddha specifically > taught against. Monks are supposed to be humble and are not > supposed to place themselves above others- be those others > laypeople, novice monks, initiates, or ANYONE! --------------------------------------------------------------------- James, the bhikkhus are the champions of humble behaviour and they aren´t intend to be above anyone...but YOU can forget basic notions of education , good manners, urbanity or even dhamma knowledge and pestering them, trying to pretend to be something you aren´t, trying to inpinge with violence your own biased opinion. You had got a well deserved reply for them, James, and could have your understand enlarged with this great chance. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > That monk who was nasty to me should not have been so. He didn't > teach me any kind of lesson other than realizing that he had yet to > overcome his ego. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The monk taught you a very important lesson, dear James: don´t pretend to be something or someone you aren´t, or never will be, if with this behaviour you continue to gain bad merit. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, I should have taught him a lesson and > refused to leave. I should have snatched the coffee right out of > his hand and drank it! --------------------------------------------------------------------- And with this notable act increase a debt of bad kamma, not speaking about the lack of merits of this action. Be courageous, James, and shake off such ill ideas off your mind. You will gain with it. Mettaya Ícaro 57347 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 5:03am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > > Then I don't know if I'll dare to approach Dhammasangani. > I don't think I'm good in such studies. I remember just all the > difficulties I had at higher school with Kant and Hegel :) > > Pablo +++++++ Dear Pablo, Amazing they inflict Kant and Hegel on school boys. Torture, really. Don't worry about the Dhammasangani: it is all about realities we experience everyday, and some that we may experience one day. Robert 57348 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 5:07am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! cerini_pablo Hi James, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Cerini, > My first name is Pablo > If you really want to ordain you might ask them for permission to > ordain temporarily, like three or four months, first- like Kom has > done. They may be okay with a temporary ordination more than a > permanent one. Then, afterwards, they may be more okay with a > permanent one. In other words, you might want to ease them into >the idea slowly. (Which I didn't do because of the travel). Thanks for the suggestion,but they fear that I could be brainwashed by this strange sect of yellow-dressed people :) Pablo 57349 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 5:22am Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! tikmok Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > Do either of you have any comment or knowledge on whether the ordination > of Sariputta's brother, Rewatta, was included in one of the exceptions > mentioned in the translation Ven D. gave? I personally couldn't see how it could be fitting one of the exceptions described. V. Sariputta wasn't the parent or a guardian (in case of dead parents), the mother didn't give implicit permission, and V. Rewatta didn't threathen to kick the chins of the monks until they submitted. I am sure someone would use this as a precedent though. kom 57350 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 5:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > this and had assumed the entire Patimokkha was always recited as at the > temples you stayed in. Is this the standard way at the main temples in > Thailand, do you know? No, I don't know what the "standard" way is in Thailand, although I have heard of another temple who did the recital in brief even though it was possible (ie someone was capable of it) to do it in total. > I was also interested in the details about when there are only two > bhikkhus or if a bhikkhu is alone ["if a bhikkhu is alone, he should do > the four preliminary duties, then make a determination that the day is an > Uposatha day for an individual."] When with two people, I think you make a pronouncement to each other about the purity of the sila (after making amends). When with just one, you prepare as if there were others who were coming, if none come, then you make a determination for yourself about the purity as well. I think both of these were spelled out in the commentaries. > Do you have any idea of the position in this regard if the bhikkhu is not > actually alone as such but in a mixed assembly, for example living with > bhikkhus from other traditions. Can it be considered 'alone' above for > Patimokkha recital? You are supposed to perform sangha ceremonies in company that is equivalent regarding to sila, so Bikkhus from other traditions may not be considered Bikkhus at all (making your life most complicated, if you want to stay amicable). However, the rules regarding to how to make this determination (whether or not you are equivalent) are somewhat complicated and I don't understand these rules yet. kom 57351 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 7:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: paramattha dhammas and conventional truth. nilovg op 31-03-2006 09:24 schreef Cerini Pablo op cerini_pablo@...: > I agree with all. If you put also "sitting in formal meditation" > in the list I think it would be perfect. ------- N: We cannot find this in the Tipitaka that this is a necessary condition for satipatthaana. (See the many debates on dsg in Useful Posts). Many people were sukkha vipassanaa, developing insight alone. No samatha. ---------- P: I' ve something to ask about the > paramattha sacca vs. vohara sacca thing, but I need some time to > elaborate the question . ------- N: that is very useful, it has influence on how we see vipassana in daily life. Nina. 57352 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 8:03am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. buddhatrue Hi Icaro, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi James! > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > I know I am going to regret writing this post, but here goes > > anyway. Icaro, I don't know where you are getting your thinking > > about monks, but monks are not at a "higher level" than laypeople > > simply because they are wearing a robe. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > James, wear the bhikkhu´s yellow robe is a HONOR only dispensed to a > few ones with great merit. Laypeople are obliged to tread the path of > accumulating merits and good doings and, by this way, gaining the > right to hear the true dhamma. > Don´t worry: all the bhikkhus recognizes in this kind of discuss of > yours that basic frustation that plagues all of us in some part of > the buddhistic path. That´s normal. > LOL! Okay, whatever. I expected this response. Honestly, I think you have a few screws loose (actually, more than a few). Metta, James 57353 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 8:48am Subject: Re: Right and Perfect Paths - Tan Chade Meng indriyabala Hi Sharad (Nina and Sarah) - I remember one term that has been popular here among the DSG members: 'right understanding'. Following your humble suggestion, I would replace that term by "perfect understanding". But there are 'clear understanding' and 'full understanding' too. But, are these two understandings inferior to 'perfect understanding'? What is your thought on this? Regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sharad goswami wrote: > > Dear All, > > I would humbly suggest that the word "Right" in "Right Livelihood", "Right Speech", etc, was the result of a mistranslation. The Pali word used is "Samma", as in "Samma Ajiva" for "Right Livelihood". The proper translation of the word "Samma" should be "Perfect". For example, "Samma Sambuddha" for "Perfectly Enlightened One". -Tan Chade Meng > > A good article i hv extracted and posted for all of us. > > kindly view > > http://www.cam-associates.com/articles/religion/right_perfect.htm > <...> > 57354 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 8:57am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. icarofranca Hi James! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Honestly, I think > you have a few screws loose (actually, more than a few). -------------------------------------------------------------------- A suspect shared by many people around the world...but not confirmed by documental register of confirmed facts!!!! So, my screwball viewpoint about the world continues being only a matter of conspiracy theory! At other side, The Vinaya is quite real, its rules are perfectly clear and you will personally grow up if you read it slowly, with calm and attention. Mettaya Ícaro 57355 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 9:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > S: When you refer to the example of the `eye decomposed into 54 rupas', I > wonder what kind of knowledge of paramatha dhammas this is? Isn't it just > a theoretical or book knowledge about dhammas? Can it really ever be > known, I wonder? I think we read a lot of detail which only the Buddha or > a few key disciples could ever know. > > Isn't it more useful to understand what is apparent now? For example, > visible object is apparent, thinking is apparent, tangible object is > apparent. Is eye-base apparent? Through what door-way? Through the > mind-door, isn't it just thinking about eye-base and its composition of > rupas? You know Sarah, we have heard again and again that it is impossible to know certain things. I now think it is presumptive to tell another person that it is impossible for THEM to know those things just because I don't. If it is impossible to know, why mention them again and again in so many places (apparently those who listened benefited, what would prevent one from benefiting now?) if only a few would know. Unless one is a Buddha (or maybe one of those magnificent disciples), it is really impossible to tell the accumulations of others. Here's a brief description about a different school of thought that takes Vissudhimagga more literally than what A. Sujin is teaching (I am not vouching for one or another --- I am just saying that they are different. I think it will take me a few more years to resolve these issues). If you grab Visuddhimagga, and read about how the venerable suggested the practice to induce one toward the third level of vipassana nana, you might be as perplexed as I am about how those suggestions have anything to do with "knowing the characteristics of the nama and rupa now". For example, to increase the understanding of impermanence, the venerable suggests that you ponder the facts that the khandhas that existed in the previous life never got carried over to this life. Taking this backward to the first two levels of vipassana nanas, this school of thought argues that you do whatever studies you can to 1) To get over doubts/ignorance that there are only nama and rupa 2) To get over doubts/ignorance about the conditionalities of all things (including how past kammas influence the current phenomena --- just try to "cognize the characteristic" of past kammas!, or to connect the past kammas to the present ones, which Vissuddhimagga appears to suggest that you do). I think the two above objectives are explicitly mentioned in Visuddhimagga. And to do those, one not only needs to be aware of the SPECIFIC characteristics of realities that can be known to one, one also decomposes things (what A. Sujin would call thinking) into its primal elements regardless if those elements really appear to the person. In the eye example, one thinks: the eyes can be decomposed into 54 rupa elements, 24 brought about by fire, citta, and ahara, the other 30 brought by kammas. Note that when you make this analysis, even if the elements don't appear to you, you can still readily agree to at least some of these truths anyway, as you already intuitively accept it as truth because of your personal experiences or it just makes sense. For example, do you accept that how well your eyes work is a function of your past kammas? What proof have you got? Apparently, you don't really need the awareness of namas and rupas to accept this truth. How about the existence of phassa cetasikas itself? (we keep hearing that is impossible to know, but Visuddhimagga actually says it is one of the things most ready to appear!) Note that if you follow this train of thoughts, it is paramount that you remember the teachings well enough that what you think conforms to the truths. And you know, personally, I can see how seeing the truths in this way can help in getting over doubts/ignorance about the existence of only nama and rupa and the conditionalities of all things, all past kammas and all the things not appearing included. Understanding the characteristics of nama and rupa now is a fine model and it helps me increase my faiths in the Buddha's teachings for so many years (because it is apparently true, you can't argue with realities!), but you know, the more I read the texts, the more I struggle with how this model and the texts can be exactly one and the same. This is not just confined to Vissudhimagga, by the way, which makes me think that this model is not INCLUSIVE enough (do you remember the little bird that said "atthi, atthi" that the commentaries used as how even animals in the Kuru country practiced Satipatthana? ) I admit, though, that I am a long long way away to feel fully confident about what Satipatthana really is. I mentioned to you my study list: thorough review of Abhidhamma-sangaha, thorough study of Visuddhimagga (especially the last part), Netti, and Patisambhidhamagga. When I get there, I think I will have a better confidence about what Satipatthana is, but until then, I think the activity that best helps me is to study the texts. (And hopefully, Nina will get to this part of the Vissudhimagga soon --- I can't help but being inspired by that thread on Vissudhimaaga that has been going on since 2003). > > Yes, we do read lots of details on these `perspectives', but I think that > if we read or reflect on them with a recipe or coping approach that again > we easily go off-track. I would disagree with you here. If one does this by rote without increase in understanding, then it probably doesn't help as much as it could. You know, in other Samatha bhavana, such as the 32 body parts, one repeats the 32 parts by rote in the beginning, but then begins to consider how thinking about those parts in a particular way can bring peace/trigger peace in one's mind, and then one focuses on those parts more and more, and eventually focuses on only one part, and then none at all (but only on the uncleanliness). The process can work this way here as well, not all the items we remember help us: which one helps is based on accumulations. But by being able to remember them, one figures out which one helps (eventually), and when the accumulations change, the other ones that didn't help before may help now. I personally believe that memorization is a recipe to the ancient learning (recitals, samatha development, pali learning system, lives of the venerable ones --- there was a venerable one who stopped reciting after he reached arahatship: when asked, he said he no longer needed to recite --- he clearly didn't recite for the benefits of others). Of course, it is better to have sanna with wisdom, but do you think wisdom happens more often than sanna, or that we can have wisdom all the time? If somehow wisdom doesn't grow, then it is better to memorize what will help it grow, because when you memorize it, then you can ponder on the thing that you memorize, and when you ponder it repeatedly, especially with new information, then you may eventually understand it. I definitely doesn't propose that memory alone will bring you to the path and fruit, but I think we deemphasize the importance of good memory by always saying "isn't it better to have understanding?" -- - it is impossible to have understanding all the time (even an Arahat doesn't have understanding all the