#62800 From: "Paul" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought paulgrabiano... Thanks Connie. Looks interesting. metta, paul #62801 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa ashkenn2k Hi Plamen and Nina Dispeller of Delusion I: <<9. Herein, in what sense is materiality (rupa)? It is materiality in the sense of being molested (ruppanatthena). For this is said by the Blessed One: 'And why, bhikkhus, is materiality said?. It is what is molested, bhikkhus? It is molested by cold, it is molested by heat, it is molested by hunger, it is molested by thiurst, it is molested by gadfires and flies and wind and sun and creeping things. It is molested, that is why it is called materiality; (S iii 86)>> Cheers Ken O #62802 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought ashkenn2k Hi Connie I am grateful for what you have written especially the Udana commentary and I believe you took a lot of effort in typing in out. I also like to share this with you Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma and Commentary <<(62)Nibbana, however, which is reckon as the transcendant, to be realized by the knowledge of the four paths, and becomes the object of the paths and fruits, is called nibbana since it has left behind (nikkhanta) craving, reckoned as 'weaving' (vana) 62. Having so far given a detailed description of consciousness, mentalities and materiality, now describing nibbana, he states the words begining Nibbana. To be realized by the knowledge of the four paths: by this he indicates that for the various noble persons nibbana is something established by direct experience; becomes the object of the paths and fruits: by this [he indicates] that for good ordinary persons it is something established by inference. For knowledge that has a conditioned dhamma or a concept as its objects is not capable of cutting off and stilling the defilements. And as the cutting off of defilements, etc., is something that exists in the world, so it is established that there exist a single dhamma, called nibbana, which is opposed to conditioned and conventional dhammas, which brings about the cutting off and stilling of the difilements, and becomes the object of the path and fruit. And by showing that Nibbana is established by direct experience and inference, he futes the argument of those erroneously take nibbana as a mere absence [of defilements] This is sufficient elaboration Because it has left behind -- because it has gone beyond by virtue of passing beyond any object -- craving, reckon as weaving -- since, above and below, it weaves and entwines the dhammas of the three levels consisting of different aggregates, etc>> Cheers Ken O #62803 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas ashkenn2k Hi Kel I realise from your notes that a Buddha is really hard to meet and being born in the Buddha sasana is really very profitable kamma. Buddha Gotama vowed to be a Buddha in front of Buddha Dipankara. A Bodhisattva need at least a minimum, four incalculables (asankheyya) and a hundred thousand great aeons or a maximum, sixteen incalculables and a hundred thousand great aeons to perfect his paramis. And during these period only 25 Buddhas had arisen. This means meeting a Buddha is very rare. Cheers Ken O #62804 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/26/2006 9:03:35 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Hi Plamen and Nina Dispeller of Delusion I: <<9. Herein, in what sense is materiality (rupa)? It is materiality in the sense of being molested (ruppanatthena). For this is said by the Blessed One: 'And why, bhikkhus, is materiality said?. It is what is molested, bhikkhus? It is molested by cold, it is molested by heat, it is molested by hunger, it is molested by thiurst, it is molested by gadfires and flies and wind and sun and creeping things. It is molested, that is why it is called materiality; (S iii 86)>> Hi All Concerned When it is said that "it is molested" I believe it means that Rupa...and all conditions for that matter, are affected by interaction between elements. And this interaction causes alteration... i.e., impermanence, dukkha. There actually is not an "affector" and an "affected" or a molestor and molested. There is mutual "affecting" going on between all interacting conditions...i.e., all conditions. It boils down to a matter of "various states of energies pushing and affecting each other." (Note: They are only different energies from our subjective perspective.) TG #62805 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:36 am Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Howard, > If anything, I'd say it's more the opposite. The realization of > any of the tilakkhana constitutes a portal to nibbana. In the same way, the realization of "grasplessness" is also a portal to nibbana, but not nibbana itself, which is Cessation. > The disappearance of all conditioned dhammas *as such* - as > separate, self-existent realities - would be part and parcel of > realizing nibbana. But I don't recall ever having seen presented > the possibility of the final ceasing altogether that you > hypothesize. Present conditions are the basis for future > conditions (speaking from our perspective "under the heavens".) > From the perspective of nibbana, of course, I would suppose there > is nothing to be said at all. The "final ceasing altogether" is not my hypothesis. It was taught by the Buddha, particularly as the reverse order of Dependent Co-arising. If you choose to interpret the "final ceasing altogether" STRICTLY as an event that occurs in time (which is associated with the term nibbana-dhatu, or the nibbana-element, instead of just nibbana), then nibbana must of course be an event that occurs in time. But the Buddha never stated in the reverse order of Dependent Co- arising that it is an event that occurs in time. Is there a "final ceasing altogether" that exists as a reality which is independent of time? I say there is. The fact that it can't be seen now doesn't mean that it does not exist. The two suttas which you quoted on emptiness supports the position of "final ceasing altogether" as nibbana. The first sutta is very explicit with terms like "the calming of all fabrications, the relinquishing of all substrata of becoming, the exhaustion of craving, the fading away of greed, cessation", which all points to the "final ceasing altogether" as nibbana without reference to time. The second sutta is even more eplicit with the "final ceasing altogether" of the six sense bases as nibbana. However in this sutta, there is an implicit reference to time (in one who is fully aware), we see that the term nibbana-element is used instead of just nibbana. In short, it is the "final ceasing altogether" that is the supreme emptiness. Regards, Swee Boon #62806 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Ken O, > To be realized by the knowledge of the four paths: by this he > indicates that for the various noble persons nibbana is something > established by direct experience; becomes the object of the paths > and fruits: by this [he indicates] that for good ordinary persons > it is something established by inference. For knowledge that has > a conditioned dhamma or a concept as its objects is not capable of > cutting off and stilling the defilements. And as the cutting off of > defilements, etc., is something that exists in the world, so it is > established that there exist a single dhamma, called nibbana, which > is opposed to conditioned and conventional dhammas, which brings > about the cutting off and stilling of the difilements, and becomes > the object of the path and fruit. And by showing that Nibbana is > established by direct experience and inference, he futes the > argument of those erroneously take nibbana as a mere absence [of > defilements] Thank you for this passage. The last part really hit the point when it says "he futes the argument of those erroneously take nibbana as a mere absence [of defilements]". Regards, Swee Boon #62807 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/26/06 12:43:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >If anything, I'd say it's more the opposite. The realization of > >any of the tilakkhana constitutes a portal to nibbana. > > In the same way, the realization of "grasplessness" is also a portal > to nibbana, but not nibbana itself, which is Cessation. > > >The disappearance of all conditioned dhammas *as such* - as > >separate, self-existent realities - would be part and parcel of > >realizing nibbana. But I don't recall ever having seen presented > >the possibility of the final ceasing altogether that you > >hypothesize. Present conditions are the basis for future > >conditions (speaking from our perspective "under the heavens".) > >From the perspective of nibbana, of course, I would suppose there > >is nothing to be said at all. > > The "final ceasing altogether" is not my hypothesis. It was taught by > the Buddha, particularly as the reverse order of Dependent Co-arising. > > If you choose to interpret the "final ceasing altogether" STRICTLY as > an event that occurs in time (which is associated with the term > nibbana-dhatu, or the nibbana-element, instead of just nibbana), then > nibbana must of course be an event that occurs in time. > > But the Buddha never stated in the reverse order of Dependent Co- > arising that it is an event that occurs in time. > > Is there a "final ceasing altogether" that exists as a reality which > is independent of time? I say there is. The fact that it can't be seen > now doesn't mean that it does not exist. > > The two suttas which you quoted on emptiness supports the position of > "final ceasing altogether" as nibbana. > > The first sutta is very explicit with terms like "the calming of all > fabrications, the relinquishing of all substrata of becoming, the > exhaustion of craving, the fading away of greed, cessation", which all > points to the "final ceasing altogether" as nibbana without reference > to time. > > The second sutta is even more eplicit with the "final ceasing > altogether" of the six sense bases as nibbana. However in this sutta, > there is an implicit reference to time (in one who is fully aware), we > see that the term nibbana-element is used instead of just nibbana. > > In short, it is the "final ceasing altogether" that is the supreme > emptiness. > > Regards, > Swee Boon ========================== So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to be, a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of suffering that comes with awakening? Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not so? Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, prior to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. With metta, Howard #62808 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:03 am Subject: Rob's forum on mindfulness of breathing, no 10 nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Co. to the Anapana Sati Sutta: QUOTE But here the mindfulness which lays hold of breathing in and out is mundane (lokiya); mundane breathing in and out perfects the mundane foundations of mindfulness; the mundane foundations of mindfulness perfect the supramundane (lokuttara) enlightenment factors; the supramundane enlightenment factors perfect nibbana as the fruit of clear vision and deliverance The Co states that it is thus elsewhere (in other texts), but that in this sutta it is handed down that the mundane foundations of mindfulness perfect the mundane enlightenment factors, and that these perfect clear vision (vijjå), deliverance (vimutti), fruition (phala) and nibbana, which are lokuttara. Because in this sutta clear vision and deliverance designate clear vision, fruition (phala) and nibbana. N : If jhana is not reached, and there are not the masteries (vasis) in jhana, such as attaining and emerging at any time, at any place, samatha, the development of calm, cannot be a foundation for vipassana. As Jon said, QUOTE the Anapanasati Sutta is a teaching on attaining to the superior kind of insight known as 'insight both ways', based on jhana, in this case jhana with breath as object. As such, is it directed at those who have already attained jhana with breath as object or who are potentially capable of doing so. For such individuals, breath is already a naturally arising object in their daily life, a daily life that is far different from yours and mine. And Jon said also: QUOTE As I have indicated, the sutta was given for the benefit of those (monks) who are already highly adept at attending to the breath (actually, its nimitta) as an object of samatha, and for those persons the sutta is indeed about the discernment of an 'everyday object'. N: I would add:the bhikkhus the sutta was addressed to were highly adept, they were arahats or they had accumulations to attain arahatship. We read even after the first tetrad (Of mindfulness of breath) in the Visuddhimagga: QUOTE After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last attains to the nineteen kinds of Reviewing Knowledge, and he becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities. (Jon to Rob Ep, Sept 16): QUOTE The Anapanasati Sutta is a teaching on attaining to the superior kind of insight known as 'insight both ways', based on jhana, in this case jhana with breath as object. As such, is directed at those who have already attained jhana with breath as object or who are potentially capable of doing so. For such individuals, breath is already a naturally arising object in their daily life, a daily life that is far different from yours and mine. So, no, I do not read this sutta as advocating anything about taking a particular object for insight development... As I have indicated, the sutta was given for the benefit of those (monks) who are already highly adept at attending to the breath (actually, its nimitta) as an object of samatha, and for those persons the sutta is indeed about the discernment of an 'everyday object'. ------- (end quote). Nina. #62809 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:14 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe 60 nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 9 Ahetuka Cittas which are Unknown in Daily Life There are eighteen types of ahetuka citta, cittas arising without hetu (root). Fifteen types of ahetuka cittas are vipåka. As we have seen, ten of these fifteen cittas are dvi-pañca-viññåùas (five pairs). They are the pairs of: seeing-consciousness hearing-consciousness smelling-consciousness tasting-consciousness body-consciousness Each of these is a pair of which one is akusala vipåka and one kusala vipåka. Seeing-consciousness is the result of kamma. When it is the result of an ill deed, seeing-consciousness is akusala vipåkacitta which experiences an unpleasant object; when it is the result of a good deed, it is kusala vipåkacitta which experiences a pleasant object. The function of seeing-consciousness is experiencing visible object. Kamma which produces the vipåkacitta which is seeing-consciousness does not only produce that type of vipåkacitta, it also produces two other types of vipåkacitta which succeed seeing-consciousness. Seeing- consciousness is succeeded by another vipåkacitta which receives the object. This citta, which still has the same object as seeing- consciousness, is called the receiving-consciousness, sampaìicchana- citta. Visible object which is experienced by seeing-consciousness does not fall away when seeing-consciousness falls away, because it is rúpa; rúpa does not fall away as rapidly as nåma. When an object is experienced through one of the six doors, there is not merely one citta experiencing that object, but there is a series or process of cittas succeeding one another, which share the same object. ******* Nina. #62810 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:17 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 41 nilovg Daer friends, What is that calm then, so much sought after? Is it the true calm which is freedom from attachment, aversion and ignorance? Or is it a subtle attachment to relaxation? Attachment can blind us so much. How can we know whether there is the right calm or only what we take for calm? How can one check? Can we check whether there is attachment at this very moment? If we cannot check this now, how could we check it later on? The test is at this moment. There are many moments of seeing and then, very often, attachment to details and outlines, to concepts, even when we do not think of wishing. We like to see the familiar things around us, that is attachment already. Is there an idea of 'I see', 'I think', deep-rooted in us? Does seeing seem to last for a while? When there are wrong ideas about seeing how otherwise but through mindfulness of seeing when there is seeing could wrong view be corrected? Does it seem that we see people and things? Do they seem to last? Is there any other way to correct this wrong view but knowing the characteristic of visible object when it appears, knowing the characteristic of thinking when it appears, knowing all realities as they appear, one at a time? Should we not know the difference between seeing and thinking of concepts such as people or trees? Seeing and thinking are different cittas arising at different moments and they experience different objects. They arise and then fall away immediately, they do not last. Are we inclined to think that it is too difficult to develop right understanding of realities in daily life because there is no immediate result of our development? Then one may be tempted to look for some other way, different from the development of right understanding in daily life. Are we not always finding excuses not to develop it in daily life? ***** Nina. #62811 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina, 41 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/26/06 2:22:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Daer friends, > > What is that calm then, so much sought after? Is it the true calm > which is freedom from attachment, aversion and ignorance? Or is it a > subtle attachment to relaxation? Attachment can blind us so much. How > can we know whether there is the right calm or only what we take for > calm? How can one check? Can we check whether there is attachment at > this very moment? If we cannot check this now, how could we check it > later on? The test is at this moment. > --------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. We have to pay attention to the way things are right now. -------------------------------------- There are many moments of > > seeing and then, very often, attachment to details and outlines, to > concepts, even when we do not think of wishing. We like to see the > familiar things around us, that is attachment already. > > Is there an idea of 'I see', 'I think', deep-rooted in us? Does > seeing seem to last for a while? When there are wrong ideas about > seeing how otherwise but through mindfulness of seeing when there is > seeing could wrong view be corrected? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Again I agree. But a mind that has been made more calm and more clear is more effectively mindful. It is possible to cultivate such a mind. ---------------------------------------- Does it seem that we see people > > and things? Do they seem to last? > > Is there any other way to correct this wrong view but knowing the > characteristic of visible object when it appears, knowing the > characteristic of thinking when it appears, knowing all realities as > they appear, one at a time? > --------------------------------------- Howard: The secret, as you say, is to see the nature of reality, to see the nature of phenomena as they arise. Cultivation is required for that - training in mindful, concentrated, calm, and clear awareness. --------------------------------------- Should we not know the difference between > > seeing and thinking of concepts such as people or trees? Seeing and > thinking are different cittas arising at different moments and they > experience different objects. They arise and then fall away > immediately, they do not last. > > Are we inclined to think that it is too difficult to develop right > understanding of realities in daily life because there is no > immediate result of our development? Then one may be tempted to look > for some other way, different from the development of right > understanding in daily life. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that many are inclined to think it is too difficult. I applaud you for implying that it is not. --------------------------------------- > > Are we not always finding excuses not to develop it in daily life? --------------------------------------- Howard: I think so. Indeed I think so. Right now we must calm the mind and pay attention, without grasping, to whatever arises. We must not permit distr action. We must avoid losing presence. If not now, when? > > ***** > Nina. > ==================== With metta, Howard #62812 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:03 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear friends, I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma Study Group. I am Lodewijk van Gorkom, Nina's husband for 54 years. I am a retired Netherlands foreign service officer. My last posting was ambassador in Vienna, including the IAEA and the UN Agencies. We had four Asian postings: the Phillipines, Thailand, Japan and Indonesia. In Bangkok in 1966 we learned to know Buddhism through Acharn Sujin Bhoriharnwannaket. We shall always remain grateful to her. What strikes me so much in Buddhism, is its profound human and compassionate nature and its direct applicability in daily life. Some of the teachings, like the Abhidhamma, may seem theoretical, but at closer scrutiny they pertain to our daily with all its happiness, sorrow and frustrations. I myself feel the Five Khanda's of Grasping as a real burden and the Five Hindrances as real hindrances to the development of wisdom and the eradication of defilements. I know that following the Buddha's Path will take many years and even aeons and that we need a great deal of patience, but too much patience should never lead to complacency! Nina gives me great help and support. Every day, she reads to me from some Buddhist writings and we often discuss points of Dhamma. I hope to learn much from all of you. With warm regards, Lodewijk #62813 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought sarahprocter... Hi Connie, Paul, Ken O, Swee Boon & all, Thx for the good quotes. Also see 'Udana -Nibbana' and 'Nibbana' in U.P. for more quotes - recycle any more you find helpful if you like. Metta, Sarah --- connie wrote: > Hi again, Paul, Udaana Readers, > > another couple of options for reading Udaana Suttas in case you like to > do > some comparative readings or if ATI is still missing some (happy, btw, > to > see the progress on the path of purification transcription project > there): > sacred-texts.com/bud/index.html > ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/TT-index.htm <...> #62814 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] new member sarahprocter... Dear Lodewijk, Thank you for breaking the ice so to speak and introducing yourself. I have always appreciated the warm friendship and support in understanding the dhamma which you an Nina have always shown me since I was young and I first visited you 30 years ago! i'm sure many people here will be very glad to have your presence here. I look forward to any more of your wise reflections/comments/ or even articles! Metta, Sarah ======= --- Lodewijk van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > > I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma > Study Group. > I am #62815 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] new member upasaka_howard Dear Lodewijk - How very wonderful!! :-) I'm so happy you have joined the list!! It will be a great pleasure communicating directly with you!!! With much metta, Howard #62816 From: "matheesha" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:02 pm Subject: Re: new member matheesha333 Hello Loedewijk, I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma > Study Group.I am Lodewijk van Gorkom, Nina's husband for 54 years. Nice to see you in the group. Hmm..you've been married for longer than I have been alive! :) In your opinion what's the secret of a successful marriage, if I may be so bold as to ask. :) I feel guidance for lay life is as useful as guidance for a ordained life. I often feel we have less of the former. with metta Matheesha #62817 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:17 pm Subject: Re: new member icarofranca Welkom Mijnheer Van Ghrorkon!!!! Aangenam kennis te maken! Bevalt het u hier? Ik hat bevalt mij heel goed!!! Mettaya, Ícaro -------------------------------------------------------------------- I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma > Study Group. > I am Lodewijk van Gorkom, Nina's husband for 54 years. I am a > retired Netherlands foreign service officer. My last posting was > ambassador in Vienna, including the IAEA and the UN Agencies. > With warm regards, > > Lodewijk > #62818 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:42 pm Subject: Re: new member icarofranca Goedenavond, Matheesha! >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Nice to see you in the group. Hmm..you've been married for longer than > I have been alive! :) > In your opinion what's the secret of a successful marriage, if I may > be so bold as to ask. :) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ik heb geen wagen Ik heb geen vrouw Ik heb geen Kinderen ok.. Ik heb geen Schulden! hah! Mettaya, Ã?caro #62819 From: han tun Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] new member hantun1 Dear Lodewijk, I am very glad that you have joined the list. I hope to learn a lot from you. You have already given a taste of how you embrace the Buddhism: as a profound human and compassionate nature and its direct applicability in daily life - a life with all its happiness, sorrow and frustrations. I am also moved by your expression of the Five Khanda's of Grasping as a real burden and the Five Hindrances as real hindrances to the development of wisdom and the eradication of defilements, and the need for a great deal of patience to achieve our goal. I too am feeling this burden of five aggregates and waiting for the day when I can lay the burden down. You are very lucky to have Nina besides you, not only as a dutiful wife for 54 years, but also as a Dhamma partner. I hope to see both of you in Bangkok when you come here. With all my warmest best wishes and respect, Han --- Lodewijk van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > I am happy to introduce myself as a new > member of the Dhamma Study Group. #62820 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:53 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,97 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 97. But in the Question Section, after setting forth conascence, prenascence, postnascence, nutriment, and faculty, the description is given first under conascence in the way beginning, 'One aggregate is a condition, as presence condition, for three aggregates and for materiality originated thereby' (P.tn.1,178). Under prenascence the description is given according to the prenascent eye and so on. Under postnascence the description is given according to postnacent consciousness and consciousness-concomitants as condition for this body. Under nutriment and faculties [respectively] the description is given thus: 'Physical nutriment is a condition, as presence condition, for this body', and 'The material life faculty is a condition, as presence condition, for materiality due to kamma performed' (P.tn.1,178).16 ----------------------- Note 16. 'The presence (atthi) condition is not applicable to nibbana. For a presence condition is that which is unhelpful by its absence of existingness (atthibhaavaabhaava) and becomes helpful by obtaining existingness. And nibbana does not, after being unhelpful by its own absence of existingness to those states that have nibbana as their object, become helpful to them by obtaining existingness. Or alternatively, the presence condition, which by its non-existingness is the opposite of helpfulness to those states that are associated with arising, etc., is helpful to them by its existingness. So nibbana is not a presence condition' (Pm.597). It may be noted that 'atthi' has more than one use, among which the following two ways may be mentioned: (1) atthi (is) = upalabbhaniya (is (a) 'apprehendable', and (b) not a self-contradictory impossibility)-- 'atthi, bhikkave, ajaata"m-- There is an unborn' (Ud. 80), and the discussion on the existence of nibbana (Ch. XVI,67ff.). (2) Atthi (is) = uppanna (arisen)-- see 'Ya"m, bhikkave, ruupa"m jaat"m paatubhuuta"m atthii ti tassa sa"nkhaa--Of the materiality that is born, manifested, it is said that "It is" ' (S.ii,71-72). The atthi-paccaya (presence condition), being implicitly equated with the latter, cannot be applied to nibbana because nibbana is not subject to arising (A.i,152). ******************** 97. pa~nhaavaare pana sahajaata.m purejaata.m pacchaajaata.m aahaara.m indriyantipi nikkhipitvaa sahajaate taava ``eko khandho ti.n.nanna.m khandhaana.m ta.msamu.t.thaanaana~nca ruupaana.m atthipaccayena paccayo´´tiaadinaa (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.435) nayena niddeso kato, purejaate purejaataana.m cakkhaadiina.m vasena niddeso kato. pacchaajaate purejaatassa imassa kaayassa pacchaajaataana.m cittacetasikaana.m paccayavasena niddeso kato. aahaarindriyesu ``kaba.liikaaro aahaaro imassa kaayassa atthipaccayena paccayo. ruupajiivitindriya.m ka.tattaaruupaana.m atthipaccayena paccayo''ti (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.435) eva.m niddeso katoti. #62821 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 3:43 pm Subject: Jhanas to be Cultivated and Not to be Feared upasaka_howard Hi, all - On another list, someone quoted material from the Latukikopama Sutta (MN 66). What was quoted involved the material "With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared." This entire sutta makes for useful reading, I would say. Throughout there is the urging to act. And the final sentence of this quoted material, so clear and to the point, urges action and calms the fearful heart. With metta, Howard #62822 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:54 pm Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Howard, > So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha > as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to be, > a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't > cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of suffering > that comes with awakening? > Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not so? > Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, prior > to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? > Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases > with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion and > the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. If "right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing whatsoever that is a thing of its own", then there is also nothing called a self that is or can be annihilated. What then is "annihilated"? Just stress and stress itself. And what is stress? Ignorance is stress. Fabrications is stress. Consciousness is stress. Name-&-form is stress. The six sense media is stress. Contact is stress. Feeling is stress. Craving is stress. Clinging is stress. Becoming is stress. Birth is stress. Aging & death is stress. These are the 12 stresses to be "annihilated". This is the complete "annihilation" of stress, the ultimate emptiness. If you want some "stress" to remain forever after the complete ceasing of "mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable", say for example, consciousness not inflicted by "I", or feeling not inflicted by "I", or contact not inflicted by "I", or the six sense media not inflicted by "I", or name-&-form not inflicted by "I", or fabrications not inflicted by "I", then I say this is impossible. Even the Buddha would say this is impossible. Why? Because consciousness not inflicted by "I" is still stress, feeling not inflicted by "I" is still stress, contact not inflicted by "I" is still stress, the six sense media not inflicted by "I" is still stress, name-&-form not inflicted by "I" is still stress, fabrications not inflicted by "I" is still stress. The desire to keep something that remains is just a manifestation of the inner primate craving for continued existence. It is the result of incomplete understanding of stress, the First Noble Truth. Regards, Swee Boon #62823 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:52 pm Subject: Re: new member christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lodewijk van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma > Study Group. > I am Lodewijk van Gorkom, Nina's husband for 54 years. I am a > retired Netherlands foreign service officer. My last posting was > ambassador in Vienna, including the IAEA and the UN Agencies. > We had four Asian postings: the Phillipines, Thailand, Japan > and Indonesia. > In Bangkok in 1966 we learned to know Buddhism through Acharn > Sujin Bhoriharnwannaket. We shall always remain grateful to her. > What strikes me so much in Buddhism, is its profound human > and compassionate nature and its direct applicability in daily life. > Some of the teachings, like the Abhidhamma, may seem theoretical, but > at closer scrutiny they pertain to our daily with all its happiness, > sorrow and frustrations. > I myself feel the Five Khanda's of Grasping as a real burden > and the Five Hindrances as real hindrances to the development of > wisdom and the eradication of defilements. I know that following the > Buddha's Path will take many years and even aeons and that we need a > great deal of patience, but too much patience should never lead to > complacency! > Nina gives me great help and support. Every day, she reads to > me from some Buddhist writings and we often discuss points of Dhamma. > I hope to learn much from all of you. > > With warm regards, > > Lodewijk Dear Lodewijk, What a delightful surprise! How lovely to see you here. :) Though, truthfully, you have always been a part of dsg through Nina's bringing you into many of her posts, and, for some of us, through our happy memories of 'real-time' meetings. You are most welcome! metta Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #62824 From: Ken O Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa ashkenn2k Hi TG Dispeller of Delusion I 10. Herein, "Why" is a question about the reason; the meaning is: for what reason do you say materiality? For what reason is that called materiality? "It is molested": here the word iti is the indication of the cause; the meaning is: because "it is molested" therefore it is called materiality. "It is molested": [it is disturbed;] it is well beaten; it is oppressed; it is broken is the meaning. Thus materiality is hereby sated to this extent in the sense of being molested. It is also permissible to call it materiality through the characteristics of being molested, for this as the characteristic of being molested>> molested by cold" -- is obvious in the hell of the world interspace molested by heat is obvious in the Great Hell of Avici molested by hunger is obvious in both the realm of ghosts and at times of famine molested by thirst is obvious among the Asura demons molested by gadflies etc is obvious in places where gadflies, flies etc are numerous molested by Wind should be understood as beely winds, spinal winds and so on molested by creeping things are any long-bodied that go by crawling Cheers Ken O #62825 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... Hi Ken O Thanks for the post. It still fits in with exactly my point IMO. TG In a message dated 8/26/2006 11:01:40 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Hi TG Dispeller of Delusion I 10. Herein, "Why" is a question about the reason; the meaning is: for what reason do you say materiality? For what reason is that called materiality? "It is molested": here the word iti is the indication of the cause; the meaning is: because "it is molested" therefore it is called materiality. "It is molested": [it is disturbed;] it is well beaten; it is oppressed; it is broken is the meaning. Thus materiality is hereby sated to this extent in the sense of being molested. It is also permissible to call it materiality through the characteristics of being molested, for this as the characteristic of being molested>> molested by cold" -- is obvious in the hell of the world interspace molested by heat is obvious in the Great Hell of Avici molested by hunger is obvious in both the realm of ghosts and at times of famine molested by thirst is obvious among the Asura demons molested by gadflies etc is obvious in places where gadflies, flies etc are numerous molested by Wind should be understood as beely winds, spinal winds and so on molested by creeping things are any long-bodied that go by crawling Cheers Ken O #62826 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa nilovg Hi tG and Ken O, Ken O, thank you for the complete text. TG, I think you use the term energy in your efforts to make the Dhamma understandable for people today. Actually we can call rupa by any name. But the aim is: detachment. We are so attached to the ruupas of the body, but we can learn to be aware of different characteristics, such as hardness, heat or cold. For convenience we can use the term nama and rupa, but the point is that they have different characteristics which can be known as they are: not belonging to a person who can manipulate them. The text about rupa that is molested helps us to see the disadvantages of rupa, thus again, detachment. Nina. Op 26-aug-2006, om 17:58 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > When it is said that "it is molested" I believe it means that > Rupa...and all > conditions for that matter, are affected by interaction between > elements. > And this interaction causes alteration... i.e., impermanence, dukkha. > > There actually is not an "affector" and an "affected" or a molestor > and > molested. There is mutual "affecting" going on between all interacting > conditions...i.e., all conditions. It boils down to a matter of > "various states of > energies pushing and affecting each other." (Note: They are only > different > energies from our subjective perspective.) #62827 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:42 am Subject: Re: new member matheesha333 Icaro! > >------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > > > > Nice to see you in the group. Hmm..you've been married for longer than > > I have been alive! :) > > In your opinion what's the secret of a successful marriage, if I may > > be so bold as to ask. :) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > > Ik heb geen wagen > Ik heb geen vrouw > Ik heb geen Kinderen ok.. > Ik heb geen Schulden! hah! > ..and now for the translation? :) with metta Matheesha #62828 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought matheesha333 AN 9.34 Nibbana Sutta Unbinding Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: A iv 414 I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Sariputta was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Sanctuary. There he said to the monks, "This Unbinding is pleasant, friends. This Unbinding is pleasant." When this was said, Ven. Udayin said to Ven. Sariputta, "But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?" "Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. There are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... smells cognizable via the nose... tastes cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Whatever pleasure or joy arises in dependence on these five strings of sensuality, that is sensual pleasure. "Now there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with sensuality, that is an affliction for him. Just as pain arises as an affliction in a healthy person for his affliction, even so the attention to perceptions dealing with sensuality that beset the monk is an affliction for him. Now, the Blessed One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this line of reasoning it may be known how Unbinding is pleasant. "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with directed thought, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the fading of rapture, remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, is physically sensitive to pleasure, and enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with rapture, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with equanimity, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of perceptions of [physical] form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, thinking, 'Infinite space,' enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with form, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, thinking, 'Infinite consciousness,' enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of the infinitude of space, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, thinking, 'There is nothing,' enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, that is an affliction for him... "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of nothingness, that is an affliction for him. Now, the Blessed One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this line of reasoning it may be known how pleasant Unbinding is. "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental fermentations are completely ended. So by this line of reasoning it may be known how Unbinding is pleasant." --------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- Revised: Sunday 2006-06-18 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.034.than.html #62829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:11 am Subject: re: Letter 41. nilovg Hi Howard (Matheesha, James), I appreciate your attention to my letter. ----------- H: Again I agree. But a mind that has been made more calm and more clear is more effectively mindful. It is possible to cultivate such a mind. ---------------------------------------- N: It is very necessary to develop right understanding also of akusala citta, which has no calm. We have to learn that it is impossible to select particular types of citta. If we fully appreciate that sati and pa~n~naa are anatta, that sati can arise at any time, also when we are disturbed, they can arise and at such moments there is detachment and calm with the kusala citta accompanied by awareness. They can take as object akusala citta which has just fallen away. Its characteristic can be object at the present time. That calm happens because of conditions, since all kusala cittas by nature are accompanied by calm and by detachment. ------------ H quotes N.: Is there any other way to correct this wrong view but knowing the > characteristic of visible object when it appears, knowing the > characteristic of thinking when it appears, knowing all realities as > they appear, one at a time? > --------------------------------------- Howard: The secret, as you say, is to see the nature of reality, to see the nature of phenomena as they arise. Cultivation is required for that - training in mindful, concentrated, calm, and clear awareness. --------------------------------------- N: Yes, training: being patient to begin again and again, being aware again and again. We have to accept that as you like to say, beginning is beginning. We cannot expect clear awareness in the beginning, that would be attachment, wrong again! When kusala citta with understanding arises, there are by conditions right concentration, right effort, calm, detachment. But they are bound to be weak in the beginning. And, the citta with awareness and understanding cannot last, it is a very short moment. ----------- Quote N: > Are we inclined to think that it is too difficult to develop right > understanding of realities in daily life because there is no > immediate result of our development? Then one may be tempted to look > for some other way, different from the development of right > understanding in daily life. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that many are inclined to think it is too difficult. I applaud you for implying that it is not. --------------------------------------- N: There is no reason for applauding, that is a misunderstanding. I do not say that it is an easy way, but I believe that if one thinks that calm, and for some even to the degree of jhaana, has to be developed first, one makes the development even more difficult. There is the danger of getting stuck in one's wish for calm, without realizing this. ---------- Quote N: > Are we not always finding excuses not to develop it in daily life? --------------------------------------- Howard: I think so. Indeed I think so. Right now we must calm the mind and pay attention, without grasping, to whatever arises. We must not permit dis- traction. We must avoid losing presence. If not now, when? ------ N: But also distraction is real, it is conditioned and it should be known as well. There is nothing to be avoided, we must learn that whatever arises does so because of conditions. What you say above about not permitting distraction is applicable to an arahat, not to us now. --------- I understand James' point that the Buddha teaches about mindfulness of breathing, and I understand that he find Rob's forum hard to swallow, the fact that this subject is soooo difficult. People in the Buddha's time had no misunderstandings, but we today? Breath is ruupa, isn't it? It does not know anything. Ruupa of the body is produced by kamma, by citta, by temperature or by nutrition. Breath is produced by citta, so long as we are alive there is citta and this conditions breath. We have to understand citta, it may be wholesome, unwholesome or neither. Very often citta rooted in attachment arises, and if someone tries to be aware of breath this breath can very well be conditioned by attachment. Breath condiitoned by attachment is coarse, it cannot be subtle. My great concern is that people are misled their whole life, not knowing that what they take for bhaavana is not bhaavana but attachment that increases evermore. I do not speak personally to you (that is why I use the word people), because everyone has to find out the truth for himself. If someone is naturally inclined to a time of silence, he may reflect on a sutta and then there are conditions for kusala citta. It is a way of samatha, the subject being the Dhamma and it can be a fruitful time. But if this is done with the wish to have more awareness, there is bound to be lobha again. Again, one can only find out for oneself whether there is attachment or not. Nina. #62830 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: new member nilovg Hi Matheesha, I was going to write to you. I do not have a vehicle, nor wife, nor children, nor debts. Icaro is wonderfully gifted for languages, even learning Dutch. Nina. Op 27-aug-2006, om 9:42 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > > Ik heb geen wagen > > Ik heb geen vrouw > > Ik heb geen Kinderen ok.. > > Ik heb geen Schulden! hah! > > > > ..and now for the translation? :) #62831 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Hi Matheesha (and Howard), still some points to answer. Meanwhile I looked at the two suttas I had overlooked, including the one about the quail Howard just drew attention to. I have no problems of course with these suttas. The Buddha explains that happiness of jhaana is a happiness higher than that connected with the five strands of sense pleasures. He then explains that jhaana, even the highest stage is not enough. The goal is cessation , attainment of extinction, nirodha samaapatti. This is possible only for the nonreturner and arahat who have developed samatha and vipassana. In this sutta and other suttas where the Buddha speaks about jhaana, that this is to be developed with vipassana so that jhaana is not taken for self. About duration of jhaana for someone who is skilled, no problem. But during that time the object does not change, citta is not shifetd to a sense object, impossible. Only the meditation subject is experienced through the mind-door. The jhaanafactors affect the body, but he does not know this while in jhaana. When he has emerged it can be noticed. Like we read in some suttas: your faculties are very clear, why? Because of bhaavanaa. See below for the next part. Op 23-aug-2006, om 15:29 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > So what does it mean to be able to stay in a jhana for > long as one wants (ie-mastery of jhana). You seem to be saying that > while in a jhana a person can experience non-jhana cittas as well? > (There is this idea of a begining and and ending of a jhanic state - > the duration of a jhana is alot longer than one citta.) > > Why are rupa jhanas called that if they cannot experience rupa? I'm > sorry I did not see Htoo's explantion. My understanding is that in > rupa jhana one can experience rupa if awareness is directed towards > it intentionally. ------- From the other post: So it looks like overcoming craving has a lot to do with samatha as well. So much so that the Buddha attributed it entirely to the samatha element rather than the panna element here. The abdhidhamma would not agree with that? ------ Samatha leads to the elimination of craving, vipassanaa to the eradication of ignorance. Agreed. But through samatha craving cannot be eradicated, only temporarily subdued. Also in samatha there is pa~n~naa, but it is of a different level. Recently Sarah mentioned that calm and insight are equal from the first stage of vipassanaa on. They are also called the two helpers. I can understand this. When insight realizes nama as nama and rupa as rupa also samaadhi, calm and concentration are developed more together with insight. By conditions, we do not have to try to develop calm separately. I mean, this is not a necessary condiiton for insight. But it depends on a person's inclinations whether he is inclined to develop samatha or not. Nina. #62832 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: new member icarofranca Hi Nina! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Matheesha, I was going to write to you. > I do not have a vehicle, nor wife, nor children, nor debts. > Icaro is wonderfully gifted for languages, even learning Dutch. > Nina. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Nina! I am specialy gifted on Languages... as a matter of fact, it always amuses me that Dutch, Swedish/Icelandic and German are so similar and, at the same time, so different! For example: when I´ve learned the basics on Dutch, I catched up the "G" spelling as a strong gutural sound, like the German "H" or the arabic "Gh"...and when I lived on Sweden (1996-1997) I´ve found sometimes the same words...but with the "G" sounding like "Y"! With the Pali I haven´t found much hindrances too - phonetically speaking, it sounds like an oversimplificated Sanskrit, despite the fact that the words meanings are many times entirelly different! One day I will try learning Thai...that has roots older than many oriental languages, but at first glance sounded to me as the quintessence of mixing up1 Mettaya, Ícaro #62833 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:00 am Subject: Re: Letter 41. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > --------- > I understand James' point that the Buddha teaches about mindfulness > of breathing, and I understand that he find Rob's forum hard to > swallow, the fact that this subject is soooo difficult. No Nina, what I find hard to swallow is misquoting the Vism. to support a particular view point. If this misquoting was done intentionally or unintentionally I don't know; I don't think it really matters to the subject at hand. Yes, mindfulness of breathing is the most difficult meditation subject because it becomes more subtle as one progresses and the body and breath become calmer. I don't dispute that at all and it isn't "hard for me to swallow". What I do dispute is that mindfulness of breathing is only for advanced practitioners who have already achieved jhana or have become sotapanna. The texts don't support that proposition. Mindfulness of breathing is most appropriate for those of a delusional nature. I would say that we all are of a delusional nature so mindfulness of breathing would be beneficial for us all. Metta, James #62834 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:28 am Subject: Rob's forum on mindfulness of breathing, no 11. nilovg Dear friends, Comments from someone else: 2. one can study all the pali, commentaries, and > subcommentaries until the end of time, but in the > final analysis, the only valid proof is the > confirmation from one's own realization experienced > directly. To this end, we have to carefully scrutinize > the canon to identify which parts are the most > authoritative and significant. For example, in the > early suttas, you would be hard pressed to find any > references to kasinas and 40 meditation objects. What > you do find is sutta passages that indicate that of > the 4 foundations of mindfulness, mindfulness of body > is the most important, and of the those, mindfulness > of breath is given special prominence. What this tells > me is that the serious cultivator should be spending a > fair amount of their effort engaged in mindfulness of > body, especially the breath. The early pali suttas > also say that if we carefully cultivate mindfulness of > breath, that it would naturally bring all 4 > foundations of mindfulness to fruition, would lead to > samatha, vipassana, single pointedness of mind and > induce jhanic absorption. What a wonderful tool! All > the study of the canon does not equal one minute of > peace, joy, tranquillity and insight that is easily > availabe to us from cultivating the breath. This can > be verified with one's own experience without even > obtaining jhanic absorption. __________ Rob K: Dear ..., If one has the ability and inclination to develop anapanasati that is great. Still it is good to know that many conditions are needed to suceed in this: Some meditation subjects need a crosslegged posture, erect back, a very quiet place, solitude... This is all well explained in the visuddhimagga. In particular this applies to anapanasati - breath. Also we should know that anapanasati is singled out as being the most difficult of all the 40 objects.Here is a passage from the Visuddhimagga Viii 211: "Although any meditation subject, no matter what, is successful only in one who is mindful and fully aware, yet any meditation subject other than this one gets more evident as he goes on giving it his attention. But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons.." (we discussed this on pali list last year) We might be concentrating on the breath with subtle lobha (attachment) not realising that true samatha comes with alobha, detachment. In many suttas the Buddha was speaking to monks who had vast accumulations of panna and other parami. It is not, I believe, that the Buddha said that all should take up anapanasati. There are other types of samatha - such as Maranasati (meditation on death)- that are suitable for all times. For example the Anguttara nikaya (Book of the Elevens ii 13 p213 Mahanama) says about Buddhanusati and Dhammanusati and several other samatha objects: "` you should develop it as you sit, as you stand, as you lie, as you apply yourself to business. You should make it grow as you dwell at home in your lodging crowded with children" ****** (end quote from Rob K) ******* NIna #62835 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:32 am Subject: Re: new member buddhatrue Hi Lodewijk, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lodewijk van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > I am happy to introduce myself as a new member of the Dhamma > Study Group. > I am Lodewijk van Gorkom, Nina's husband for 54 years. Nice to see you posting here. I understand that you have appreciated some of my posts to you- that is nice to know. Know I can communicate with you more directly. To get the ball rolling, perhaps you would like to explain more as to why you believe the Buddha's path takes aeons. I don't see it that way and believe that the Buddha's path takes at the most seven lifetimes (upon reaching sotapanna). The only thing that would take aeons is development of the perfections leading to Buddhahood- which the Buddha didn't teach as part of the Noble Eightfold Path. But perhaps you see it differently. If you would care to elaborate I would be interested. Metta, James #62836 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Generally useful meditation subjects jonoabb Hi Kel The message I just sent to you was meant to be in reply to this one of yours (addressed to me). Apologies for the confusion. Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi KenH, James and Jon > > Vsm III, 57 > > Herein, lovingkindness towards the Community of Bhikkhus, etc., and > also mindfulness of death are what are called generally useful > meditation subjects. Some say perception of foulness, too. > #62837 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Generally useful meditation subjects jonoabb Hi Kel I've finally found some time to comment on this and some other posts from your series of quotes from the Vism, posted just after Sarah and I left Hong Kong (travel means erratic posing, I'm afraid!). I have 2 observations to make in relation to the 'generally useful meditation subjects' given in Vism Ch III and quoted by you below. The first is that metta and mindfulness of death (and perception of foulness) can and do occur in daily life, and such moments are opportunities for the further development of those particular aspects of samatha. The second is that we need to bear in mind the description given in the same chapter of Vism of the prerequisites for the development of samatha at the level being discussed here (which I see as being a relatively high level). In par. 28 of Ch III those prerequisites are given as follows: - The person should have *taken his stand on virtue that is quite purified*. - He should *sever any of the ten impediments that he may have*. - He should then *approach the good friend, the giver of a meditation subject* regarding the choice of a meditation subject suitable to his temperament. - After that he should *avoid a monastery unfavourable to the development of concentration and go to live in one that is favourable*. - Then he should *sever the lesser impediments* and *not overlook any of the directions for development*. These are all very meaningful requirements/steps. Do people nowadays understand the proper significance of each? Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi KenH, James and Jon > > Vsm III, 57 > > Herein, lovingkindness towards the Community of Bhikkhus, etc., and > also mindfulness of death are what are called generally useful > meditation subjects. Some say perception of foulness, too. > > 58. When a bhikkhu takes up a meditation subject, he should first > develop lovingkindness towards the Community of Bhikkhus within the > boundary, limiting it at first [ to 'all bhikkhus in this > monastery'], in this way: 'May they be happy and free from > affliction'. Then he should develop it towards all deities within > the boundary. Then towards all the principal people in the village > that is his alms resort; then to [all human beings there and to] all > living beings dependent on the human beings. With lovingkindness > towards the Community of Bhikkhus he produces kindliness in his > coresidents; then they are easy for him to live with. With > lovingkindness towards the deities within the boundary he is > protected by kindly deities with lawful protection. With > lovingkindess towards the pricipal people in the village that is his > alms resort his requiisites are protected by well-disposed principal > people with lawful protection. With lovingkindness to all human > begings there he goes about without incurring their dislike since > they trust him. With lovingkindess to all living beings he can > wander unhindered everywhere. > > With mindfulness of death, thinking 'I have go to die', he gives > up improper search and with a growing sense of urgency he comes to > live without attachment. When his mind is familiar with the > perception of foulness, then even divine objects do not tempt his > mind to greed. > > 59. So these are called generally useful and they are called > meditation subjects since they are needed generally and desirable > owing to their great helpfulness and since they are subjects for the > meditation work intended. #62838 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Lovingkindess jonoabb Hi Kel Thanks for this passage, which contains some interesting material on the development of metta. We should not underestimate the difficulty of the task being described. What may seem on a quick read to be minor steps turn out on a closer examination to be much more substantial. Consider the *preliminary* steps given in the passage: 1. If he is a beginner, he should *sever the impediments* and *learn the meditation subject*. 2. Then, when he has down the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself conformably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place. 3. To start with, he should *review the danger in hate and the advantage in patience*. I think that even step #1 would be difficult to attain for most people. The first part of that step, the severing of the impediments, requires the adoption of a certain lifestyle. The second part, the learning of the mediation subject, seems to suggest a fairly advanced level of samatha. Step #3, reviewing the danger in hate and the advantage in patience, requires panna of the level of samatha, I believe. It is not a matter of mere recitation or of following a particular technique. Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi James and Jon, > > Vsm IX 1-12 > > 1. A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindess among > these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments and learn > the meditations ubject. Then, when he has down the work connected > with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat > himself conformtably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place. > To start with, he should review the danger in hate and the advantage > in patience. > > 2. Why? because hate has to be abandoned and patience attained in > the development of this meditation subject, and he cannot abandon > unsenn dangers and attain unknown advantages. > ... #62839 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A good friend jonoabb Hi Kel Thanks for this post with the description of the good friend. We have already discussed the contents of this in another thread. I don't think I hav anything more to add on that side of things at the moment. Of interest to me, however, were some comments in par. 65 regarding the preferred qualifications of the good friend. If there is no enlightened person or jhana attainer available, the preferred good friend should be, in order: one who knows three Pitakas, one who knows one Pitaka, one who is familiar with one Collection together with its commentary and who is himself conscientious. In explanation of this it says: For a teacher such as this, who knows the texts, guards the heritage, and protects the tradition, will *follow the teachers' opinion rather than his own*. This shows the importance placed on the words of the ancients rather than the individual's views or 'experience'. It was the guiding principle for compilers such as Buddhaghosa himself. Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi Jon, Howard, Scott and all (from Teacher thread) > > Vsm III 61 > > The good friend is one who posses such special qualities as these: > 'He is revered and dearly loved, > And one who speaks and suffers speech; > The speech he uters is profound, > He does not urge without a reason' and so on. > > He is wholly solicitous of welfare and partial to progress. > ... > 64. So if someone with cankers destroyed is available, that is good. > If not, then one should take it from a non-returner, a once- > returner, a stream-enterer, an ordinary man who has obtained jhana, > one who knows three Pitakas, one who knows one Pitaka, in descending > order [according as available]. If not even one who knows one > Pitaka is available, then it should be taken from one who is > familiar with one Collection together with its commentary and one > who is himself conscientious. For a teacher such as this, who knows > the texts, guards the hiertage, and protects the tradition, will > follow the teachers' opinion rather than his own. Hence the Ancient > Elders said three times, 'One who is conscientious will guard it'. > > 65. Now thoese beginning with one whose cankers are destroyed, > mentioned above, will describe only the the path they have > themselves reached. But with a learned man, his instructions and > his answers to questions are purified by his having approached such > and such teachers, and so he will explain a meditation subject > showing a broad track, like a big elephant going through a stretch > of jungle, he will select suttas and reasons from here and there, > adding [explanations of] what is suitable and unsuitable. So a > meditation subject should be taken by approaching the good friend > such as this, the giver of a meditation subject and by doing all > duties to him. > #62840 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Near and Far Enemies of brahma-viharas jonoabb Hi Kel --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi Jon and James, > > Kel: I came across this section today and since you were discussing > metta/lobha before. I believe this points out why you have to > practice all 4 to cover all the bases :) I'm not sure what you mean by 'cover all the bases'. But as I see it, all 4 Brahma-viharas arise from time to time in daily life, so there is some opportunity for their development even without undertaking a special 'practice' of any kind. Jon > Vsm 98-101 > > 98. And here each one has two enemies, one near and one far. > The divine abiding of lovingkindness has greed as its near enemy, > since both share in seeing virtues. Greed behaves like a foe who > keeps close by a man, and it easily finds an opportunit. So > lovingkindess should be well protected from it. And ill will, which > is dissimilar to the similar greed, is its far enemy like a foe > ensconced in a rock wilderness. So lovingkindess must be practised > free from fear of that; for it is not possible to practise > lovingkindess and feel anger simultaneously. > ... #62841 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:16 am Subject: insubstaintial as in Dispeller of Delusion ashkenn2k Hi Howard I remember we discuss this before and if I am not wrong your position is that