time), and it seems to me that saying this may be disrespectful to these learning systems invented by those venerable ones. > S: I'd like to have such a good memory, but I think that real wisdom is > far more precious. Think of Culapantaka (Little Wayman) who couldn't > remember anything his brother (an arahant) taught him, but eventually > listened to the Buddha and became an arahant with patisambhidas. And do you believe that he achieved the expertise in causes and effects, languages, and the usage of all three without in some lives or another, having good memories of the texts? These venerable ones who achieved patisambhidha were described as being master of all 3 tipitakas in the previous lives, even when they (apparently) didn't achieve the paths and fruits in those lives. I also muse that, the Arahat Mahapantaka, Culapantaka's brother, started teaching his brother by having him memorizing something even though it didn't help, but that maybe where all the monks that hadn't already fulfilled their perfections started. I guess if we were in his time and his elder and we told him, "Culapantaka, isn't it better to have understandings? Just disregard your brother", that would simply be outrageous. > S: I have confidence that if people have a good understanding of the > teachings they will be carried on and not vice versa. As I just wrote to > Icaro, if they are recited, memorized and passed on without any > understanding on anyone's part, I believe this will not help. The purpose > for study and reciting is surely only for the development of > understanding, not for gaining knowledge or memorization expertise? I think memory is a foundation of learning, and wisdom relies on those memory (I am a master of stating the obvious!). Without memory, there would be no wisdom, but without wisdom, there is still memory. Although lokuttara wisdom is the ultimate prize of Buddhism, I would not discourage people from memorizing the words of the Buddha, but I would tell them that we remember things for a purpose, and that is the understanding, and there is nothing wrong with memorization whatsoever, especially when understanding comes from it. kom 57356 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 9:59am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana .. vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m indriyabala Dear Connie (and Joop) - Your reply to Joop was a short one, but its information content is very high -- i.e. it is hard for me to penetrate to the true meanings, even after the "tasteless baby food joke" has been removed. :-)) I have some questions for you to consider -- if and when you have time to answer them. -- Where and when does 'hadaya rupa' arise ? -- If we can become 'aataapii sampajjaano satimaa' most of the waking moments, will that be sufficient to remove 'loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m'? Regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > > dear joop, tep, > > > Joop: What I'm looking for is a description of for example the > > mother-child relation using only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and > > conditions; an no sentimental conventional language. > > connie: namarupa & nutriment/aahaara. (snipped) > what's a chain > of bone alongside an ocean of tears and who is safe from the undertow of aasava? for me, there still arise loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m - avarice and sorrow regarding the world. > > peace, > connie > 57357 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: remarks. nilovg Dear Han, thank you for your kind post and willingness to discuss further. Thank you for your offer sending the Mahasi book, but I do not need it. I am taken in too much with Vis. studies and this list. I never have enough time even reading commentaries, there are many in my book case. Besides I am more interested in your own points of view. I mentioned the points to Lodewijk and he did not think they were easy topics. I take perhaps too much for granted, so it is good material for discussion, any time you think fit. Nina. op 01-04-2006 12:08 schreef han tun op hantun1@...:> =============================== : > Yes, I would be most happy and honoured to continue > discussions with you. I have always noted important > points from your posts. But please be patient with me > as I am still a very raw, unpolished material. 57358 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 10:44am Subject: Re: How to radiate metta .. Wait a minute !! indriyabala Dear Joop- How come you easily took Bhikkhu Bodhi's words for granted without verifying first if they were right? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear Han, Tep, Nina, all > >(snipped) > "It should be noted that a citta in its immediacy cannot become an > object, for the cognizer cannot cognize itself; but A CITTA in an > individual mental continuum CAN EXPERIENCE earlier cittas in that > same continuum as well as THE CITTAS OF OTHER BEINGS." (p.136; > capitals me) Q.E.D. ! > > Metta > > Joop > Warm regards, Tep ====== 57359 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 11:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Clinging to sanna of postures, phil nilovg Hi Phil, op 01-04-2006 02:30 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > I heard an interesting thing about a term that in Thai sounded > like "Perk Iliyabot" It is about how clinging to sanna of postures > interferes in some way with awareness of dhammas. ------ N: Iriyapada: posture. It must be pidbang, hide. Iriyapada pidbang dukkha. See Vis. Ch XXI, 3, about shifting postures when there is pain. We have to read the footnote [3] very carefully, otherwise we do not get the point which is: in the ultimate sense there is no posture, only impermanent rupas. The text explains actually that conditioned dhammas are subject to dukkha and it uses as an example that there is dukkha in each posture. As I understand this, this is figuratively speaking. The Vis. goes on: resolution of the compact: as elements, not a whole. Because of saññaa we remember that we are sitting, and we are forgetful of the fact that the body consists of rupas arising and falling away. It is the continuity, santati, that hides the arising and falling awya of rupas. Nina. 57360 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 0:14pm Subject: Re:what is sati. indriyabala Dear Nina - You said the right thing : >Nina: >Our discussions can become more fruitful and more relaxed, without frustrations, if we do not try to convince the other party. I remember that you wanted to convince me and tried in many posts, as you mentioned yourself, and then gave up. Tep: It is absolutely correct that frustrations would arise when one had tried hard but failed to convince "the other party". Yes. More fruitful and relaxed discussions can be expected from letting go. Thanks to DSG, you and Sarah in particular, for giving me the opportunity to test myself and learn to be humble. ......... >N: As paññaa grows, there will be more detachment, as shown by the Kundaliya Sutta, but also from the beginning a degree of detachment is indispensable. Tep: Perhaps the best thing one can do "at the beginning", when his mindfulness is weak, is to keep on reminding himself about the danger of clinging through tanha and ditthi. That reminder -- a recollection -- is helpful for cultivating sati. I see your point about the need to understand the "basic" sati, during the restraining of the six sense faculties. It is the mindfulness of a person who is training in virtues(siila) and cultivating generosity through daana, as you rightly said "A person cannot be generous when sati does not arise. He cannot refrain from harsh speech when sati does not arise." ...................... >Nina: >When sati arises it is aware of sound and at that moment there can be a little more understanding of its characteristic: it is a dhamma appearing through earsense. It can be understood as dhamma, a conditioned reality. It is not the voice of a person or the sound of wind, or a dog's barking, it can be known as just sound. In this way we can learn the difference between paramattha dhamma and conventional truth of person, wind, dog. Tep: Or, in other words, "noting with bare attention"? BTW I know very well how a dog's barking can cause dosa and lost of mindfulness in one who doesn't practice letting go with the bare attention that "it is just a sound". Last night my neighbor's dog barked loudly and continuously, very close to my bedroom, when I was trying to get some sleep. Yet, I was not disturbed and fell asleep a few minutes later. ............... >Nina: >Mindfulness of one object can occur without being able to predict the next moment, and this conditions a degree of detachment. What appears is conditioned, it has happened already, be it sati or forgetfulness, it has happened already. Nobody is master of this or that dhamma that appears. Understanding this leads to detachment, even if it is slight. Tep: Thanks, Nina. That reminds me of a favorite sutta in which our Greatest Teacher, the Buddha, taught a monk (Malunkyaputta) how to restrain the six sensing media by letting go. <"What do you think, Malunkyaputta: the forms cognizable via the eye that are unseen by you — that you have never before seen, that you don't see, and that are not to be seen by you: Do you have any desire or passion or love there?" ... The sounds cognizable via the ear...The aromas cognizable via the nose... The flavors cognizable via the tongue... The tactile sensations cognizable via the body... The ideas(dhamma) cognizable via the intellect(mano) that are uncognized by you — that you have never before cognized, that you don't cognize, and that are not to be cognized by you: Do you have any desire or passion or love there?"> This sensing media restraint with letting-go is very effective for completely withdrawing one's attention ("detaching") from a sensed object through any of the six doors. I think the same outcome can be expected from this sensing media restraining exercise or from what you suggested ( What appears is conditioned, it has happened already ...). Thank you very much for the Dhamma discussion on mindfulness. Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep (and James in passing), > (snipped) > Mindfulness of one object can occur without being able to predict the next moment, and this conditions a degree of detachment. What appears is > conditioned, it has happened already, be it sati or forgetfulness, it has happened already. Nobody is master of this or that dhamma that appears. > Understanding this leads to detachment, even if it is slight. > Nina. > 57361 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 2:17pm Subject: Re: Three Suttas about Atta ... Understandings indriyabala Dear Sarah (and all)- Now it's time to give a full reply to your exceptional post that deserves a special treatment. >S: Comments: >1. I don't believe the terms atta-ditthi and sakkaaya-ditthi are synonymous, but all sakkaya-ditthi are included in atta-ditthi. >2. There are obsessions (vipallaasa) which do not include any wrong views or self-views. Even the anagami still has the perversion of sukkha for dukkha and the anagami, still the perversion of subha for asubha without any wrong views or sakkaaya-ditthi. Tep: 1. I am not so sure either if 'atta-ditthi' is broader than 'sakkaaya-ditthi', but Nyanatiloka Dictionary states that they are the same. "Numerous speculative opinions and theories, which at all times have influenced and still are influencing mankind, are quoted in the sutta-texts. Amongst them, however, the wrong view which everywhere, and at all times, has most misled and deluded mankind is the personality-belief, the ego-illusion. This personality-belief (sakkaaya-ditthi), or ego-illusion (atta-ditthi), is of 2 kinds: eternity-belief and annihilation-belief. [endquote] T: Please also study the following excerpt from the famous Ledi Sayadaw's book : 'A Concise Description of the Advantages Arising Out of the Realisation of Anatta' by The Venerable Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw " If one can clearly perceive the characteristic of anatta, one attains the stage of the knowledge of sotapatti magga (path of the streamwinner) wherein atta-ditthi (ego delusion) or sakkaya-ditthi (personality belief) is totally eradicated. " Atta-ditthi is the head--the chief--of the old akusala kammas that thus accompany beings incessantly. As long as sakkaya-ditthi exists, these old akusala kammas are fiery and full of strength. [endquote] 2. Does the term 'vipallaasa' mean obsession? I do not think so. Let's find out more information. According to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 'anusaya' means obsession or underlying tendency["Monks, there are these seven obsessions. Which seven? (1) The obsession of sensual passion. (2) The obsession of resistance. (3) The obsession of views. (4) The obsession of uncertainty. (5) The obsession of conceit. (6) The obsession of passion for becoming. (7) The obsession of ignorance.]; 'vipallaasa' means perversion.['Constant' with regard to the inconstant is a perversion of perception, a perversion of mind, a perversion of view. 'Pleasant' with regard to the stressful... 'Self' with regard to not-self... 'Attractive' with regard to the unattractive is a perversion of perception, a perversion of mind, a perversion of view.] .................. >S: I recall that anuseti/anusayati, meaning `lies dormant' is from the same root as anusaya, meaning latent tendency. So here the sutta is not about the vipallaasas or about wrong views as such, but about the 7 anusayas towards various objects. Tep: Yes. It is about anasayas. ................. >S: I believe that this sutta [SN XXIII.2 Satta Sutta: A Being ] is referring to all kinds of clinging (i.e not just wrong view clinging) which need to be seen, understood and eradicated in order for there to be an end of becoming. Tep: You made a valid point! Many suttas are similar to this sutta in the sense that they look simple, yet there are implications that the careful reader must consider. The "end of becoming" is addressed in the second half of the sutta : "In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form. "You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, ... perception, ... fabrications, ...consciousness, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness — for the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding." ................. >S: There can be clinging with wrong view as you suggest, but also with conceit or just clinging without either. As I said (and as you know) there is still plenty of clinging to one's aggregates for a sotapanna when self view has been eradicated. Here, it is stressed that by understanding dhammas, the khandhas, as arising and passing away directly, all kinds of clinging/attachment are (eventually) eradicated. It's so useless to cling to any reality, any dhamma which falls away as soon as it has arisen. This is why understanding of realities leads to detachment. A being is a conventional term we use for the combination of the aggregates. When there is no more obsession, no more attachment, as you indicate, no more becoming. Tep: True, plenty of (finer) clinging remains after the three fetters are eradicated. True, when all 4 kinds of clinging(upadana) end, then there are no obsessions(7 anusayas). But, would you be kind enough to elaborate a bit on the following : Sarah: "Here, it is stressed that by understanding dhammas, the khandhas, as arising and passing away directly, all kinds of clinging/attachment are (eventually) eradicated." In particular, it would be very helpful if you can be clear about which kinds of understanding you are talking about, and how they are developed by the sotapanna and, also, by the arahant? Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > Thank you for addressing this post to me...I was going to write back > sooner and just say `great quotes', but then I decided to delve a little > more into them and as usual got side-tracked:) > >(snipped) > > Thankyou for helping me to consider these sutta extracts further with you. > I look forward to any more of your reflections on these or other suttas. > Please point out any errors in my logic as you see them. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= > 57362 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 2:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Clinging to sanna of postures, phil indriyabala Hi, Nina & Phil - I think I know what the word 'perk' in Thai means! It means abandon, forego, give up. Other Thai members: please correct me if I am incorrect. Thanks. Sincerely, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Phil, > op 01-04-2006 02:30 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > > > I heard an interesting thing about a term that in Thai sounded > > like "Perk Iliyabot" It is about how clinging to sanna of postures > > interferes in some way with awareness of dhammas. > ------ > N: Iriyapada: posture. It must be pidbang, hide. Iriyapada pidbang dukkha. 57363 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 3:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Suttas about Atta indriyabala Hi, Sarah (& Han, Nina, Ven. Samahita) - I also like your selected sutta a lot, although I am not totally clear about the neutral feeling and its correlation with avijja-nusaya. > S: I like BB's translation of the verses at the end, so I'd like to quote these too: > > "When one experiences pleasure, > If one does not understand feeling > The tendency to lust is present > For one not seeing the escape from it. > > When one experiences pain, > If one does not understand feeling > The tendency to aversion is present > For one not seeing the escape from it. > > The One of Broad Wisdom has taught > With reference to that peaceful feeling, > Neither-painful-nor-pleasant: > If one seeks delight even in this, > One is still not released from suffering. > > But when a bhikkhu who is ardent > Does not neglect clear comprehension, > Then that wise man fully understands > Feelings in their entirety. > > Having fully understood feelings, > He is taintless in this very life. > Standing in Dhamma, with the body's breakup > The Knowledge-master cannot be reckoned." ............ Tep : Please allow me to use questions to initiate a discussion. 1. The neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling is neutral -- it does not make a person joyful or sad or unhappy: it is just like nothing. Then why does one "seek delight" in it? I wouldn't. 2. How and why does the feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain cause ignorance-obsession (avijja-nusaya) in a person? MN 148 provides an answer: 'If, when touched by a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then one's ignorance-obsession gets obsessed.' 3. Please suggest how to fully understand the neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling "in its entirety". Warm regards, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep & all, > > --- sarah abbott wrote: > (snipped) > ***** > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s for anyone new to the list, lots on the 'anusayas' under this heading in 'Useful Posts' in the files section. > ======= > 57364 From: Eddie Lou Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. eddielou_us Hi, Sarah, Glad to be some help and got recognized as a DSG member. Quite a timing, I was to tell you of my receipt (received just yesterday) of the book 'Survey on Paramattha Dhammas' by Sujin Boriharnwanaket. Thanks very much and a lot of info to absorb. Thanks also to Sukin, can you please also let her know. Your comment pointer to ..a quote of A.Sujin's which I heard on a tape yesterday and liked a lot: "Anything which we think can help moves us away from the reality of this moment.".. One instance I can think of is when one is on a phone or cell phone, especially more profound while driving, one is shifted from driving moment of reality, to that of phone conversation. Thx for the encouragement, Sarah. Metta, Eddie sarah abbott wrote: Hi Eddie, I'm enjoying all your reflections on this and other threads:) ... Sarah p.s Did you receive your copy of 'Survey' by A.Sujin? Would anyone else like a (free) copy? (pls let me or Sukin or Nina know if so). ====== 57365 From: "dhammanando_bhikkhu" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 5:57pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! dhammanando_... Dear Sarah & Kom, > Do either of you have any comment or knowledge on whether > the ordination of Sariputta's brother, Rewatta, was included > in one of the exceptions mentioned in the translation Ven D. > gave? No, there was no need to resort to any loophole, for the parental consent rule did not yet exist. It was laid down in the seventh year of the Sasana, as a result of Suddhodana's grief at the going forth of Rahula. Revata's going forth had taken place years earlier. Best wishes, Dhammanando 57366 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Apr 1, 2006 10:15pm Subject: Re: How to radiate metta .. Wait a minute !! jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > > Dear Joop- > > How come you easily took Bhikkhu Bodhi's words for granted without > verifying first if they were right? > Dear Tep You are right with this question, I think I can verify but I'm not sure what kind of verification you accept and what kind you don't. For example (1) the phenomenological method: I know I experience the citta of somebody else (till now I did give that the name intuition) (2) the empirical method: experiments with tests in the way of psychological science. (3) logic inference from the body of knowledge of the Abhidhamma: this is what BB did (3) Sutta quotes; that will be (in your eyes, I think) the best way but you know like me that the Buddha did not use this kind of language. So I had to accept you are not convinced. Of course my honest answer had to be: I took BB's word so easily because I liked the conclusion. Metta Joop > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > > > Dear Han, Tep, Nina, all > > > >(snipped) > > "It should be noted that a citta in its immediacy cannot become an > > object, for the cognizer cannot cognize itself; but A CITTA in an > > individual mental continuum CAN EXPERIENCE earlier cittas in that > > same continuum as well as THE CITTAS OF OTHER BEINGS." (p.136; > > capitals me) Q.E.D. ! > > > > Metta > > > > Joop > > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > ====== > 57367 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 0:35am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > .... > > accumulating merits and good doings and, by this way, gaining the > > right to hear the true dhamma. > > Don´t worry: all the bhikkhus recognizes in this kind of discuss > of > > yours that basic frustation that plagues all of us in some part of > > the buddhistic path. That´s normal. > > > > LOL! Okay, whatever. I expected this response. Honestly, I think > you have a few screws loose (actually, more than a few). > > Metta, > James > Dear James In # 56827 you wrote: "Instead, you answered and then gave him a lashing about his questioning. Why answer? I think it is because of ego. So often we want to protect our egos in a forum like this: "What will the others think of me if I don't answer? Will they think I am stupid or something? Will Suan get the satisfaction of thinking he has beaten me? I won't let down my `admiring public' and I won't let Suan beat me! I am going to answer but also let Suan know what a jerk he is! That way, it is win/win for ME!" (I am not saying that you thought in this fashion. I know that you are quite free from ego ;-)) In a forum like this, with so many people watching and not everyone has the best intentions, we have to be so careful of our egos getting in the way of decent communication." That was very wise of you! Metta Joop 57368 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:what is sati. nilovg Hi Tep, op 01-04-2006 22:14 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > Tep: Perhaps the best thing one can do "at the beginning", when his > mindfulness is weak, is to keep on reminding himself about the danger > of clinging through tanha and ditthi. That reminder -- a recollection > -- is helpful for cultivating sati. ------- N: Perhaps we can learn little by little when there is not mindfulness but some clinging, such as clinging to understanding, to mindfulness. In that way we can learn that it just arises, that it is conditioned already. We do not need to reason about it: this is a danger, instead we come to understand it as a dhamma. If we remind ourselves of the danger it may be only thinking, or we may have an idea of: "I do not want this.' Then again the idea of self may be strong. I use the word may be, because I do not know with what kind of citta someone reminds himself. -------- >> Nina: >> When sati arises it is aware of sound and at that moment there can be > a little more understanding of its characteristic: it is a dhamma > appearing through earsense. > > Tep: Or, in other words, "noting with bare attention"? ------- N: This is not enough: understanding it as a kind of ruupa. If there is only sati but understanding is not being developed it is not very meaningful. Noting (here we have one of Han's points!) and bare attention may be thinking, it depends what someone means by these expressions. --------- T: BTW I know very well how a dog's barking can cause dosa and lost of > mindfulness in one who doesn't practice letting go with the bare > attention that "it is just a sound". Last night my neighbor's dog > barked loudly and continuously, very close to my bedroom, when I was > trying to get some sleep. Yet, I was not disturbed and fell asleep a > few minutes later. > ............... N: Very good. Lodewijk says, exemplary. I am very sensitive for neighbour's sounds, like a washing machine at night, and I cannot help having strong dosa. This way of reminding: it is only sound is good. We may not yet be aware of it but at least the intellectual understanding can help. Khun Sujin would say: is our aim to have less dosa or to have understanding? She is right, it should be understanding, but if I am honest, I still like less dosa. But I also know that it is best to develop right understanding. And I cling to having less dosa, it feels better. If we learn: it is only sound, a conditioned dhamma, by attending to its characteristic without naming it sound, this helps understanding. And also dosa: it is only a conditioned dhamma, it has been accumulated. I can notice or note that I have dosa, but then it is still my dosa as Kh. Sujin would say. It is not mindfulness of its characteristic. --------- T: the Buddha, taught a monk (Malunkyaputta) how to > restrain the six sensing media by letting go. <"What do you think, > Malunkyaputta: the forms cognizable via the eye that are unseen by you > — that you have never before seen, that you don't see, and that are > not to be seen by you: Do you have any desire or passion or love > there?" .... > This sensing media restraint with letting-go is very effective for > completely withdrawing one's attention ("detaching") from a sensed > object through any of the six doors. I think the same outcome can be > expected from this sensing media restraining exercise or from what you > suggested ( What appears is conditioned, it has happened already ...). ---------- N: This seems to me a higher stage of insight: nibbidaa or revulsion. This is the function of paññaa that has been developed to that stage. But for now, I think that we should not withdraw from any object that impinges on the six doors. These are to be understood as rupa or nama. It is a different matter in samatha. Here one concentrates with paññaa on a meditation subject in order to subdue the himdrances. Nina. 57369 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple nilovg Dear Kom, thank you for your interesting post to Sarah. I am glad you are inspired by the Vis. thread. Larry and I will not come beyond Ch XVII, this has 344 paras. We do about two a week and there are pauses. It will take us more than two years and I understood that Larry finds this sufficient. But one never knows! It depends on Larry. We can still discuss what comes after that, especially about insight stages. You referred to the many rupas and aspects that can be discerned re the eyesense. It shows the Buddha's great wisdom. His great disciples could realize many dhammas that we, in this time, would find extremely hard. At this time there are only neyya puggala, those who need much guidance and explanations before they can attain enlightenment, and pada parama, those who understand only the theory. The Visuddhimagga XVIII, 13, speaks about the coarse rupas, the sense objects and sense-bases which can each be produced by four factors (kamma etc,), and also about sex, life faculty, and sound, and states: Thus rupas that can be realized by insight are limited. Not all ruupas are suitable to be directly known. And of course, if we try to have awareness and direct understanding of what does not appear, one at a time, through one of the six doors, we try in vain. Nevertheless, I think it useful to study details like rupas produced by the four factors, it is a good foundation knowledge of the many conditions that operate for each dhamma that arises. It counteracts our inherent tendency to try to manipulate dhammas according to our will. As to reciting you discussed, as I said, it is very personal. I am not good at learning Pali texts by heart, but sometimes when walking I made an effort, and if one knows some Pali it helps to consider more the meaning of a sutta. One does not run quickly over the sentences, but goes very, very slowly. This is always good, at least for me. I also find that the English text is not as good as the Pali, it looses some impact. This is just my personal impression: Pali is so direct, so straight. I do not have to convince you of learning Pali, but maybe this is of some interest to others: Rob K has on his web an article about the usefulness of Pali: Nina. op 01-04-2006 19:07 schreef Kom Tukovinit op kom@...: > I admit, though, that I am a long long way away to feel fully confident > about what Satipatthana really is. I mentioned to you my study list: > thorough review of Abhidhamma-sangaha, thorough study of > Visuddhimagga (especially the last part), Netti, and > Patisambhidhamagga. When I get there, I think I will have a better > confidence about what Satipatthana is, but until then, I think the activity > that best helps me is to study the texts. (And hopefully, Nina will get to > this part of the Vissudhimagga soon --- I can't help but being inspired by > that thread on Vissudhimaaga that has been going on since 2003). 57370 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 1:02am Subject: Detached from Feeling ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Detached from Feeling one gains Immunity towards Suffering! The Blessed Buddha once said to some sick bhikkhus: If one keen on mental training feels a pleasant feeling, then he understands: 'As this pleasure is impermanent, it is neither to be clung to, nor indulged in...' If he feels a painful feeling, he also understands and observes: 'As this pain is transient, it is neither to be clung to, nor engaged in...' If he feels a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he similarly notes: 'As this neutral feeling is passing, it is neither to be clung to, nor delighted in...' When he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it as if detached from it! When he feels a painful feeling, he feels it as if detached from it! When he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it as if detached from it! When he feels a feeling terminating with the body, he understands: 'I feel a feeling terminating with the body...' (all bodily feeling!) When he feels a feeling terminating with life, he understands: 'I feel a feeling terminating with life...' (all mental feeling!) He understands: With the breakup of this body, at the exhaustion of this life, any feeling, neither being delighted in, nor clung to, will cool down right there... Just as, bhikkhus, an oil lamp burns depending on the oil and the wick, & with the exhaustion of the oil and the wick, the flame is extinguished through lack of fuel, similarly here, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu feels a feeling terminating with the body... terminating with life... He understands: With the breakup of this body, at the very exhaustion of this life, all that is felt, not being indulged in, will vanish right here... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [211-3] section 36: Feeling. Vedana. The Sick-Ward. 7. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> 57371 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 2:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:what is sati. hantun1 Dear Nina (and Tep), Nina: When sati arises it is aware of sound and at that moment there can be a little more understanding of its characteristic: it is a dhamma appearing through earsense. Tep: Or, in other words, "noting with bare attention"? Nina: This is not enough: understanding it as a kind of ruupa. If there is only sati but understanding is not being developed it is not very meaningful. Noting (here we have one of Han's points!) and bare attention may be thinking, it depends what someone means by these expressions. ---------------------------- Han: This is one of the points that I am not used to – not used to the possibility that “noting” and “bare attention” may be just thinking. I have been taught to “note” everything that arises: to take note of the in-breath and out-breath, or to take note of the wandering mind with the noting mind etc. Since this is a new experience for me I will not be able to join the discussion, but I will closely follow your discussions. Thank you very much. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote to Tep: > >> Nina: > >> When sati arises it is aware of sound and at that > moment there can be > > a little more understanding of its characteristic: > it is a dhamma > > appearing through earsense. > > > > Tep: Or, in other words, "noting with bare > attention"? > ------- > N: This is not enough: understanding it as a kind of > ruupa. If there is only > sati but understanding is not being developed it is > not very meaningful. > Noting (here we have one of Han's points!) and bare > attention may be > thinking, it depends what someone means by these > expressions. > --------- 57372 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 2:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! ken_aitch Hi Joop, Thanks for answering my questions. ------------ (1) … are you saying that namas and rupas are only theory and not absolutely real? (2) If that is so then what, if anything, is real? Joop: (1) Yes, that's my idea now; and (2) nothing, I guess And when you think the term "theory' is too meagre to live with, I can also use the term 'raft', like the Buddha used that too. ----------- Your answer reminds me of Ven. Thanissaro's teaching on the anatta doctrine. He says anatta is not really true: it is just a device for preventing meditators from thinking stressful thoughts (about existence and non-existence). I don't believe that, and I certainly don't believe the entire Dhamma is just a device for crossing over. ----------- (3) In your opinion, does the Abhidhamma take the same line that you take? That is, does it say that namas and rupas are only a theoretical model? Joop: (3) No; -------------- I am glad to hear that. It is better to understand the texts and disagree, than to misunderstand and agree. ---------------------- 4) Or does it say (mistakenly, in your opinion) that they are absolutely real? Joop: (4) I'm not sure Abhidhamma is saying anything about but; the interpretation of Nyanaponika Thera (as I understand his term phenomenologic) is: not real; and of Bhikkhu Bodhi (prefering the ontologic strand): real) ------------------------ I didn't know that about Nyanaponika Thera, but I will take your word for it. ----------------------------------- (5) Is absolute reality the presently arisen namas and rupas, or is it something else? What could that something else be? Joop: Two answers. The first is: I am not sure of everything, I think I still have too much opinions. The second is a quote of the (Mahayanian) Heart Sutra: "… seeing the five skandhas to be empty of nature. Form is emptiness; emptiness also is form. Emptiness is no other than form; form is no other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are emptiness. Thus, Shariputra, all dharmas are emptiness. There are no characteristics. There is no birth and no cessation. There is no impurity and no purity. There is no decrease and no increase. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness, there is no form, no feeling, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no appearance, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no dharmas, no eye dhatu up to no mind dhatu, no dhatu of dharmas, no mind consciousness dhatu; no ignorance, no end of ignorance up to no old age and death, no end of old age and death; no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no non-attainment." ---------------------------------- Maybe I am trying too hard to see things the way I want them, but I can interpret that sutta (sutra) in a way that does not deny the absolute reality of dhammas. It is talking about emptiness (anatta- lakkhana). In emptiness there is no substance, no dhammas, no arising and falling away etc. But emptiness is just one characteristic of dhammas: in all other respects they do have absolute existence. But, as I said, maybe I am trying too hard. And maybe Mahayana is a lost cause after all. :-) ------------------------------ (6) <. . . . .> what is actually happening when insight is being developed. What is going on at such moments that happens at no other time? > Joop: As far as I know TG has not (yet) answered; but it's strange that Jon does not say first what is happening with him leading to his insights. -------------------------------- I don't think Jon has claimed to have had insights, so it is not surprising that he has not said what happened at the time. However, he has repeatedly expressed his understanding of insight - as in his current discussion with TG. Insight occurs when a paramattha dhamma becomes the direct object of panna. However, if paramattha dhammas do not really exist, then insight must have some other meaning. --------------------------------------------------------- Joop: All I can answer (and my path is not yet finished) is: the conviction that all, including any conviction, is emptiness. ---------------------------------------------------------- OK, but can you see there is a big difference between, "All realities have emptiness as one of their characteristics," and, "There is only emptiness?" Ken H 57373 From: Dhammanando Bhikkhu Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 4:13am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. dhammanando_... Dear Sarah, > This was a quote of A.Sujin's which I heard on a tape > yesterday and liked a lot: > > "Anything which we think can help moves us away from the > reality of this moment." Therefore, if we think the above quote can help us, it will move us away from the reality of this moment. > I think it's really worth reflecting on, Yes, provided we don't think this will be of any help. If we DO think it will help then we should avoid reflecting on it like the plague, for it will only move us away from the reality of this moment. ;-)) (Sorry .... couldn't resist) Best wishes, Dhammanando 57374 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 4:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) matheesha333 Hi Cerini, This reply is probably late by DSG standards. > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > >J:As I have said before, where's the kusala in focussing > > on an earth kasina (or 'watching' the breath, for that matter)? > > At least, dosa and lobha are put away for some time. And I think > that you also create an inclination to alobha and adosa, becuase > in the first hours following the meditation, sensual impressions > keep cooler and don't cause defilements to burn as in days without > formal meditation at all. This seems my experience, at least. M: This is my experience as well. > >J: Samatha moments can occur in daily life, spontaneously, without any > > 'input' from us, so there is no need to do anything special for them > > to > > arise. > > Maybe I'm wrong, but I won't call "samatha" those moments of > spontaneus calm in daily life. Or, at least, I won't call every one > of them "samatha" of 100% quality. I think they're just moments > of calm, without any "deeper implication". M: I agree. What one-pointdeness is there when compared to the state of mind after samatha meditation? It is like saying chewing on bread is sweet - it might be ever so slightly after a few minutes - but compare that with tasting sugar. metta Matheesha 57375 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 5:47am Subject: Re: Hello - moving to the second temple matheesha333 Hi Nina, N: At > this time there are only neyya puggala, those who need much guidance and > explanations before they can attain enlightenment, and pada parama, those > who understand only the theory. > M: Since we don't know this for sure, it might be better not to make such statements don't you think? There might be people out there who are truly capable, and they should not be discouraged. People do look up to you, so it is important not to leave them feeling hopeless. There was this belief in sri lanka 50 years ago that arahathood in this lifetime was impossible and everyone would make determinations to become enlightened with the maitreya buddha (the next one). Such talk has almost completely faded away and would be considered outdated there because of the great strides made in rediscovering buddhism and its practices. I'm sorry if this looks like nitpicking, but I felt it was important to state this. Hope you are keeping well, with metta Matheesha 57376 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 5:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Suttas about Atta matheesha333 Hi Mr.Indriyabala! T:> 1. The neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling is neutral -- it does not > make a person joyful or sad or unhappy: it is just like nothing. Then > why does one "seek delight" in it? I wouldn't. M: But you do! You have upadana towards your kandas! If some tried to kill you, you wouldnt want to die! You would be afraid to loose consciousness. You LOVE those neutral moments of being alive and conscious and if you could, you would want them to continue. Bhava thanha I think.:) > 2. How and why does the feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain cause > ignorance-obsession (avijja-nusaya) in a person? > > MN 148 provides an answer: 'If, when touched by a feeling of neither > pleasure nor pain, one does not discern, as it actually is present, > the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that > feeling, then one's ignorance-obsession gets obsessed.' M: Does continued state of avijja, then strengthen that avijja? > 3. Please suggest how to fully understand the > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling "in its entirety". M: sati and sampajanna. bare awareness and clear comprehension, satipattaana, vipassana, understanding the present moment, call it what you will. It comes with a Buddha's guarantee. How much more do you need? with metta Matheesha 57377 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 6:36am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! For Icaro and All. buddhatrue Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear James > > In # 56827 you wrote: > "Instead, you answered and then > gave him a lashing about his questioning. Why answer? I think it > is because of ego. So often we want to protect our egos in a forum > like this: "What will the others think of me if I don't answer? > Will they think I am stupid or something? Will Suan get the > satisfaction of thinking he has beaten me? I won't let down > my `admiring public' and I won't let Suan beat me! I am going to > answer but also let Suan know what a jerk he is! That way, it is > win/win for ME!" (I am not saying that you thought in this fashion. > I know that you are quite free from ego ;-)) In a forum like this, > with so many people watching and not everyone has the best > intentions, we have to be so careful of our egos getting in the way > of decent communication." > > That was very wise of you! ;-)) Okay, so you got me. But I also wrote in that post: "And I speak from experience because EGO has led me to make a complete ass of myself on several occasions! ;-))" And this instance of my being impolite to Icaro is no exception to me making a complete ass of myself. I think I will go back to being quiet again...I get into less trouble that way. ;-)) > > Metta > > Joop > Metta, James Metta, James 57378 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) jonoabb Hi Pablo (Apologies for the slow reply again) Pablo wrote: >hi Mateesha ,Jonothan and Icaro >I received many valuable inputs from this thread, thanks. > >Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > >>But a much more important issue, I think, and one that may interest >>Pablo, is whether a particular level of samatha is required in >>order for the development of awareness to begin. My understanding >>is that the answer to that question is clearly 'No'. In which case >>I'd like to suggest that there is more to be gained by discussing >>the development of satipatthana than of samatha, speaking in >>general terms. >> > >I think I should be happy of this . Some manuals of meditations >infact seem to suggest the idea that vipassana should begin >after having reached a certain level of samatha/jhana, to avoid >the risk of having to notice wordling concepts instead of >ultimate thruths. >The method I'm following now is based on Mahasy Sayadaw 's teachings >and it agrees with your opinion. >I'm noticing this thing anyway : that when I go on noticing >dhammas for a long while, calm begins to appear and after some time >of having this calm going on with the noticing process >anapanasati takes the place of the activity of noticing, as >if arising dhammas were become too weak to be of interest. > You mention a practice of noticing dhammas, as a means of developing insight (vipassana). On my reading of the teachings, the development of insight occurs when any presently arisen dhamma is directly experienced by conscious that is accompanied by panna (the mental factor that is 'wisdom' or 'understanding'). Now it is an essential part of the teaching that all dhammas (other than Nibbana) are conditioned, and that they arise only as and when the conditions for their arising are fulfilled. (That, after all, is the meaning of 'conditioned'.) The mental factor of panna is itself one such conditioned dhamma. It's arising will depend on all the conditions necessary for its arising to be fulfilled. There are some suttas that mention what these conditions are, and other suttas that describe the process whereby panna comes to be developed to the level of enlightenment. But to my knowledge, these conditions do not include the kind of deliberate 'practice' that is suggested by the idea of noticing dhammas Dhammas can only be directly experienced, or noticed, by panna. So there is a problem here. There cannot in fact be the noticing of dhammas unless panna has been developed. I believe this means that what we take to be the noticing of dhammas is really only a form of focussing attention on what we think (from having read or heard about them) dhammas to be. >Usually it's a situation which doesn't last soo much (one - two >minutes at all), and then some strong defilement breaks in >causing the noticing process to restart. But I feel that returning >to the noticing preocess is something like a fall from a more >refined bhavana to a coarser one. The omen it's like if vipassana- >bhavana evolves into samatha-bhavana spontaneusly. >Or at least that's the opinion I'm currently experiencing >about it. May it be not totally wrong or am I falling into ditthi ? > > We are all falling into ditthi from time to time. The best antidote to this is to keep considering the words of the teachings, as explained in the ancient commentaries, and to never assume that we are beyond wrong view and wrong practice. Jon 57379 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 6:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: >>The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with >>enlightenment. >> > >James: The ending of dukkha for who? Who or what experiences dukkha >when there is no self? If the arahant realizes that there is no >self, who then experiences dukkha? > As I