dhamma lack substance. After thinking about this for a while, I would like to discuss this again. My position is that it lacks a permanent substance but not susbtance itself. As substance is to me, the essential characteristics of a dhamma, it does not meant to be lasting. Because without susbtance, how could a dhamma be experience, its characteristics be unique, and it exist from causes and conditions. A susbtance does not mean it exist on its own right, it arise due to conditions. Dispeller of Delusion 1 <<144. "Matter is like a lump of foam, and feeling like a water bubble, Perception like a mirage, too formations like a plantain stem And consciousness like an illusion -- so said the Kinsman of the Sun" (S iii 140) 145 Herin, the resemblance of materiality, etc to the lump of foam, etc, should be understood thus. Just as a lump of foam is unsubstantial, so also materiality is unsubstantial owing to its lack of any permanent substance, lasting substance or self substance.................And since it is impermanent, painful, no self and foul, thus it is merely like a lump of foam>> There are description on water bubble etc, I would type it later, as I am a bit lazy today :-) Cheers Ken O #62842 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:14 am Subject: nibbaana nilovg Dear Paul (Howard, James), Paul, I appreciate it that you are reading Survey. -------- P: It seems to me that we can get caught up in this notion of "super" cittas. My understanding, which may be quite different from others here, is that lokuttara cittas are "super" because of the very fact that they carry out a function that in itself must be different from the function of "regular" mundane conditioned cittas. How could there be an experience of the nature of conditioned realities by a regular old vipaka citta. There is no doubt that lokuttara cittas perform a function just like any other, but by nature of vipaka, the cause of past kusala kamma comes to fruition is such a way that determines that the next reality to be experienced will be nibbana. According to Sujin, the type of citta that arises (lokuttara citta) arises because of past kamma. Path-consciousness is vipakacitta; it happens because of conditions and is beyond our control. The very nature of what the lokuttara citta experiences is what makes it great. _______ N: You are quite right about not being caught up with super, well said. On p. 322 of Survey you can read about lokuttara citta. Actually, Path-consciousness is lokuttara kusala citta and fruition- consciousness is the immediate result of this, and this is lokuttara vipaakacitta. James, you would like to know my sources, and yes, I should give them. The main sources: Abhidhamma, for example the first Book, Dhammasangani, but also the other books, and the commentaries, such as Visuddhimagga. But, a super citta if I may use this expression is implied in the suttas, all over. I try to explain. Nibbaana is the third noble Truth, the cessation of dukkha. At the moment of enlightenment the four noble Truths are realized by the lokuttara cittas. But, these could never arise without the accumulation of all the 37 factors pertaining to enlightenment. Among these the four applications of mindfulness, the eightfold Path, four right efforts, etc. thus, the citta that finally experiences nibbana is not an ordinary citta, it is endowed with all these factors. These factors are often mentioned in the suttas. Pa~n~na has to realize conditioned realities as impermanent, dukkha and anatta before the realization of nibbaana. I think Paul meant by the result of kusala kamma in this context the accumulation of all these excellent qualities. Insight is developed in stages and during this development the citta will be more inclined to nibbaana. I shall quote from Kh Sujin's book on the Perfections (Pa~n~naa): < We may not have understood that the defilements and all dukkha, suffering, which arise in this life are in ourselves, that is, the nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas we take for me, for self. The true cessation of dukkha is that nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma do not have to be reborn. We read in the “Mahåniddesa, “Attadaùèa Sutta”: The word “man” (nara) is used here with regard to someone who is inclined to nibbåna. This means, that “men” are people in this world who perform generous deeds, undertake síla, observe the fastday, prepare water for drinking and for other uses, sweep the grounds, pay respect to the stupa, develop kusala of the three dhåtus, elements, that should be developed. They do not develop kusala because of rebirth, because of a plane of existence they want to attain, because they want to continue in the cycle of birth and death. They have as their goal to depart from dukkha, they are humble and they are inclined to nibbåna. Because of this goal they will develop all kinds of kusala. They are called “men”, because they are inclined to nibbåna. Someone who has not understood the true meaning of dukkha may hope for the end of dukkha in as far as he sees dukkha as merely getting what he does not wish for. Or he may just want to have no more suffering. However, when someone has understanding of the meaning of dukkha, his goal is departing from dukkha, in the sense of being inclined to nibbåna, which is the end of dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas. This kind of understanding has as foundation listening to the Dhamma and seeing the danger in akusala, seeing the disadvantage, suffering and danger of rebirth, of the arising of nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas. > ****** Nina. #62843 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:18 am Subject: Letters from Nina 42 nilovg Dear friends, It is actually because of our defilements that it is hard to develop right understanding. If we cling to immediate results we will make it even harder. Why don't we have the patience to develop understanding little by little, starting at this very moment? There are realities all the time and at least we can begin. We cannot expect to have full understanding at once of seeing, hearing etc. But what does that matter? When one is only intent on the present moment one does not worry about the many lives one still has to live in order to have full understanding. And anyway, we do not have understanding, it is understanding which develops and understands. I do not see any other way in order to know that it is the seeing which sees, not self. That it is the hearing which hears, not self. That it is the thinking which thinks, not self. There is no other way but knowing their characteristics when they appear. If one tries to concentrate on such realities, or thinks about them, or tries to direct phenomena there is thinking about stories and concepts but not the direct experience of the realities which appear. When we think of seeing, the characteristic of seeing cannot be directly experienced. And we shall keep on living in the world of thoughts only, with lobha, dosa and moha (attachment, aversion and ignorance). It is good to remember that the Buddha repeated that it is 'no easy matter' to attain full knowledge. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (II, Ch XXI, Kindred Saying about Brethren, par. 6, 11,12) about different monks who attained arahatship. We read that the Buddha said about Kappina: (par. 11): .... That monk is highly gifted, monks, of wondrous power. No easy matter is it to win that which he formerly had not won, even that for the sake of which clansmen rightly leave the home for the homeless, even that uttermost goal of the divine living which he has attained, wherein he abides, having come just here and now to know it thoroughly for himself and to realize it. The Buddha would not repeatedly say that it is no easy matter if there were some other way of developing which would be easier. There is ignorance of all realities which appear; ignorance is deeply accumulated and thus, how could it be easy to get rid of it? ****** Nina. #62844 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:18 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe 61 nilovg Dear friends, If the seeing-consciousness is akusala vipåka, the sampa.t.ticchana- citta (receiving-consciousness) is also akusala vipåka; if the seeing- consciousness is kusala vipåka, the sampa.t.ticchana-citta is also kusala vipåka. Thus, there are two types of sampa.t.ticchana-citta: one is akusala vipåka and one is kusala vipåka. Sampa.t.ticchana-citta is ahetuka vipåka; there are no akusala hetus (unwholesome roots) or sobhana hetus (beautiful roots) arising with this type of citta. sampa.t.ticchana-citta succeeds seeing- consciousness; seeing-consciousness is a condition for the arising of sampa.t.ticchana-citta. Likewise, when there is hearing-consciousness which hears sound, sampa.t.ticchana-citta succeeds hearing- consciousness. It is the same with regard to the other sense-doors. sampa.t.ticchana-citta always arises with upekkhå (indifferent feeling), no matter whether the sampa.t.ticchana-citta is akusala vipåka or kusala vipåka. After the sampa.t.ticchana-citta has arisen and fallen away, the process of cittas experiencing an object is not yet over. The sampa.t.ticchana-citta is succeeded by another ahetuka vipåkacitta which is still the result of kamma. This type of citta is called investigating-consciousness, santiira.na-citta. Santiira.na-citta investigates or considers the object which was experienced by one of the dvi-pañca-viññå.nas (``the five pairs''), and which was ``received'' by the sampa.t.ticchana-citta. santiira.na-citta succeeds sampa.t.ticchana-citta in a process of cittas experiencing an object through one of the five sense-doors; sampa.t.ticchana-citta is a condition for the arising of santiira.na-citta. When seeing has arisen, sampa.t.ticchana-citta succeeds the seeing-consciousness, and santiira.na-citta succeeds the sampa.t.ticchana-citta in the process of cittas which experience visible object. It is the same with the santiira.na-citta which arises in the process of cittas experiencing an object through one of the other sense-doors; it succeeds the sampa.t.ticchana-citta. We cannot choose whether santiira.na-citta should arise or not; cittas arise because of conditions, they are beyond control. santiira.na-citta is also an ahetuka vipåkacitta. When the object is unpleasant, the santiira.na-citta is akusala vipåka and it is accompanied by upekkhå (indifferent feeling). As regards santiira.na- citta which is kusala vipåka, there are two kinds. When the object is pleasant but not extraordinarily pleasant, santiira.na-citta is accompanied by upekkhå. When the object is extraordinarily pleasant, the santiira.na-citta is accompanied by somanassa, pleasant feeling. Thus, there are three kinds of santiira.na-citta in all. It depends on conditions which kind of santiira.na-citta arises. **** Nina. #62845 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 5:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/26/06 10:55:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha > >as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to be, > >a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't > >cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of suffering > >that comes with awakening? > >Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not so? > >Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, prior > >to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? > >Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > >anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > >whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases > >with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion and > >the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. > > If "right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > whatsoever that is a thing of its own", then there is also nothing > called a self that is or can be annihilated. > > What then is "annihilated"? Just stress and stress itself. > > And what is stress? > > Ignorance is stress. > Fabrications is stress. > Consciousness is stress. > Name-&-form is stress. > The six sense media is stress. > Contact is stress. > Feeling is stress. > Craving is stress. > Clinging is stress. > Becoming is stress. > Birth is stress. > Aging &death is stress. -------------------------------------------- Howard: All of these are *unsatisfactory* (i.e., not sources of satisfaction), and they are sources of outright suffering *when clung to*. The second noble truth provides the primary cause of suffering, and it is tanha. Dhammas, themselves, are not stress. --------------------------------------------- > > These are the 12 stresses to be "annihilated". > > This is the complete "annihilation" of stress, the ultimate emptiness. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Suffering is ended entirely, right then and there, with full and final awakening. The Buddha did *not* suffer. ------------------------------------------ > > If you want some "stress" to remain forever after the complete ceasing > of "mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable", > say for example, consciousness not inflicted by "I", or feeling not > inflicted by "I", or contact not inflicted by "I", or the six sense > media not inflicted by "I", or name-&-form not inflicted by "I", or > fabrications not inflicted by "I", then I say this is impossible. Even > the Buddha would say this is impossible. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I think you are playing word games and mind games with yourself. An arahant is entirely free of dukkha. There is no sense of person, there is nothing to grasp, there is complete and direct understanding, and there is total freedom. Nothing is lacking. There is nothing more to be done. For an arahant, should experience cease or continue matters not in the slightest. Peace is utter and complete, with nothing further required. ------------------------------------------- > > Why? Because consciousness not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > feeling not inflicted by "I" is still stress, contact not inflicted by > "I" is still stress, the six sense media not inflicted by "I" is still > stress, name-&-form not inflicted by "I" is still stress, fabrications > not inflicted by "I" is still stress. -------------------------------------------- Howard: There is no clinging and no stress. There is no affliction of any sort. The arahant has done what was needed to be done. Nibbana is realized. -------------------------------------------- > > The desire to keep something that remains is just a manifestation of > the inner primate craving for continued existence. It is the result of > incomplete understanding of stress, the First Noble Truth. -------------------------------------------- Howard: I think you misunderstand it. An arahant lacks in its entirety the cause of dukkha. An arahant is entirely free - free of self, free of other, free of dukkha. ------------------------------------------ > > Regards, > Swee Boon > ===================== With metta, Howard #62846 From: "Paul" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nibbaana paulgrabiano... Thanks Nina, P: That's precisely what needed to be said and I was unable to say. Lokuttara cittas are the culmination of the path that comes not by wanting to be free from pain and displeasurable states of mind, but by becoming evermore aware of the nature of dukkha in this moment. N: Actually, Path-consciousness is lokuttara kusala citta and fruition- consciousness is the immediate result of this, and this is lokuttara vipaakacitta. P: Also, this is an important correction. Sujin writes on page 176: "The locuttara kusala citta is the condition for locuttara viapakacitta to succeed it immediately; there is no other type of citta arising in between the lokuttara kusula citta, which is cause, and the locuttara vipakacitta, which is result. Apart from the lokuttara kusala citta, no other type of kusala citta can produce vipakacitta immediately succeeding it." Then, it appears that the experience of nibbana is unmediated by the cycle of dependent arising. It appears that it is its own thing. Then, to what extent is the lokutara kusala citta also free from conditions? Nibbana must be experienced by a citta (albeit a special citta), but why must the citta which experiences nibbana be kusalacitta and not vipakacitta? It makes perfect sense, but I'll need to study this one more. You always confuse me and make me think. paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 11:14 AM Subject: [dsg] nibbaana Dear Paul (Howard, James), Paul, I appreciate it that you are reading Survey. -------- P: It seems to me that we can get caught up in this notion of "super" cittas. My