said in my message to Larry, dukkha is not something that is 'experienced'. It is an aspect, or 'characteristic', of dhammas, and as such it is something that is seen more and more clearly as insight is developed. Only the arahant has developed panna to a level that fully penetrates the truth of dukkha. To my reading of the teachings, the characteristic of dukkha be comes apparent only when insight has been developed to a certain stage beyond the first stage of knowing the difference between namas and rupas. Until then it can be understood only at an intellectual level. >Furthermore, the Buddha taught: > >"And this, monks is the noble truth of the origination of dukkha: >the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion >& delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for >sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming." > >Are you saying that an arahant hasn't eliminated craving until >parinibbana? > The arahant has eliminated all craving and hence the cause for further rebirth in samsara. But as long as his life in samsara continues, there will still be for him the arising of dhammas that have the nature of being 'dukkha'. >The Buddha further taught: > >"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading >to the cessation of dukkha: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path:..." > >So if arahant hasn't eliminated dukkha until parinibbana, why didn't >the Buddha say that? Why did the Buddha said that the Noble >Eightfold Path will lead to the cessation of dukkha? > The development of the NEP leads to arahantship, and this in turn to Parinibbana. I think it is clear from the suttas that even for the Buddha himself all conditioned dhammas are 'dukkha'. When he said that rupas (for example) are dukkha, he did not qualify that statement to exempt those who had become fully enlightened. Jon 57380 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 6:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) jonoabb Hi Eric Good to see you back again. ericlonline wrote: >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > >>The reason I queried it was because I couldn't see any connection >>between the experience of jhana and saddha in the teachings. Any >>thoughts of your own? >> >> > >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel277.html > > Thanks for the reference to the Upanisa Sutta from SN (trans by Bh Bodhi). The original comment I was responding to was that the attainment of jhana was a condition for the development or increase of saddha. I do not see anything in the sutta to that effect. What it says is that 'faith' (saddha) is a supporting condition for 'joy' (pamojja) and, further up the chain, that 'concentration' (samadhi) is a supporting condition for 'knowledge and vision of things as they are' (yathabhutañanadassana). At the end of this post is a copy of the translator's summary of the factors mentioned in the sutta, each of which is said to be a supporting condition for the succeeding factor in the list. >Also noteworthy... >Notice where 'real' insight occurs, not >until after concentration is developed. >So if a Buddhist does not cultivate >concentration (jhana) how can they >even begin to talk about insight? > > The terms 'concentration' (samadhi) and 'jhana' are not the same (although in some contexts samadhi can mean jhana). Jhana consciousness is attained by the development of samatha ('tranquillity', a form of kusala) to a high degree, while 'concentration' is a mental factor that accompanies cittas of all kinds including samatha/jhana cittas and insight/enlightenment cittas, as well as akusala cittas. To my understanding, the concentration that is a supporting condition for the attainment of enlightenment is the concentration that arises with the development of awareness/insight. Jon >From the notes at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel277.html (Mundane Order) Ignorance (avijja) Kamma formations (sankhara) Consciousness (viññana) Mentality-materiality (namarupa) Sixfold sense base (salayatana) Contact (phassa) Feeling (vedana) Craving (tanha) Clinging (upadana) Existence (bhava) Birth (jati) Suffering (dukkha) (Transcendental Order) Faith (saddha) Joy (pamojja) Rapture (piti) Tranquillity (passaddhi) Happiness (sukha) Concentration (samadhi) Knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathabhutañanadassana) Disenchantment (nibbida) Dispassion (viraga) Emancipation (vimutti) Knowledge of destruction of the cankers (asavakkhaye ñana) 57381 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 7:05am Subject: Re: How to radiate metta .. Wait a minute !! indriyabala Dear Joop - Thank you for the elaboration you have given me. > > Dear Joop- > > > > How come you easily took Bhikkhu Bodhi's words for granted without > > verifying first if they were right? > > > > Dear Tep > > You are right with this question, I think I can verify but I'm not > sure what kind of verification you accept and what kind you don't. Tep: Without any doubt you are an honest person! >Joop: > For example > (1) the phenomenological method: I know I experience the citta of > somebody else (till now I did give that the name intuition) Tep: That is only your perception of the person's thinking. > (2) the empirical method: experiments with tests in the way of > psychological science. Tep: That may be the most useless time-consuming way to find out. > (3) logic inference from the body of knowledge of the Abhidhamma: > this is what BB did. Tep: That's his opinion based on his understanding of the Abhidhamma. > (4) Sutta quotes; that will be (in your eyes, I think) the best way > but you know like me that the Buddha did not use this kind of > language. > Tep: You are right! So we we should pay most attention to His "kind of language", I think. > So I had to accept you are not convinced. Of course my honest answer > had to be: I took BB's word so easily because I liked the conclusion. > Tep: Your answer is sincere and honest, indeed. Thanks. Sincerely, Your humble friend Tep. ===== 57382 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 7:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) scottduncan2 Dear Jon (et al), May I please try to enter your conversation? "But a much more important issue, I think, . . . is whether a particular level of samatha is required in order for the development of awareness to begin. My understanding is that the answer to that question is clearly 'No'. In which case I'd like to suggest that there is more to be gained by discussing the development of satipatthana than of samatha, speaking in general terms. "On my reading of the teachings, the development of insight occurs when any presently arisen dhamma is directly experienced by conscious that is accompanied by panna (the mental factor that is 'wisdom' or 'understanding'). "Now it is an essential part of the teaching that all dhammas (other than Nibbana) are conditioned, and that they arise only as and when the conditions for their arising are fulfilled. (That, after all, is the meaning of 'conditioned'.) "The mental factor of panna is itself one such conditioned dhamma. It's arising will depend on all the conditions necessary for its arising to be fulfilled. There are some suttas that mention what these conditions are, and other suttas that describe the process whereby panna comes to be developed to the level of enlightenment. But to my knowledge, these conditions do not include the kind of deliberate 'practice' that is suggested by the idea of noticing dhammas. "Dhammas can only be directly experienced, or noticed, by panna. So there is a problem here. There cannot in fact be the noticing of dhammas unless panna has been developed. I believe this means that what we take to be the noticing of dhammas is really only a form of focussing attention on what we think (from having read or heard about them)dhammas to be." In listening to the recordings of the sessions with A. Sujin (and thank you very much for making these available) I heard you and the others to have been discussing this matter. I happen to meditate on a daily basis. I gather that this is the case because of the particular set of accumulations which condition this. I am struck, in listening to the recordings, that there is no one who meditates and that "meditation" cannot be misunderstood as an act which, by conscious direction, can cause the arising of anything. It may be a fact that my getting up each day to meditate, if understood properly, is a function of other conditions. I gather that a correct understanding of the act of meditation I find myself doing would be that it is so because of accumulations. I then, perhaps, find that I am able to "meditate" with right view, I guess (if this also happens to arise out of conditions). This would mean, to me, that the act is a chance which arises to allow for concentration to arise, to be cultivated, to be accumulated - not by will or wanting it but merely because it is given to me that such is the way of it now. Then, I wonder further, perhaps the distinction made between practise with meditation or without is a false one. If there is no self who meditates or who causes to arise sati, pa.n.na, or any other cetasika, then all of the time can be devoted to the cultivation of these factors. Whether one finds that one sits for periods or not, apparently pa.n.na, for example, arises wherever and whenever conditions are conducive to its arising. Since I can't help that I find meditation to be something I do, then perhaps someone else can't help that it is not. What if it arises that I no longer sit? Or that someone suddenly finds it important to start? "The man discreet, on virtue planted firm, In intellect and intuition trained; The brother ardent and discriminant: 'Tis he may from this tangle disembroil. "What is meant therein is, that there remains nothing for 'the man' to do in regard to that wisdom by means of which he is said to be 'discreet,' for his wisdom has been made perfect in virtue of kamma done in a previous existence. And in 'ardent and discriminant' it is meant that he is to be persevering by means of the said energy, and comprehending by means of wisdom; and establishing himself in virtue, cultivate calm and insight indicated by way of intellect (or mind) and intuition (or wisdom)," (The Path of Purity, pp. 4-5, Pe Maung Tin, trans.). Please correct this view I've expressed. Sincerely, Scott. 57383 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 8:45am Subject: [dsg] Re:what is sati. .. Mental Noting indriyabala Hi, Nina (Han and othe DSG friends)- It is greatly beneficial to discuss how 'sati' should be trained "at the beginning", as you have stated often that (even after 40+ years of Dhamma study) you are still a beginner. So it always makes sense for us to talk from where we stand. {:>)) Now you have full attention of another beginner, that's me. I am always a beginner because the dhamma in me arises and then falls away, all the time -- like a slippery eel that I can hold steadily only for a quick moment. Well, until I learn how to put that "eel" away in a secured container, I will have to pick it up over and over again. BTW It might be a discouragement to new beginners in Buddhism (both pariyatti & patipatti) that even the exeptional Buddhist and Abhidhamma scholar, Nina Van Gorkom, does not yet have mindfulness in every moment ! >Nina: >We do not need to reason about it: this is a danger, instead we come to understand it as a dhamma. If we remind ourselves of the danger it may be only thinking, or we may have an idea of: "I do not want this.' Then again the idea of self may be strong. Tep: That's a good point. Now, how about realizing a danger without making any attempt to reason or say 'Oh, I must remind myself of the danger'? For example, seeing a hot plate we immediately realize the danger of getting burnt. Immediately, mindfulness arises to be careful not to touch it with a bare hand. Analogous to the "hot plate" is a "sensual pleasure" <'Since he does not seek delight in sensual pleasure, the latent tendency to lust for pleasant feeling does not grow deeper. He understands as it really is, the cause, fading away, satisfaction, *danger*, and the escape in the case of feelings.' from Bhikkhu Samahita's Message #57325> ...................... >N: >If there is only sati but understanding is not being developed it is not very meaningful. Noting (here we have one of Han's points!) and bare attention may be thinking, it depends what someone means by these expressions. >Han (message #57371): >I have been taught to "note" everything that arises: to take note of the in-breath and out-breath, or to take note of the wandering mind with the noting mind etc. Since this is a new experience for me I will not be able to join the discussion, but I will closely follow your discussions. Tep: After having been a member of DSG for over three years now, I know well the great advantage of understanding that sati can also accompany akusala-citta. Yes, noting in some uninstructed persons may be just "thinking" without a clear understanding (no paññaa). But, the kind of noting that Han has kindly advised is indeed very meaningul and useful. .............. >N: >Khun Sujin would say: is our aim to have less dosa or to have understanding? Tep: Khun Sujin is a wise person. The moment we realize that citta is associated with dosa -- that is a "noting" to me. But the reminder that "our aim is to have understanding" is a thinking, I guess. ............. >N: >If we learn: it is only sound, a conditioned dhamma, by attending to its characteristic without naming it sound, this helps understanding. And also dosa: it is only a conditioned dhamma, it has been accumulated. Tep: I agree that "attending to" the characteristics of a phenomenon helps understanding -- that attention clearly indicates unshakable mindfulness. We should discuss "accumulation" in depth later. ........... >N: >I can notice or note that I have dosa, but then it is still my dosa as Kh. Sujin would say. It is not mindfulness of its characteristic. Tep: True. That's a great point, Nina. However, a correct noting of dosa when it arises and when it fades away depends a great deal on mindfulness. It is noting with discernment, which is the same as what the Buddha taught on contemplating citta with/without dosa in DN 22. <'When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion.'> ............ >N: >I think that we should not withdraw from any object that impinges on the six doors. These are to be understood as rupa or nama. It is a different matter in samatha. Here one concentrates with paññaa on a meditation subject in order to subdue the himdrances. Tep: You mean one at a time (since each impingement does not last long enough)? Now, about concentration "with paññaa on a meditation subject" -- can you give a sutta reference on this important point for me, please? We should continue to discuss this point. .......... Warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Nina (and Tep), > > Nina: When sati arises it is aware of sound and at > that moment there can be a little more understanding > of its characteristic: it is a dhamma appearing > through earsense. > > Tep: Or, in other words, "noting with bare attention"? > > Nina: This is not enough: understanding it as a kind > of ruupa. If there is only sati but understanding is > not being developed it is not very meaningful. Noting > (here we have one of Han's points!) and bare attention > may be thinking, it depends what someone means by > these expressions. > ---------------------------- > > Han: > This is one of the points that I am not used to – > not used to the possibility that "noting" and "bare > attention" may be just thinking. I have been taught to > "note" everything that arises: to take note of the > in-breath and out-breath, or to take note of the > wandering mind with the noting mind etc. > > Since this is a new experience for me I will not be > able to join the discussion, but I will closely follow > your discussions. > (snipped) 57384 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 10:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I think it is clear from the suttas that even for the Buddha himself all > conditioned dhammas are 'dukkha'. When he said that rupas (for example) > are dukkha, he did not qualify that statement to exempt those who had > become fully enlightened. > > Jon > Well, you have a point. Could you quote to me the sutta where the Buddha said that all rupas are dukkha, regardless of if they are clung to or not? Thanks. Metta, James 57385 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 10:25am Subject: Long Post Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'reali... sukinderpal Hi TG, :-) Another one. But I won't burden you with more after this. ================================= > |Sukin: The Satipatthana Sutta, when it talks about postures and so on, > is pointing out the different situations in which we might be aware of > realities, *not of the postures* themselves. > TG: Nope. It talks about "the postures themselves" and says nothing about > being aware of "realities." Example... "when walking, a Bhikkhu understands: > 'I am walking,' etc...." > TG: It does NOT say -- "when walking, a Bhikkhu understands: 'These are only > nama dhammas with their own characteristics that are motivating the rupa,' etc." > > Now, another type of insight practice might indeed say the latter. But the > Satipatthana Sutta does not in this case. > > What it says, we should say -- it says. What it doesn't say, we should say > -- it doesn't say. If we want to interpret a meaning not explicitly > expressed, we should say -- we are interpreting a meaning not explicitly expressed. > > That's my feeling. S: Another type of insight practice? How many can there be? Satipatthana is *the* practice leading to insight `vipassana' and the 4 Foundations of mindfulness, vedana, rupa, citta and dhamma are all paramattha dhammas. Buddha's audience was of very great accumulations. Take someone who was practicing jhana, his understanding had to be so developed that he saw danger in sense impressions and then to understand the practice to overcome this. Do you know of any single person who really and truly saw the danger in seeing, hearing, and of visible object and sound etc. and any lobha and dosa associated? Do you know of anyone with the accumulations for metta so great that it can form the basis for jhana? These were people who were very much in touch with their mental states, only they did not see it as conditioned and anatta. They only needed to be told about this and instantly they knew, what exactly `anatta' and `conditioned' were being referred to. Yes, it is all a matter of interpretation. In the end, it is not about what the Buddha said or not, but what either of us feel most comfortable with believing. If you truly believe that the Buddha prescribed observing conventional activities and postures as a foundation upon which sati develops, why do you think that He stopped at that? Why did He not go further in that direction and as do meditation teachers of today, recommend observing details such as "lifting, moving, touching left foot" etc.? I think this is because doing so can only be conditioned by and encouraging of papanca. To note rising and falling of the abdomen or to mentally scan for sensations over this concept called `body' happens as a result of mental proliferation, no matter what we believe and how much faith we have in a teacher. The Buddha mentioned the postures etc. only as reminder of what we normally might be doing. Going about daily activities with reference to bodily postures, we think by accumulated inclinations as much as we do, conventionally speaking, just enough to get by. Surely most if not all the time, such activities are motivated by the three roots and we are ignorant of these underlying dhammas. The process of deliberately being aware of the details of one's posture and movement is *not* knowing the dhammas, but "extension of the `thinking' about postures", clearly a mental proliferation! ========================================= > Sukin: How can concepts be objects of insight? Firstly let me state that to > me 'concept', the 'referent', 'thoughts' are more or less the same and > this is different from say, the citta that 'thinks'. > TG: I disagree. A concept is a mental-formation. It is based on memory > which serves as the mental-object. The "referent" does not arise at all. > Based on your view, as I understand it, you would postulate a > "arisen-non-arisen." There is no such thing. You are saying that this -- "arisen-non-arisen" > is not really real whereas other things are really real. > > As I see it... the "arisen-non-arisen" is nothing (no-thing) and therefore > does not belong in a discussion about realities in any way, shape, or form. > > To clarify -- you are saying a referent arises but is not real. I am saying > a referent does not arise. I disagree that a concept is a referent and > therefore do not categorize it as such. S: Sanna arises and marks, vitakka, viccara, manasikara and other cetasikas arise and fall while performing their individual tasks during what we call `thinking'. You seem to assume that memory arises as "memory of" something. But this is in fact `thinking', already involving many instances of sanna. The process I believe is very complicated and at every step (instances of consciousness), characteristics of different dhammas appear. The characteristics of any of these dhammas can be object of sati and panna, including the citta which thinks. The concepts `formed' as a result however, does not exhibit any characteristic at all. I put `formed' in brackets to distinguish this from what you have stated concepts as being `mental-formations'. Mental formations can only be said of dhammas, I don't think it applies to concepts. So I do make a distinction between thinking and thoughts, the latter including what we conventionally call `memory'. So while the former arises and falls, the latter doesn't. Therefore no `arisen-non-arisen' as you think I postulate. =================================== > TG: I like your "shadow" word. I use it also. But it applies to all > states/conditions as well as concepts. "Referents" don't arise in any way at all, > so they don't even get the word "shadow" applied to them. S: I used `shadow' not as a description, but only as metaphor. ================================== > |Sukin: No to "grasping after dhamma". But I hope this perception is not > due to your own resistance to our objection to the idea of conventional > reality being object of satipatthana development. And do you really think > that "not grasping" can arise or made to develop by 'thinking'? Would > not any attitude thus developed only become a 'conditioned response' > and not in fact lead anywhere near to insight development? > > TG: I don't believe there is such a thing as "conventional reality." There > are various levels of delusion, yes. But various levels of reality, no. S: Of course not, conventional reality is not another level of reality. In light of the fact that only paramattha dhammas are real, then conventional reality is not. ================================== > TG: Did I ever indicate that "thinking" was the sole approach to developing > insight? No. S: What are the different approaches to insight that you know of? I know only of the one. ================================== > |Sukin: Yes. But such ideas as 'echoes' or 'energy', aren't these also > concepts? In fact they seem to be of a higher order. Exist and non- exist > may be unnecessary, but 'reality-existence' can still point directly to > what arises in the present moment as against what doesn't. But 'echo' > begs 'echo of' and 'energy'?! What understanding do you expect to arise > when hearing such a term? Is this your reaction to the reality/concept > issue that you have ended up relying on concepts that take you even > further away? And what of this "nothing standing on its own"? Couldn't > this almost be used to deny the fact that "one reality appears' at any > given moment? And "Emptiness", I wonder how well you grasp this > concept, mind you though, I don't agree with the Nagarjuna/Mahayana > use of this term? And what about 'empty echoes', how am I to > understand this? > > TG: How indeed. ;-) The Buddha described states as "alien, void, like a > mirage, etc.." How would you understand that may I ask? > "Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, mental > formations, consciousness, he sees those states as impermanent, as suffering, as a > disease, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, > as disintegrating, as void, as not self." MN #64 S: Yes, we are on the way to slowly develop our understanding to finally know through direct experience what the Buddha meant by these terms. But here I am questioning what seems to be a worldling's use of a particular term not used in the text and claiming that it reflects the nature of reality. =============================== > TG: ...so many things the Buddha says the 5 Khandas should be seen as ... but > "realities" is not on the list. S: OK, if I stopped using `reality' and `exist', would you stop insisting that insight can be developed by `concentrating on concepts'? ;-) =============================== > TG: Your objections above are legitimate. All these terms eventually need to be > flushed down the toilet. They are just tools. I am more comfortable with > the terms I use because, for me, they more fully reveal the un- substantial > nature of phenomena. "Realities," on the other hand, tends to "substantialize" > phenomena. S: No, I don't agree with your position about this. Just as I wouldn't object to the use of concepts denoting conventional reality, such as trees, man, car, or even unicorns, I would not say that the terms, citta, lobha, panna, sati, saddha, etc. should at any point be `flushed down'. Thinking is natural, no one can stop this process which happens by conditions. There is thinking following sense door processes and that which happens on its own. What needs to be done is knowing and insighting exactly this natural process. Whatever terms we use, depends in part on memory, while there is thinking even before any words come to mind. I understand that you are more comfortable with the terms you use. In my first response to you, which I did not post, I mentioned at one point, of the possibility that aside from the fear of substantiality, that this might be a result of fascination with the "idea" of emptiness etc. I don't think concepts as being `tools'. I think they form as part of a natural process and we need to understand exactly this. ===================================== > sukin: So indeed, as far as you and I are concerned, we should do well to > understand the importance of knowing dhammas by their > characteristics. > > TG: Except that I think to think that a dhamma has its own characteristic > is a delusion. The conditions that arise are empty of anything of their own. > There are "qualities of experience," but there is no essence to those > qualities. S: Could we say that dhammas exhibit characteristics? If you are uncomfortable with the idea that dhammas *have* characteristics, could we say that they *are* their characteristics? But then we need to distinguish dhammas don't we? And this is not merely for the purpose of analysis. It should in fact be done in practice. For it is because we do not distinguish one dhamma from another, that there is ignorant and other unwholesome reaction to the `whole' and dhammas are taken as `self'. So wouldn't there be under certain circumstances, the need in fact, to say of dhammas, that they `have' characteristics? Should we then assume a substantialist viewpoint because of this use? ====================================== > |Sukin: Tree is not a rupa. What is seen is visible object, what is > touched are the earth, fire and wind elements. From these experiences > to proliferate into 'tree being rupa' is clearly wrong. > TG: Hummm, the elements that constitute what we call a tree are not rupa? > That does not correspond to the Suttas or abhidhamma as far as I understand > it. The Buddha spoke about internal and external elements. > > Check out "The Exposition of the Elements" MN #140 S: I haven't yet read the Sutta, but this I can say, that a tree or one's own head, can remind one of visible object, hardness/softness, heat/cold, motion/pressure or even other not-directly-experience-able rupas. But Tree itself is not one of these. The Buddha wouldn't have for example, pointed to Arupa-Brahma as an example of rupa would he? Likewise, he talked about feelings in the `other', not with the idea of experiencing another's feelings, but to know one's own, no? So though it may be safe to say that a tree is constituted of rupas, tree itself is not. ================================= > |Sukin: No, no quotes, just some use of logic and reasoning. The fact > that certain dhammas condition other dhammas in an impersonal way, > suggests that it must be due to the characteristics of the dhammas > involved. Were dhammas not anatta and exhibit distinct characteristics, > how can D.O. be the way it is? > > TG: Logic and reasoning??? So you are using conceptual deductions in such > a manner as to produce conclusions about the Buddha's teachings that the > Buddha did not state. As the Buddha said, paraphrasing -- "anything based on > reasoning might be right, and it might be wrong." S: Yes, we do use logic and reasoning. Or do you think that we all start with the saddha in the teachings, based on direct experience? How is this possible? I do realize the danger of being lured into thinking that one is right by force of reason and logic, whether or not there is in fact any `right understanding'. But then this may be the same means by which one discriminates between wrong and right view at the intellectual level. And it is at this level that we all must start. However we also must remember at the same time, the difference between pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. With this I think it is then safe to use reasoning. In fact I think that it is even necessary when encountering `wrong view'. And this is exactly the perception when dealing with interpretations of the Buddha's teachings which do not agree with my own. ;-)) =================================== > TG: If the "reality" and "own characteristics" issues were so crucial, how could > the Buddha not have directly said so? Why wouldn't the Buddha stress over > and over again that "realities with their own characteristics need to be > directly known"? S: Perhaps, just by pointing out Khandas, Ayatanas and so on, the Buddha's audience understood them to be just this same thing we call realities?! =================================== > TG: I think there is a mis-match in what abhidhammists are stressing and what > the Buddha stressed. S: Not from where I stand. ;-) =================================== > |sukin:When you say that the Buddha advised seeing things as 'empty, void, > coreless, alien' etc., prior to Him saying this, does He not point to > the 'knowing of dhammas'? > TG: Nope. Not in the sense you are positing. The Buddha says to know the > khandas is to know them as empty, alien, impermanent, coreless, etc. That is > the knowing! Do they arise? Yes. But they arise merely as empty, alien, > coreless, etc. S: I think what you refer to happens only at the highest levels of vipassana nanas. We can have some intellectual understanding of all this, but in practice before this stage can be reached, one *has* to experience dhammas and *know* them with varying degrees of understanding and insight. Even knowing dhammas as dhammas is way out from where we are now. And we have to also know the difference between nama and rupa and other knowledge gained from the other insight stages. I suppose one does get a glimpse of dhammas being alien, coreless and so on at even the early stages of the development of satipatthana, but I think this is only by inference. In the meantime however, the development must start with characteristics discernable to the level of sati and panna we have now, and that too very vague. Even to distinguish kusala from akusala is very far from clear. You seem to be insisting that any "right knowing" has to be that of dhammas being empty etc. It is almost like you are putting the cart before the horse. :-) Or are you in fact superimposing a theory on to experiences? Besides, the ariyan who has penetrated the characteristics of dhammas as coreless, alien and so on, does he not also perceive them in accordance to their being *real*? I think he does! =============================== > |Sukin: Do we not have to know dhammas before > knowing that these are indeed coreless, empty and so on? > TG: Yes. We have to pay attention to experiences and see conditional > structures and impermanence in progress. Does this need to lead to a conclusion > that these experiences are "ultimate realities with their own characteristics? > No. S: Lets look at it another way. Would one *deny* that they are `real' and with `sabhava'? You would say `yes', and my response is that this is because you reason from the standpoint of `emptiness' and `conditionality' and infer that namas and rupas can therefore not be seen as paramattha dhammas and with sabhava. And I would say further, that this is taking a wrong starting point and therefore being fooled by reasoning and logic. ;-) ================================ > |Sukin: You may if > you wish, quote me a sutta, the audience being non-ariyans, where the > Buddha straight away talks about seeing things as empty and so on. > > TG: The following Sutta seems to have been spoken to a large gathering of > monks including at least one who couldn't answer the Buddha's question in a > satisfactory way. MN # 64 -- > > "Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, mental > formations, consciousness, he sees those states as impermanent, as suffering, as a > disease, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, > as disintegrating, as void, as not self. ……." S: It states, "Whatever EXISTS therein…….". Firstly it is suggesting the importance of knowing various dhammas, implying that one does *distinguish* them. Secondly, it states that they *exist*. Only with this knowledge does that of being like `barb', `calamity' and so on, follow. =============================== > |Sukin: "Attitudes" are conditioned by dhammas, for example, moha, miccha > ditthi, amoha and sati. Would you not want to determine whether if > indeed it is panna which holds such an attitude? > > TG: I don't understand this question. Conditionality determines all in > samsara. What you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various > formations. S: What I mean is that, we hear about dhammas being coreless, empty, alien and so on. We have a vague intellectual understanding or misunderstanding, and so this may or may not be with any level of sati and panna. And I would go further on to suggest that, because "we do not actually see this", the idea that one *must* see it this way, is suggestive of the fact that the idea is rooted in lobha and ditthi. ================================ > |Sukin: Talking about Khandas for example, is to be talking about > dhammas. Talking about them as being distinct and different is to be > talking about their characteristics. Am I reading too much into the > Buddha's words? > > TG: Again, what you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various > formations. If that is agreed, then I can go along with the above > statement.... slightly preferring to use the word "qualities" instead of > "characteristics" and eliminating the word "their" that precedes them. S: You suggested to Sarah I think, that her use of the word "dhamma" reflected only 10% of the full and intended meaning. And here you are trying to fit "dhamma" with "force". I think this latter concept is so inflicted with scientific ideas and being in general one originating from the uninstructed worldling. So no, I don't agree, because I would never use `force' in any attempt to understand dhamma. ================================ > TG: My time is limited as I'm getting ready to leave for a few weeks but wanted > to respond to as much as possible. I hope my responses are helping you and > others understand my position but I'm afraid they may not be. S: I guess neither of us will really understand the other, if anything, for the reason that we are not so clear about our own understandings. So I think I will let you have the last word if you wish to respond, otherwise make this the last post between us on this thread. :-) But believe me, it is not you, but me, me and me. =============================== > TG: Again, what you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various > evolving formations. If this is understood, I can't disagree with your above > statement. But I doubt we are seeing this in anything very close to the same > way. > > The principles of D.O. are the key in understanding the Buddha's teaching. > But the way "dhammas" are talked about indicates to me that D.O. is NOT being > correctly understood. (As I understand it.) S: I am curious about your own interpretation, but it can wait. I am sure that there will be other opportunities for this to come up. Metta, Sukinder 57386 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 11:01am Subject: Re: Three Suttas about Atta .. the neutral feeling indriyabala Hi, Matheesha - The cornerstone of our discussion is the 'neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling'. But what is it? You have kindly given implied definition of this term. It gives the implication that the 'neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling' is almost any dhamma after dukkha vedana, sukha vedana, somanassa and domanassa are separated out from the Teachings. Is that a correct understanding? If so, then please advise! Below is my explanation why your answers are not precise and have not been very helpful. ....................... >Matheesha: > "...those neutral moments of being alive and conscious" > "..continued state of avijja" ....................... Tep: You seem to state that any one of the following terms (they are synonyms) is for attaining full understanding of the neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling in its entirety : sati and sampajanna, bare awareness and clear comprehension, satipattaana, vipassana, understanding the present moment. But isn't it true for full understanding of many other dhammas, including the "All"? Thank you very much for initiating the potentially-useful discussion. With equanimity, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Mr.Indriyabala! > > T:> 1. The neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling is neutral -- it (snipped) > M: But you do! You have upadana towards your kandas! If some tried to > kill you, you wouldnt want to die! You would be afraid to loose > consciousness. You LOVE those neutral moments of being alive and > conscious and if you could, you would want them to continue. Bhava > thanha I think.:) > (snipped) > > M: Does continued state of avijja, then strengthen that avijja? > > > 3. Please suggest how to fully understand the > > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling "in its entirety". > > M: sati and sampajanna. bare awareness and clear comprehension, > satipattaana, vipassana, understanding the present moment, call it > what you will. It comes with a Buddha's guarantee. How much more do > you need? > 57387 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 11:35am Subject: Re: Hello - moving to the second temple indriyabala Hi Matheesha and Nina - Please allow me to give some opinion too. I can easily identify a number of DSG members who would fit a third category between the two you have mentioned, Nina! Most formally educated people (products of the university systems) understand only theories and hence would need much guidance too. I agree with Matheesha that there are people who are "truly capable" in the world. Thus I belief the world will never be empty of ariyans. Why waste our time waiting for the next Buddha? Why waste the present moment? This Buddha's Teachings give us everything we need to dwell heedfully here & now ! Best wishes, Tep, your friend. =========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > N: At > > this time there are only neyya puggala, those who need much > guidance and > > explanations before they can attain enlightenment, and pada parama, > those > > who understand only the theory. > > > > > M: Since we don't know this for sure, it might be better not to make > such statements don't you think? There might be people out there who > are truly capable, and they should not be discouraged. People do look > up to you, so it is important not to leave them feeling hopeless. > > There was this belief in sri lanka 50 years ago that arahathood in > this lifetime was impossible and everyone would make determinations > to become enlightened with the maitreya buddha (the next one). Such > talk has almost completely faded away and would be considered > outdated there because of the great strides made in rediscovering > buddhism and its practices. > > I'm sorry if this looks like nitpicking, but I felt it was important > to state this. > > Hope you are keeping well, > > with metta > > Matheesha > 57388 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 0:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: sangiitisutta nilovg Hi Tep, op 31-03-2006 00:53 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > "Five perceptions making for maturity of liberation: the perception of > impermanence, of suffering in impermanence, of impersonality in > suffering, of abandoning, of dispassion. These are sets of five things > which were perfectly proclaimed by the lord..." [Sangiti Sutta] > http://www.buddhistinformation.com/ida_b_wells_memorial_sutra_library/ sangiti_ > sutta.htm ------- As promised, I will look at the Co. when you quote the Sangiitisutta. The Co. is short and mentions that maturity of liberation means arahatship. It states about aniccasaññaa: this is saññaa that has arisen with insight that contemplates aniccaa (aniccaanupassanaa ñaa.ne uppanna-saññaa). N: anupassanaa means contemplating (with sati and paññaa) again and again, thus this is not of the level of thinking or intellectual understanding. It is with direct awareness and direct understanding. The same is said of the following saññaas. The fact that these are mentioned in order does not, as I see it, necessarily mean that there is an order of contemplating. Except the last two: first pahaana, giving up, then viraaga, dispassion. As I already mentioned in a discussion, it depends on someone's inclination which of the three characteristics he is inclined to contemplate more often. But they are closely connected, see S.N. IV, Salaayatanavagga, §1: what is impermanent is dukkha and what is dukkha is void of the self. When I consider the stages of insight, understanding nama as nama and rupa as rupa, this seems to me already a beginning of the understanding of anattaa, although it is very weak. Nama is understood as nama, not as me or mine. Rupa is understood as rupa, not as me or mine. At the beginning stages more understanding of the specific characteristics (such as visible object, sound, etc.) is developed, and later on paññaa turns more to the three general characteristics, as the Visuddhimagga explains. It is true, at the first stage of mahaa-vipassanaa the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa is penetrated, thus impermanence. At the process during which enlightenment occurs only one of the three characteristics of the nama or rupa is the object of paññaa in that process and this depends on the individual's inclination. But it is true that when one characteristic is penetrated also the other two are penetrated. Nina. ---------- > > Tep: The Sangiti Sutta indicates that the very first contemplation is > to be on impermanence of all formations. Next, the bhikkhu > contemplates suffering in things that are impermanent -- thus, > 'anicca' must be clearly seen first before 'dukkha' is seen. Next, the > bhikkhu contemplates impersonality (not self, egolessness) in > impermanent things that induce suffering -- thus, 'anatta' is to be > seen after the bhikkhu has developed clear knowings in 'anicca' and > 'dukkha'. Q.E.D. 57389 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 0:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: was: moving to the second temple, four kinds of people. nilovg Dear Matheesha, This is not nitpicking, if you feel you should say this, it is good you say this. It means, I should give somewhat more explanation, so as to encourage people, not discourage them. I don't think people should look up to me, because, really, what I am trying to do is to understand the teachings and sharing my experiences with others, and, by exchanging my views with others, I think others as well as myself can benefit. op 02-04-2006 15:47 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: > N: At >> this time there are only neyya puggala, those who need much > guidance and >> explanations before they can attain enlightenment, and pada parama, > those >> who understand only the theory. --------- > M: Since we don't know this for sure, it might be better not to make > such statements don't you think? There might be people out there who > are truly capable, and they should not be discouraged. People do look > up to you, so it is important not to leave them feeling hopeless. > > There was this belief in sri lanka 50 years ago that arahathood in > this lifetime was impossible .... -------- N: I just requote what I quoted before from a Commentary: The Buddha , in the sutta the Peg, spoke about the decline of the teachings, Sarah recently quoted this and Rob K quoted this before: <"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering.... In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.> The Buddha knew that his teachings would decline. The Patthana book of the Abhidhamma will be the first one to go according to the Co. According to the 'Designation of Human Types", Puggala Paññatti of the Abhidhamma, there are four types of people: 1: ugghatitaññu, who already during a given explanation penetrates the truth. Think of Ven. Assaji and Ven. Saariputta: after just a few words they attained: all dhammas that arise from a cause... 2. vipacitaññu: who realizes the truth after a more detailed explanation. 3. neyya puggala as I explained, after much guidance. The Co. adds: noble friendship with a kaliyanamitta, asking questions, yoniso manaasikaara. These are also conditions mentioned in the suttas. 