understanding, which may be quite different from others here, is that lokuttara cittas are "super" because of the very fact that they carry out a function that in itself must be different from the function of "regular" mundane conditioned cittas. How could there be an experience of the nature of conditioned realities by a regular old vipaka citta. There is no doubt that lokuttara cittas perform a function just like any other, but by nature of vipaka, the cause of past kusala kamma comes to fruition is such a way that determines that the next reality to be experienced will be nibbana. According to Sujin, the type of citta that arises (lokuttara citta) arises because of past kamma. Path-consciousness is vipakacitta; it happens because of conditions and is beyond our control. The very nature of what the lokuttara citta experiences is what makes it great. _______ N: You are quite right about not being caught up with super, well said. On p. 322 of Survey you can read about lokuttara citta. Actually, Path-consciousness is lokuttara kusala citta and fruition- consciousness is the immediate result of this, and this is lokuttara vipaakacitta. James, you would like to know my sources, and yes, I should give them. The main sources: Abhidhamma, for example the first Book, Dhammasangani, but also the other books, and the commentaries, such as Visuddhimagga. But, a super citta if I may use this expression is implied in the suttas, all over. I try to explain. Nibbaana is the third noble Truth, the cessation of dukkha. At the moment of enlightenment the four noble Truths are realized by the lokuttara cittas. But, these could never arise without the accumulation of all the 37 factors pertaining to enlightenment. Among these the four applications of mindfulness, the eightfold Path, four right efforts, etc. thus, the citta that finally experiences nibbana is not an ordinary citta, it is endowed with all these factors. These factors are often mentioned in the suttas. Pa~n~na has to realize conditioned realities as impermanent, dukkha and anatta before the realization of nibbaana. I think Paul meant by the result of kusala kamma in this context the accumulation of all these excellent qualities. Insight is developed in stages and during this development the citta will be more inclined to nibbaana. I shall quote from Kh Sujin's book on the Perfections (Pa~n~naa): < We may not have understood that the defilements and all dukkha, suffering, which arise in this life are in ourselves, that is, the nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas we take for me, for self. The true cessation of dukkha is that nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma do not have to be reborn. We read in the "Mahåniddesa, "Attadaùèa Sutta": The word "man" (nara) is used here with regard to someone who is inclined to nibbåna. This means, that "men" are people in this world who perform generous deeds, undertake síla, observe the fastday, prepare water for drinking and for other uses, sweep the grounds, pay respect to the stupa, develop kusala of the three dhåtus, elements, that should be developed. They do not develop kusala because of rebirth, because of a plane of existence they want to attain, because they want to continue in the cycle of birth and death. They have as their goal to depart from dukkha, they are humble and they are inclined to nibbåna. Because of this goal they will develop all kinds of kusala. They are called "men", because they are inclined to nibbåna. Someone who has not understood the true meaning of dukkha may hope for the end of dukkha in as far as he sees dukkha as merely getting what he does not wish for. Or he may just want to have no more suffering. However, when someone has understanding of the meaning of dukkha, his goal is departing from dukkha, in the sense of being inclined to nibbåna, which is the end of dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas. This kind of understanding has as foundation listening to the Dhamma and seeing the danger in akusala, seeing the disadvantage, suffering and danger of rebirth, of the arising of nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas. > ****** Nina. #62847 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] insubstaintial as in Dispeller of Delusion upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/27/06 10:17:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: > Hi Howard > > I remember we discuss this before and if I am not wrong your position > is that dhamma lack substance. After thinking about this for a > while, I would like to discuss this again. My position is that it > lacks a permanent substance but not susbtance itself. As substance > is to me, the essential characteristics of a dhamma, it does not > meant to be lasting. > -------------------------------------- Howard: That is one sense of "substance". But it doesn't apply to paramattha dhammas. They do not *have* essential characteristics. They are exactly what they are. Hardness is not something having a quality. It *is* a "quality". In any case, what I object to is the sense of substance as an individuating core of separateness. That usage points away from anatta. -------------------------------------- Because without susbtance, how could a dhamma> > be experience, its characteristics be unique, and it exist from > causes and conditions. A susbtance does not mean it exist on its own > right, it arise due to conditions. --------------------------------------- Howard: Why are you beating a dead horse? I've said again and again that dhammas are distinguishable, but they lack own being. I still say that. --------------------------------------- > > Dispeller of Delusion 1 > <<144. "Matter is like a lump of foam, > and feeling like a water bubble, > Perception like a mirage, too > formations like a plantain stem > And consciousness like an illusion -- > so said the Kinsman of the Sun" (S iii 140) -------------------------------------------- Howard: And that is exactly what I mean by saying that they are insubstantial. That's it! So what is there to argue about? -------------------------------------------- > > 145 Herin, the resemblance of materiality, etc to the lump of foam, > etc, should be understood thus. Just as a lump of foam is > unsubstantial, so also materiality is unsubstantial owing to its lack > of any permanent substance, lasting substance or self > substance.................And since it is impermanent, painful, no > self and foul, thus it is merely like a lump of foam>> > > There are description on water bubble etc, I would type it later, as > I am a bit lazy today :-) -------------------------------------- Howard: There is more to anatta than anicca. If that were all, there would be no need to speak of anatta. Anicca would suffice. The impermanence of dhammas merely points to there being anatta. What has self is independent and separate. It is its own thing. No dhamma has such nature. -------------------------------------- > > > Cheers > Ken O > > =================== With metta, Howard #62848 From: Daniel Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:31 am Subject: Re: Lunch meeting with Jon and Sarah sbhtkk Dear Howard and all, I am reviving and old post. > Howard: > > Phil, I hope you continue actively on the list, actively engaging in > Dhamma discussions. You are free to pick and choose whom you speak with. If I > am among those with whom you'd rather not speak, that's fine - seriously. > It happens that I have come across commentarial interpretations that > have been helpful to me, and I will take assistance (though not dictation) > from > any source that seems helpful, especially from people who should know a great > deal due to being said to be or to have been ariyans. But ultimately my > understanding of the Dhamma cannot and, IMO, should not, be the result of > merely > substituting the insights and deliberations of others for mine. I take the > Kalama Sutta very seriously. As for the commentaries, I don't own any. My > experience so far has been that the English translations available are > distressingly > poor. I would like to ask you for an advice, how to develop a more inquisitive mind, which relies more one oneself, than on others? What what experience that you had in your life helped you in this? With regards to me, I can say that noticing how much I am influenced by the opinions of people that I respect is a bit helpful in order to be less influenced, paradoxically. Just learning about myself how much I am influenced by the opinions of other people simply because they are rich, beautiful, educated, possess a high social status, famous and so on, helps me not to deny it. Yours, Daniel #62849 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Generally useful meditation subjects kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, > The first is that metta and mindfulness of death (and perception of > foulness) can and do occur in daily life, and such moments are > opportunities for the further development of those particular aspects of > samatha. ... > In par. 28 of Ch III those prerequisites are given as follows: > > - The person should have *taken his stand on virtue that is quite > purified*. > - He should *sever any of the ten impediments that he may have*. > - He should then *approach the good friend, the giver of a meditation > subject* regarding the choice of a meditation subject suitable to his > temperament. > - After that he should *avoid a monastery unfavourable to the development > of concentration and go to live in one that is favourable*. > - Then he should *sever the lesser impediments* and *not overlook any of > the directions for development*. > > These are all very meaningful requirements/steps. Do people nowadays > understand the proper significance of each? Kel: I think they're opposite of daily life and not required for satipatthana. With any set of instructions there's bound to be a sense of self. So anyone who understands Buddha's teaching of Anatta can see them as description of what ancient monks used to do. - Kel #62850 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Lovingkindess kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, > What may seem on a quick read to be minor steps turn out on a closer > examination to be much more substantial. Kel: It's quite difficult and important first step which makes it even more essential for one to take it. Questionable returns > I think that even step #1 would be difficult to attain for most people. > The first part of that step, the severing of the impediments, requires the > adoption of a certain lifestyle. The second part, the learning of the > mediation subject, seems to suggest a fairly advanced level of samatha. > > Step #3, reviewing the danger in hate and the advantage in patience, > requires panna of the level of samatha, I believe. It is not a matter of > mere recitation or of following a particular technique. 1) Developing metta is a difficult task 2) Certain living situations are more conducive than others 3) Imagine not just eating and observing the dizziness 4) Set of recommendations or instructions are given I'm just pointing out what's given in Visuddhimagga. Some parts involve recitation and certain ways of dealing with things. If you don't call that technique, what is that? You can't say beginner should server the impediment then jump to the part #2 where the person becomes advanced in samatha. Where are your sources for such a conclusion? - Kel #62851 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A good friend kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, > In explanation of this it says: > For a teacher such as this, who knows the texts, guards the heritage, and > protects the tradition, will *follow the teachers' opinion rather than his > own*. > > This shows the importance placed on the words of the ancients rather than > the individual's views or 'experience'. It was the guiding principle for > compilers such as Buddhaghosa himself. Kel: It was in the context of getting a meditation subject which is recommended by ancients. Though I guess whatever object that arises in the mind of an individual is better than a subject given by a teacher. But you don't believe in having a teacher anyway, especially any modern teachers who might even know the texts #62852 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 8/27/2006 1:26:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi tG and Ken O, Ken O, thank you for the complete text. TG, I think you use the term energy in your efforts to make the Dhamma understandable for people today. TG: The term "energies" is not meant as a second rate alternative to nama and rupa; it is meant to accurately indicate what is going on. Investigation of the Four Great Elements can reveal conditionality to be energy transformations. I think this is confirmed with modern scientific understanding. But the Buddha is the scientist I'm interested in. Actually we can call rupa by any name. TG: Not necessarily. But the aim is: detachment. TG: Yes We are so attached to the ruupas of the body, but we can learn to be aware of different characteristics, such as hardness, heat or cold. TG: I think we are naturally aware of these things in general. The point is to be intently mindful of their arising and changing and passing away along with the CONDITIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT INSTIGATE SUCH CHANGES, impermanence. Insight is keyed into understanding the conditional circumstances 'motivating' change. Awareness of the actual experience is the way insight is "tested" as being accurate. When insight realizes that conditionality produces change that MUST disintegrate all conditions, DETACHMENT is the result. For convenience we can use the term nama and rupa, TG: I actually find the usage most inconvenient. but the point is that they have different characteristics which can be known as they are: TG: "known as they are" is where the fallacy creeps in IMO. An experience cannot insightfully be known as "it is." Because "it is" nothing of itself. It is empty of itself. It is a resultant, a phantom, a shadow of others "empties." Note: If knowing it as "it is" is actually knowing the experience as "having nothing of itself" ... then I might be inclined to agree. not belonging to a person who can manipulate them. TG: I'm OK with that part. The text about rupa that is molested helps us to see the disadvantages of rupa, thus again, detachment. TG: My point in my first response, posted again below, corresponds quite nicely with your conclusion, does so in more depth IMO, and in straight forward English. :-) It does require lots of contemplation to see the point however. The Buddha used the terminology available to him and his audience. He did not become the Buddha because he understood such terminology. He became the Buddha because he correctly observed his experiences and surroundings and implemented appropriate action to oust ignorance completely. I think adhering to strictly to boundaries of language is liable to thwart the "artistic/penetrating/synthesizing" side of the mind that is equally responsible for developing insight. Nina. TG: When it is said that "it is molested" I believe it means that Rupa...and all conditions for that matter, are affected by interaction between elements. And this interaction causes alteration... i.e., impermanence, dukkha. There actually is not an "affector" and an "affected" or a molestor and molested. There is mutual "affecting" going on between all interacting conditions...i.e., all conditions. It boils down to a matter of "various states of energies pushing and affecting each other." (Note: They are only different energies from our subjective perspective.) TG #62853 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Near and Far Enemies of brahma-viharas kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, Basic point is if you're concerned about subtle lobha you wouldn't use arising of metta or metta-like state as a chance to see the difference. Yea I hope those some opportunities are enough. - Kel > I'm not sure what you mean by 'cover all the bases'. But as I see it, all > 4 Brahma-viharas arise from time to time in daily life, so there is some > opportunity for their development even without undertaking a special > 'practice' of any kind. #62854 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lunch meeting with Jon and Sarah upasaka_howard Hi, Daniel - In a message dated 8/27/06 1:37:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, daniell@... writes: > > Dear Howard and all, > > > I am reviving and old post. > > > > >Howard: > > > > Phil, I hope you continue actively on the list, actively engaging in > >Dhamma discussions. You are free to pick and choose whom you speak with. If > I > >am among those with whom you'd rather not speak, that's fine - seriously. > > It happens that I have come across commentarial interpretations that > >have been helpful to me, and I will take assistance (though not dictation) > >from > >any source that seems helpful, especially from people who should know a > great > >deal due to being said to be or to have been ariyans. But ultimately my > >understanding of the Dhamma cannot and, IMO, should not, be the result of > >merely > >substituting the insights and deliberations of others for mine. I take the > >Kalama Sutta very seriously. As for the commentaries, I don't own any. My > >experience so far has been that the English translations available are > >distressingly > >poor. > > > I would like to ask you for an advice, how to develop a more inquisitive > mind, > which relies more one oneself, than on others? What what experience that you > had in your life helped you in this? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Daniel, I'm flattered that you would ask me this but also slightly embarassed, because of my inadequacies. I'm also rather concerned about how I answer it. Relying on oneself is important, and the Buddha emphasized that in saying to be a light (or an island) unto oneself. But there is a danger in going too far with that as well, as there is with most things. We are all beset by egotism in one form or another, and this business of "relying on oneself" is one more thing that our sense of self can latch onto as an excuse to grow even stronger. So we need to be careful. With that caveat, I must say that ultimately, we only *have* ourself to rely on. After all, when choosing others as teachers or guides, and when choosing teachings to favor, who is it who does the choosing? It is we who choose - of course. And it is we who choose whether or not to accept at face value or to give due consideration and evaluation. In a sense, we should consider everyone and everything. There are sources of knowledge everywhere. For me, I have never come across a teacher or a teaching so magnificent as that presented in the Sutta Pitaka, and, accordingly, I have chosen to take the Buddha and his teaching as my primary source. As for my being inquisitive, I would suppose it fair to say that all of us here are inquisitive, though some may be less willing to accept without personal confirmation than others. I have never been a "rebel", but I have always been a questioner. As a young child I thought about things that most kids never considered: What I "really" am, what the world "really" is. I was *consumed* by the meaning of personal identity - what makes me "me" and not "someone else", a non-question for most people. It was like a koan for me. I couldn't let it go. Also at that stage, without having been taught, I engaged in a kind of "natural" meditation that involved closing the eyes and listening to the world of sound and feeling the world of bodily sensation *as such*, without conceptualizing. Why I did that I can't say. I just did. From early on I was inclined to science and mathematics. That is the training I pursued, and starting while yet working on my doctorate in mathematical logic and formal linguistics, I began a career of working as a mathematician for close to 40 years. That further pushed my inclination towards inquisitiveness ----------------------------------------------- > > With regards to me, I can say that noticing how much I am influenced by the > opinions of people that I respect is a bit helpful in order to be less > influenced, paradoxically. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: As with most things, there is a middle (i.e. optimal) way. ------------------------------------------- Just learning about myself how much I am influenced > > by the opinions of other people simply because they are rich, beautiful, > educated, possess a high social status, famous and so on, helps me not to > deny > it. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Sure! Our awareness of our inclinations, kusala and akusala, saves the day. And without a basic awareness we're in big trouble. ---------------------------------------- > > > Yours, Daniel ===================== With metta, Howard #62855 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:56 am Subject: Idiotic Fool ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is an Idiotic, Imbecile & Moronic Fool? A certain bhikkhu once asked the Blessed Buddha: Venerable Sir, it is said: An idiotic fool, an idiotic fool... In what way, Venerable Sir, can one rightly be called an idiotic fool ? Bhikkhu, it is because one has neither developed nor cultivated these Seven Links to Awakening that one rightly is called an idiotic fool !!! What seven? 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening. 5: The Tranquillity to Awakening. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening. It is because one has neither developed nor ever cultivated these Seven Factors of Enlightenment that one is called an idiotic fool... Source of reference: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 99-100] 46: Links. 44: Unintelligent.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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, Ceylon. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <....> #62856 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:35 pm Subject: Re: insubstaintial as in Dispeller of Delusion pgradinarov Dear Ken, Substance is a philosophical category for denoting the bearer of the properties. And since dharmas are the properties, to say that they have a dharmin (substance) and this dharmin is their essential characteristic, entails lots of inconsitences and self-contradictions. As I pointed elsewhere Buddhist ontology is asubstantial (anAtmika and even nairAtmika), while Buddhist logic (taken as the theory of perception and inference) is strictly based on the Law of identity (tAdAtmya) and the unequivocal svabhAvika causation, so they have to be substantial, referring to something identical (tAdAtmika). As for the second part of the question, how could a dharma be experience without a substance, this is not so difficult to answer (we have lot of unsubstantiated experiences) compared to the other closely related question: How could a dharma be the experiencer of its own? Best regards, Plamen --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > substance is to me, the essential characteristics of a dhamma, it does not meant to be lasting. Because without susbtance, how could a dhamma be experience, its characteristics be unique, and it exist from causes and conditions. A susbtance does not mean it exist on its own right, it arise due to conditions. > #62857 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:46 pm Subject: Alcohol? matheesha333 Hello everyone, It seems clear from the 5th precept that one should not consume alcohol. However different people interpret it differently. Some would say that the 5th precept talks of not doing akusala after drinking alcohol, rather than just the matter of drinking a certain type of fluid. People practice precepts to different degrees. Some might not kill, others wont eat meat as well. I am in an unusual situation in that a little bit of alcohol (in low percentages and volumes!) might actually benefit and perhaps even help my practice on the long run in a rather complex manner, as you can imagine. But the downside as I see it, is the possible infringement of the 5th precept. Like to know 'how you take your alcohol'. with metta Matheesha #62858 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Alcohol? upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 8/27/06 4:48:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, dhammachat@... writes: > > Hello everyone, > > It seems clear from the 5th precept that one should not consume > alcohol. However different people interpret it differently. Some > would say that the 5th precept talks of not doing akusala after > drinking alcohol, rather than just the matter of drinking a certain > type of fluid. > > People practice precepts to different degrees. Some might not kill, > others wont eat meat as well. I am in an unusual situation in that a > little bit of alcohol (in low percentages and volumes!) might > actually benefit and perhaps even help my practice on the long run > in a rather complex manner, as you can imagine. But the downside as > I see it, is the possible infringement of the 5th precept. > > Like to know 'how you take your alcohol'. > > with metta > > Matheesha ========================= For at the last 20 to 25 years I've taken no alcohol at all in order to observe the precept. (And I had thoroughly enjoyed it when I used to drink!) I stopped drinking, because I believed that the precept makes general good sense in terms of keeping the mind calm, clear, and less prone to the effects of defilement. I do think that the Buddha intended abstention by the precept. That being said, I also think it is a personal and individual matter as to the degree to which the precept is observed, if at all. No one of us should be so smug as to say what is and what is not "proper" for others. I also think that there are people who have gone very far - further than I, for sure - who have not chosen to observe that precept. Further, I think that observing the precept not because of its usefulness, but out of kind of superstitious, ritual observance, is missing the boat - though, of course, the abstention may well be helpful anyway. With metta, Howard #62859 From: connie Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:26 pm Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nichiconn from The Long Discourses of the Buddha - A Translation of the Diigha Nikaaya by Maurice Walshe. peace, connie from Mahaagovinda Sutta - DN 19 8. Again, the Lord has well explained to his disciples the path leading to Nibbaana, and they coalesce, Nibbaana and the path, just as the waters of the Ganges and the Yamunaa coalesce and flow on together. And we can find no proclaimer of the path leading to Nibbaana...other than the Lord. from Aga~n~na Sutta - DN 27 30. And a Khattiya who is restrained in body, speech and thought, and who has developed the seven requisites of enlightenment, will attain to Parinibbaana in this very life. So too will a Brahmin, a Vessa or a Sudda. from the Introduction Nibbaana or Nirvaa.na The Sanskrit form is better known in the West than the Pali Nibbaana. There are, not surprisingly, many misapprehensions about this. In fact it has been said by one witty scholar that all we have to go on is our misconception of Nirvaa.na, because until we have realised it we cannot know it as it really is. But if we cannot say much about what it is, we can at least say something about what it is not. Robert Ceasar Childers, in his famous and still useful Pali dictionary (1875), devoted a whole long article, in fact a short treatise, to proving to his own satisfaction that Nibbaana implies total extinction, and this view, though certainly erroneous, is still to be met with among some Western scholars. And yet, it would be odd indeed if Buddhists were supposed to have tread the entire path right up to the attainment of Arahantship merely in order to finish up with that total obliteration which the materialists, and many ordinary people today, assume to occur for all of us, good, bad and indifferent, at the end of our present life. It is true, some colour is given to this idea by the etymology of the term (nir + /vaa = 'blowing out' as of a lamp). Contrasted with this, howcver, we find other very different descriptions of Nibbaana. Thus in Sutta 1.3.20 it is used for 'the highest happiness', defined as the indulgence in the pleasure of the five senses - obviously a non-Buddhist use of the word, though it is not otherwise attested in pre-Buddhist sources. We thus find two apparently contradictory meanings of Nibbaana: 1. 'extinction', 2. 'highest bliss'. And while these were wrongly used in the examples quoted, they both occur in authentic texts. In considering this problem, it is well to note the words of the Venerable Nyaa.natiloka in his Buddhist Dictionary: <> What this in effect means is that in order to 'understand' Nibbaana one should have 'entered the Stream' or gained First Path, and thus have got rid of the fetter of personality-belief. While scholars will continue to see it as part of their task to try to understand what the Buddha meant by Nibbaana, they should perhaps have sufficient humility to realize that this is something beyond the range of purely scholarly discussion. In the systematisation of the Abhidhamma (see p52), Nibbaana is simply included as the 'unconditioned element' (asankhata-dhaatu), but with no attempt at definition. Nibbaana is indeed the extinction of the 'three fires' of greed, hatred and delusion, or the destruction of the 'corruptions' (aasavaa) of sense-desire, becoming, wrong view and ignorance. Since the individual 'self' entity is not ultimately real, it cannot be said to be annihilated in Nibbaana, but the illusion of such a self is destroyed. Very oddly, in the Pali-English Dictionary, it is said that Nibbaana is 'purely and simply an ethical state ... It is therefore not transcendental.' In fact it is precisely the one and only transcendental element in Buddhism, for which very good reason no attempt is made to define it in terms of a personal god, a higher self, or the like. It is ineffable. It can, however, be realised, and its realisation is the aim of the Buddhist practice. While no description is possible, positive references to Nibbaana are not lacking: thus at Dhammapada 204 and elsewhere it is called 'the highest bliss' (parama'm sukha'm), and we may conclude this brief account with the famous quotation from Udaana 8.3: <> This is, at at the same time, perhaps, the best answer we can give concerning the Upani.sadic Aatman. Buddhism teaches no such thing - nevertheless the above quotation could certainly be applied to the Aatman as understood in Vedaanta, or indeed to the Christian conception of God. However, to the followers of those faiths it would be in insufficient description, and the additions they would make would for the most part be unacceptable to Buddhists. It can, however, be suggested that this statement represents the fundamental basis of all religions worthy of the name, as well as providing a criterion to distinguish true religion from such surrogates as Marxism, humanism and the like. #62860 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited ken_aitch Hi Howard, ------- H: > First of all, if there is no practice yet there is expectation of progress towards awakening ------- Correction: there is no formal practice. There is, of course, paramattha practice. That is, mundane insight at either the patitatti level (satipatthana) or at the pariyatti level (association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, and wise consideration of the true Dhamma). ----------------- H: > there must be some other basis presumed for the progress. I do want to understand what that basis is - seriously. The usual answer is "When the requisite conditions are in place, that is the basis." And, of course, that is true. But why should the requisite conditions become in place. ------------------ If there has been patipatti and/or pariyatti in the past, then mundane insight (at one of those two levels) might possibly be conditioned to arise now. In that way, there would be a continuation of the practice. --------------------- H: > That is, why for you any more than someone else. There are academicians who study the dhamma and are more knowledgeable than you or I or most folks here, but who don't *believe* in the Dhamma as fact. Does believing do it, IYO? Or is it something else? ---------------------- Yes, believing does it. That is, if we are using believing as a synonym for insight (samma-ditthi). It's hard to say about those hypothetical academicians: I suppose they occasionally know, "Yes, this is what the Buddha taught!" but they also occasionally think, "The Buddha was wrong!" So maybe there's a bit of both in there. (?) --------------------------- H: > BTW, forget about "formal". I don't know what the meaning of "formal" is in "formal practice". I only said "practice". ---------------------------- I know you only said "practice" but I added the word "formal" to distinguish concepts of practice from the reality of practice. ---------------- KH: > > I think you are saying: 'Direct insight can't happen in the course of normal daily life. There has to be a ritual of some sort.' Needless to say, this is where we disagree. > > H: > No, I didn't say that and I don't mean that. I mean that actions have consequences, and different actions have different consequences, and it *does* matter what we do. ----------------- You are using 'actions' to include concepts. Concepts don't have consequences. --------------------------- KH: > > I know you don't like the word ritual, but what else could I call it? > > H: > > I'm sure you couldn't call it anything else. It is convenient for you to call it that, because it supports your inclination not to follow the Buddha's instructions. ----------------------------- The Buddha's instructions are hard to follow. The right conditions must be in place, and they are very rare. I can at least understand that. And, whenever I do understand that, I am following his instructions (in a beginner's way). ---------------------------------- <. . > H: > I was waiting for the pat "condition response" (or should I say "conditioned response"?), and you didn't disappoint. ----------------------------------- When you keep asking the same questions you've got to expect a little repetition. :-) ------------ KH: > > Primitive man couldn't make rain, but he tried the only thing he could think of - a rain dance. > > H: > Not-so-primitive man does better. The rain dance is an activity, and cloud seeding is an activity. The former is mere ritual, the latter is (intentional) setting up of useful conditions. -------------- By your analogy the difference between ritual and practice is one of improved technique. This brings us right back to the beginning of all our discussions here at DSG - "Is the Middle Way a way of technique, or is it a way of right understanding?" --------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > Snooze. The Buddha didn't teach carrying out of ritual. He taught useful intentional activity. --------------------------------------- At the paramattha level, all activity is intentional. The way you are using the word is to extend useful activity (practice) to include not only dhammas, but also concepts. Wake up! You are missing the point! :-) ------- <. . .