4. padaparama, as explained, someone who understands the pariyatta, but does not attain. Now we can consider for ourselves what is stated here, whether all this makes sense. Whatever we read we should discriminate for ourselves. We do not hear the teachings from the Buddha in person anymore, this time is different from the Buddha's time. For those who had accumulated great wisdom the right conditions to be born at the Buddha's time were present. There was a concurrence of conditions for many people to attain, and attain after no long time.After hearing a few words or a whole discourse. I find it understandable that in this time conditions are not the same. We have to read, study, listen, ask questions. We need noble friendship. How can we expect to attain without the right conditions? But we are fortunate that this is still possible for us. Fortunate to have access to the Tipitaka and Co. to have internet, to have this list so well managed by Sarah and Jon, that gives us the possibility for Dhamma exchanges. It is not discouraging to know that enlightenment is still possible. But best is not to speculate about this or cling to this idea. We can be encouraged and at the same time be realistic and not have expectations that are too high, for example to attain after hearing one Discourse. Do you still find that discouraging? Nina. 57390 From: "ericlonline" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 10:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) ericlonline --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Eric > > Good to see you back again. Thanks Jon. Good to see folks still whittling away. >Thanks for the reference to the Upanisa Sutta from SN (trans by Bh Bodhi). >The original comment I was responding to was that the attainment of jhana was a condition for the development or increase of saddha. Ah, I see. Well yes, if we look at it only linearly then faith conditions jhana. But surely you see a nonlinear relation? A feedback loop of sorts. >To my understanding, the concentration that is a supporting condition for the attainment of enlightenment is the concentration that arises with the development of awareness/insight. Surely there are no silver bullets otherwise all of us would be enlightened. There are only factors that none of us beyond some sort of intellectualization can claim to know anything conclusively about. But in reading sutta after sutta, it says to me that without the aspirant having the ability to enter and maintain jhana, there is no insight. I think a more prudent discussion would be, what is the need and use of jhana in the Buddha Dhamma. So, what is jhana and how can it help? E 57391 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 2:52pm Subject: The Discernment of Real Buddhists indriyabala Hi, all - What is vipassana in the present moment? There are more than one answer, but the following one is the simplest to understand. Vipassana in the present moment is the same as "discernment". The original Pali for discernment (or understanding) is 'pañña' and the Pali for the verb 'discern' is 'pajaanaati' (come to know, understand). The term 'pajaanaati' is used several times in the Maha-satipatthana Sutta(DN22) to mean knowing experientially in the present moment. The following sutta quote is excellent. It tells us that we realize the Dhamma (paccattam veditabbo vinnuhi) through discerning in the present moment our state of mind whether or not there is greed, aversion, or delusion. What else is a better qualification of a real Buddhist than if he/she practices 'vipassana in the present moment' (discerns)? "The fact that when greed is present within you, you discern that greed is present within you; and when greed is not present within you, you discern that greed is not present within you: that is one way in which the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves. "The fact that when an aversion quality is present within you, you discern that an aversion quality is present within you; and when an aversion quality is not present within you, you discern that an aversion quality is not present within you: that is one way in which the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves." "The fact that when a delusive quality is present within you, you discern that a delusive quality is present within you; and when a delusive quality is not present within you, you discern that a delusive quality is not present within you: that is one way in which the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves." Yours truly, Tep ==== 57392 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 6:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four ken_aitch Dear Han, I can see that the reasons for my comments were not clear. Thank you for your patience. ---------------- <. . .> H: > But I am not clear what did I have actually written in my Part Four on which you based your above explanation. Can you kindly point out the sentences or paragraphs that I had written that correspond to the above explanation, so that I can fully understand the subject matter. > ------------------ You had written the following: >(4) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This is not mine' (netam mama). (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This I am not' (nesohamasmi). (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate `This is not my self' (na meso attaati) in the strict sense of the word. > (End quote) It is not difficult to contemplate "Citta is not self; cetasika is not self; rupa is not self," and so I assumed your contemplations must have been of a different nature. For various reasons,* I suspected you had been contemplating conventional realities (for example, the sound of a dog barking, the image of a vase on your table, the sensation of your feet touching the floor – that kind of thing). When we contemplate conventional realities with the idea of seeing them as anicca, dukkha and anatta, silly contradictions are bound to arise. Taking some extreme examples, we both agreed that attachment would not be overcome by contemplating, "This is not my wallet" if, in fact, it *was* our wallet. And conceit would not be overcome by contemplating, "I am not the person who is entitled to be served next by the shop assistant" if, in fact, it was our turn. And lastly, wrong view would not be not overcome by pointing to oneself and saying, "This is not my self!" Those would not be not wise contemplations: they would be silly contradictions. When the Buddha employed conventional designations (person, chariot, walking etc.) he was actually referring to their underlying realities –conditioned namas and rupas. We can't catch a nama or a rupa, hold it still, and contemplate, "This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self." However, we can hear and study the Buddha's teaching and understand how it applies to the present moment. And it is only in that way (not by being mindful of a dog's bark, a vase, or pressure on the feet etc.) that those three contemplations are gradually developed. Ken H * Han, you will find that most of my posts deal with the difference between conditioned meditation (bhavana) as taught by the Buddha and formal meditation (pannatti-bhavana) as practised by many eager devotees. Some people think I am obsessed with the subject. I hope I will not drive you mad. :-) 57393 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 7:01pm Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: sangiitisutta indriyabala Hi, Nina - It was very kind of you to take time and effort to consult the Co. on the Sangitisutta in order to inform me of the following facts: 1. "Aniccasaññaa is saññaa that has arisen with insight that contemplates aniccaa (aniccaanupassanaa ñaa.ne uppanna-saññaa)." 2. "Anupassanaa means contemplating (with sati and paññaa) again and again, thus this is not of the level of thinking or intellectual understanding. It is with direct awareness and direct understanding." 3. The contemplation of the three characteristics is not necessarily in that order: i.e. aniccam --> dukkham --> anattam. 4. Pahaana saññaa is followed by viraga saññaa. 5. "At the process during which enlightenment occurs only one of the three characteristics of the nama or rupa is the object of paññaa in that process and this depends on the individual's inclination. But it is true that when one characteristic is penetrated also the other two are penetrated." Excellent information! Now I see that by assuming that anatta can become clear only after the first two characteristics are clear first, is a restriction. In some situations the anatta characteristic may be easily seen first. I can think of one example, the four basic properties(mahabhuta-dhatus) are empty of ownership, and that is easy to see. On the other hand, the anicca characteristic is easily seen in vedana, but it is not easily contemplated in a mahabhuta-rupa. With appreciation, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > op 31-03-2006 00:53 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > > "Five perceptions making for maturity of liberation: the perception of impermanence, of suffering in impermanence, of impersonality in suffering, of abandoning, of dispassion. These are sets of five things which were perfectly proclaimed by the lord..." [Sangiti Sutta] > > http://www.buddhistinformation.com/ida_b_wells_memorial_sutra_library/ sangiti_ > > sutta.htm > ------- > As promised, I will look at the Co. when you quote the Sangiitisutta. The Co. is short and mentions that maturity of liberation means arahatship. > It states about aniccasaññaa: this is saññaa that has arisen with insight that contemplates aniccaa (aniccaanupassanaa ñaa.ne uppanna-saññaa). > (snipped) 57394 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 7:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) jonoabb Hi Eric --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ericlonline" wrote: ... > > Hi Eric > > > > Good to see you back again. > > Thanks Jon. Good to see folks > still whittling away. ;-)) ;-)) > >To my understanding, the concentration that is a supporting > condition for the attainment of enlightenment is the concentration > that arises with the development of awareness/insight. > > Surely there are no silver bullets > otherwise all of us would be enlightened. > There are only factors that none of > us beyond some sort of intellectualization > can claim to know anything conclusively about. > But in reading sutta after sutta, it says to me > that without the aspirant having the ability to > enter and maintain jhana, there is no insight. > I think a more prudent discussion would be, > what is the need and use of jhana in the Buddha > Dhamma. > > So, what is jhana and how can it help? Thanks for this last question and the other good ones in your post. Before I reply to them, however, I'd just like to clarify something in your comments, so I can understand where you're coming from on this. When you say above, "without the ability to enter and maintain jhana, there is no insight", do you mean no insight, or no enlightenment? If you mean no insight, does that mean no satipatthana, no panna, no understanding of dhammas, no mundane path development whatsoever? Jon (Keeping on whittling away ...) 57395 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 9:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Four hantun1 Dear Ken, Thank you very much for your kind explanation. When I wrote [[(4) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This is not mine' (netam mama), (5) I have no difficulty in contemplating `This I am not' (nesohamasmi), (6) But I find it still difficult to contemplate `This is not my self' (na meso attaati) in the strict sense of the word.]], I was trying to say that if I WERE TO contemplate on (netam mama), (nesohamasmi), (na meso attaati), it WOULD BE easier for me to contemplate on the first two but WOULD BE difficult to contemplate on the third. I did not mean to say I am already contemplating on the first two. I am sorry I did not make myself clear. Your explanation is very clear. I also benefit from your explanation on the difference between conditioned meditation (bhavana) as taught by the Buddha and formal meditation (pannatti-bhavana) as practised by many eager devotees. In fact, the “conditioned meditation” and the “formal meditation” are also the terminologies that I hear for the very first time. Once again, I thank you very much for your cetana. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- ken_aitch wrote: > Dear Han, > > I can see that the reasons for my comments were not > clear. Thank you > for your patience. > > ---------------- 57396 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 2, 2006 10:06pm Subject: Dependent on Contact ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Aloof from urge for pleasant Feeling peace prevails! The Blessed Buddha once said to some very sick bhikkhus: A bhikkhu should await his time aware and clearly comprehending... This is our instruction to you!!! While a bhikkhu lives in this way, aware & clearly comprehending, enthusiastic, keen, & determined, if there arises in him a pleasant feeling, then he understands this: 'There has arisen in me a pleasant feeling. Now that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on just this contact! But this contact is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen... So when the pleasant feeling has arisen in dependence on a contact, that is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, how could it ever then itself be permanent?' He dwells in this way always contemplating the impermanence of contact and of pleasant feeling, and he considers the inevitable vanishing, fading away, ceasing, & the therefore necessary relinquishment of all constructions. While he dwells thus, the underlying tendency to lust for contact & pleasant feeling is gradually eliminated... He understands: With the breakup of this body, at the exhaustion of this fragile life, any feeling, all that is felt, neither being hankered after, nor clung to, will cool down right there... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [214] section 36: Feeling. Vedana. The Sick-Ward. 8. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> 57397 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 3, 2006 1:03am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 415- Confidence/saddhaa (l) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) As we have seen, one of the proximate causes of confidence is an object worthy of confidence. The Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha are objects worthy of confidence. So long as we are not ariyans we do not really understand what enlightenment means; we have only theoretical understanding about it and thus our knowledge is very limited. We take our refuge in the Buddha, but our confidence in his virtues cannot be as strong as the sotåpanna’s confidence. The second Gem in which we take refuge is the Dhamma. The term “dhamma” has many meanings, it can stand for the teachings, or for paramattha dhamma, ultimate reality. Seeing and attachment are real, they are dhammas. We do not take our refuge in every dhamma. Nibbåna is lokuttara dhamma and this is the second Gem, the Dhamma we take our refuge in. Also the eight types of lokuttara cittas which experience nibbåna are included in the second Gem; thus there are “nine lokuttara dhammas” in which we take our refuge. Again, our understanding of the second Gem is limited so long as we have not attained enlightenment. Our confidence in the teachings which lead to enlightenment cannot be as strong as the sotåpanna’s confidence; he knows from experience what enlightenment means. The ariyan Sangha is the third Gem in which we take our refuge. We do not really know what it means to be an ariyan so long as we are not ariyans ourselves and thus our confidence in the ariyan Sangha is still weak. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57398 From: han tun Date: Mon Apr 3, 2006 1:25am Subject: Conditioned meditation hantun1 Dear Ken ("ken_aitch") In your previous post, under another subject title, you had written: Han, you will find that most of my posts deal with the difference between conditioned meditation (bhavana) as taught by the Buddha and formal meditation (pannatti-bhavana) as practised by many eager devotees. Some people think I am obsessed with the subject. I hope I will not drive you mad. :-) Dear Ken, you are not driving me mad. On the contrary, you have kindled my interest. I would like to know more about conditioned meditation. Would you be kind enough to tell me in detail, step by step, how I will have to practice conditioned meditation. Thank you very much. With metta and deepest respect, Han 57399 From: connie Date: Mon Apr 3, 2006 1:55am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana .. vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m nichiconn How's it going, Tep? 1-- Where and when does 'hadaya rupa' arise ? --the subtle, derived rupa cittassa vatthu arises "wherever you think" like the cave just comes with the territory, not in jhaana-sukha arupabrahma but confined to grosser panca-vokaara planes' upadhi at bhavanga [next to the 'cut' as past kamma conditions it thru-out life when it is not the occasion for one of the five ajjhattika pasadas but the instant for that connection with mano-vinnaana and dhammarammana and would be in evidence whenever cittajarupa arise, i think]. 2-- If we can become 'aataapii sampajjaano satimaa' most of the waking moments, will that be sufficient to remove 'loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m'? --maybe the other way around? 8 loke winds stir the pond and the fire is damp? (how's that for obfuscating and reifying?) (the natures of) kaaye kaaya-, vedanaasu vedana-, citte citta-, dhammesu dhamma-anupassii viharati (-contemplating dwells) ... aataapii sampajaano satimaa, *vineyya* loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m. ... earnestly, clearly aware, mindful and *having put away* all handering and fretting for the world. {walshe} ... ardent, fully aware, and mindful, *after removing* avarice and sorrow regarding the world. {anandajoti} ... anissito ca viharati, na ca ki~nci loke upaadiyati. ... and he dwells independent, and without being attached to anything in the world. (DN 18, 26) - "here ... becomes perfectly concentrated, perfectly clear, and, being perfectly concentrated, perfectly clear/serene, he generates knowledge and insight regarding the external bodies ... vedanaa ... citta ... dhamma ... for the attainment of that which is good". peace, connie