> KH: > always a pleasure to discuss Dhamma with you. > > H: > :-) Always interesting, certainly. Are you sure it's always a pleasure? ;-)) ------- It is a beautiful Spring day - the beach and the waves are beckoning - but I am happy to sit at my computer discussing Dhamma with you (and anyone else I can rope in). :-) Ken H #62861 From: connie Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:01 pm Subject: Re: Alcohol? nichiconn Dear Math, still in quote mode. peace, connie THE MINOR READINGS (KHUDDAKAPAA.THA) #5. I undertake the training precept of abstention from any opportunity for negligence due to liquor, wine, and besotting drink. Suraamerayamajjappamaada.t.thaanaa verama.nii-sikkhaapada'm samaadiyaamai. THE ILLUSTRATOR OF ULTIMATE MEANING (PARAMATTHAJOTIKAA) Ch. ii, 46. The fruits of abstention from the opportunity-for-negligence-due-to-liquor-wine-and-besotting-drink are such things as swift recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, constant establishment of mindfulness, freedom from madness, possession of knowledge, non-procrastination, non-stupidity, non-drivellingness, non-intoxication, non-negligence, non-confusion, non-timourousness, non-presumption, unenviousness, truthfulness, freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom from dullness both night and day, gratitude, gratefulness, unavariciousness, liberality, virtuousness, rectitude, unangriness, possession of conscience, possession of shame, rectitude of view, great understanding, wisdom, learnedness, skill in [distinguishing] good from harm, and so on. #62862 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 27, 2006 5:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/27/06 11:36:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > ------- > H: > First of all, if there is no practice yet there is expectation > of progress towards awakening > ------- > > Correction: there is no formal practice. > > There is, of course, paramattha practice. That is, mundane insight at > either the patitatti level (satipatthana) or at the pariyatti level > (association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, and wise > consideration of the true Dhamma). ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Why should insight be called "practice"? As to "association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, and wise consideration of the true Dhamma," why are these intentional activities any less a matter of "ritual" than meditation? ------------------------------------------------- > > ----------------- > H: >there must be some other basis presumed for the progress. I do > want to understand what that basis is - seriously. The usual answer is > "When the requisite conditions are in place, that is the basis." And, > of course, that is true. But why should the requisite conditions > become in place. > ------------------ > > If there has been patipatti and/or pariyatti in the past, then mundane > insight (at one of those two levels) might possibly be conditioned to > arise now. In that way, there would be a continuation of the practice. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Suppose that they have not been in the past? How about the present, so that insight might arise in the future. The present time will become the past, you know! ------------------------------------------- > > --------------------- > H: >That is, why for you any more than someone else. There are > academicians who study the dhamma and are more knowledgeable than you > or I or most folks here, but who don't *believe* in the Dhamma as > fact. Does believing do it, IYO? Or is it something else? > ---------------------- > > Yes, believing does it. That is, if we are using believing as a > synonym for insight (samma-ditthi). ------------------------------------------ Howard: No, I am using 'believing' for believing. Insight is knowing! ------------------------------------------- > > It's hard to say about those hypothetical academicians: I suppose they > occasionally know, "Yes, this is what the Buddha taught!" but they > also occasionally think, "The Buddha was wrong!" So maybe there's a > bit of both in there. (?) > > --------------------------- > H: >BTW, forget about "formal". I don't know what the meaning of > "formal" is in "formal practice". I only said "practice". > ---------------------------- > > I know you only said "practice" but I added the word "formal" to > distinguish concepts of practice from the reality of practice. ------------------------------------ Howard: What you consider the reality of practice has nothing to do with practice. It is the fruit of practice. Practice is cultivation, not its fruit. --------------------------------------- > > ---------------- > KH: >>I think you are saying: 'Direct insight can't happen in the > course of normal daily life. There has to be a ritual of some sort.' > Needless to say, this is where we disagree. > >> > > H: > No, I didn't say that and I don't mean that. I mean that > actions have consequences, and different actions have different > consequences, and it *does* matter what we do. > ----------------- > > You are using 'actions' to include concepts. Concepts don't have > consequences. -------------------------------------- Howard: Being hit by a car is concept, right? Does it have no consequenses? C'mon, Ken, get real!!! --------------------------------------- > > --------------------------- > KH: >>I know you don't like the word ritual, but what else could I > call it? > >> > > H: >> I'm sure you couldn't call it anything else. It is > convenient for you to call it that, because it supports your > inclination not to follow the Buddha's instructions. > ----------------------------- > > The Buddha's instructions are hard to follow. The right conditions > must be in place, and they are very rare. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: That is one of the most terrible things I've ever read written by a Buddhist. There have been times I've written that there is sometimes expressed on DSG a sense of helplessness and hopelessness. Well, there it is, folks - right in front of us. ----------------------------------------- I can at least understand> > that. And, whenever I do understand that, I am following his > instructions (in a beginner's way). > > ---------------------------------- > <. . > > H: > I was waiting for the pat "condition response" (or should I > say "conditioned response"?), and you didn't disappoint. > ----------------------------------- > > When you keep asking the same questions you've got to expect a little > repetition. :-) > > ------------ > > KH: >>Primitive man couldn't make rain, but he tried the only thing > he could think of - a rain dance. > >> > > H: > Not-so-primitive man does better. The rain dance is an > activity, and cloud seeding is an activity. The former is mere ritual, > the latter is (intentional) setting up of useful conditions. > -------------- > > By your analogy the difference between ritual and practice is one of > improved technique. This brings us right back to the beginning of all > our discussions here at DSG - "Is the Middle Way a way of technique, > or is it a way of right understanding?" -------------------------------------- Howard: My comparison is between actions that have no bearing on the desired result and actions which do. The former, when engaged in are mere ritual. -------------------------------------- > > --------------------------------------- > <. . .> > H: > Snooze. The Buddha didn't teach carrying out of ritual. He > taught useful intentional activity. > --------------------------------------- > > At the paramattha level, all activity is intentional. The way you are > using the word is to extend useful activity (practice) to include not > only dhammas, but also concepts. Wake up! You are missing the point! > :-) > > ------- > <. . .> > KH: >always a pleasure to discuss Dhamma with you. > >> > > H: > :-) Always interesting, certainly. Are you sure it's always > a pleasure? ;-)) > ------- > > It is a beautiful Spring day - the beach and the waves are beckoning - > but I am happy to sit at my computer discussing Dhamma with you (and > anyone else I can rope in). :-) > > Ken H > ========================== With metta, Howard #62863 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letter 41.breath. nilovg Hi James, Of course no misquotations. This point will come up soon in Rob's forum, we keep contact. Nina. Op 27-aug-2006, om 12:00 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > What I do dispute is that mindfulness of > breathing is only for advanced practitioners who have already achieved > jhana or have become sotapanna. The texts don't support that > proposition. Mindfulness of breathing is most appropriate for those > of a delusional nature. I would say that we all are of a delusional > nature so mindfulness of breathing would be beneficial for us all. #62864 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lunch meeting with Jon and Sarah nilovg Hi Howard (and Daniel), I must say that I really appreciate your carefully written advice to Daniel. With interest I read about your experiences as a child. I understand better now that for some people sitting can come naturally. You had accumulated this tendency, maybe in former lives. This inclination is a conditioned dhamma. Nina. Op 27-aug-2006, om 20:51 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As a young child I thought about things that most kids never > considered: What I "really" am, what the world "really" is. I was > *consumed* by the > meaning of personal identity - what makes me "me" and not "someone > else", a > non-question for most people. It was like a koan for me. I couldn't > let it go. Also > at that stage, without having been taught, I engaged in a kind of > "natural" > meditation that involved closing the eyes and listening to the > world of sound > and feeling the world of bodily sensation *as such*, without > conceptualizing. > Why I did that I can't say. I just did. #62865 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:51 am Subject: Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited pgradinarov Dear Howard, Thank you for your definition and content interpretation of "mindstream." It probably goes without saying that whatever western and many of the "eastern" Buddhists understand by mindstream now has dependently originated from our James and Bergson reading rather than from original Buddhist sources. I may even concede that the great Stcherbatsky contributed much to this standing confusion by comparing namarupa dharmas to cinematographic frames, and our experience to movie. This is very much misleading because it practically puts an equal sign between nama and rupa, turning rupa paramarthatah (ultimately) into nama. If namarupa is synonymous with mindstream (defined as content of consciousness), then all rupas and namas should be vijnanas only, because it is the vijnanas that are the only content of consciousness (citta). If this is the case, then the only philosophical position that makes sense in Buddhism is that of Yogacara and its vijnaptimatrata-siddhi. I strongly believe early Buddhism is realistic. It is based on the interplay of nama and rupa rather than on the reduction of rupa to nama, and of most namas to vijnana (citta). As for the famous "manopubbangamA dhammA manoseTThA manomayA" of DP, it is a moral rather than ontological injunction. Best regards, Plamen --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > By 'mindstream' I mean the stream of experience - the content of conciousness and the knowing of it. I suppose 'namarupa' comes close. > #62866 From: Ng Boon Huat Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Alcohol? mr39515 Dear Matheesha Hi there... There are some comflict in our own Buddhist community and this is one of them. If you follow the Thai.... the 5th precepts would only be broken if one consume alcohol in a manner which results in being Drunk. If you follow the Burmist.... abstain means abstain. The issue came about when Alcohol is used as medicine and I believe it is your case. To our view, we would think that the modern medicine is advance enough to replace some with Alcohol.... So this question basically goes back to you and yourself.... how well you would want to take the precepts....?? Precepts are not something which one must take otherwise it would be a "sin". We take precepts knowing of its benefits and based on current conditions. And off course our own accumulations. The final decision will have to come from you.... All Results has a cause(s).... Metta STEVen --- matheesha wrote: > Hello everyone, > > It seems clear from the 5th precept that one should > not consume > alcohol. However different people interpret it > differently. Some > would say that the 5th precept talks of not doing > akusala after > drinking alcohol, rather than just the matter of > drinking a certain > type of fluid. ... #62867 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:21 am Subject: Buddha is never wrong pgradinarov Dear Ken, If they are really unbiased and openminded academicians, they would rather think: There is no way for Buddha to be wrong because, unlike the Jainas who professed the saptabhanginaya (the seven points of view), Buddha proclaimed 84000 dhammakkhandhas (Dharma teachings, dharmic points of view) all of them possessing the quality of samma ditthi. Best regards, Plamen --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > It's hard to say about those hypothetical academicians: I suppose they occasionally know, "Yes, this is what the Buddha taught!" but they also occasionally think, "The Buddha was wrong!" > #62868 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi All Concerned > I would prefer, Hi All Conditioned! :-) - Probably many of the interlocutors here have developed the quality of not being any more concerned (upeksatva). > When it is said that "it is molested" > I believe ruppati means "molesting" in the sense of rUpaka rather than "being molested" in the sense of rUpya. In the large quote Nina provided (Thank you, Nina - it rather supported than rejected what I said in my larger and allegedly different from Theravada post on pancaskandhakam as the object of the rupa molestations and subject of nama actions) Buddha clearly says that it is we, the people, that are suffering molestation at the blows of rupa by means (kena ruppati?) of cold, heat, etc. Best regards, Plamen #62869 From: "icarofranca" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:34 am Subject: Re: Alcohol? icarofranca Hi Matheesha! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Like to know 'how you take your alcohol'. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Always in the Irish Pub... a good pint of Guinness, with a table of Claddagh, tortillas and fried chicken snacks. Ah...and don´t drive if you drink alcohol! It´s a horrible defilement that can make you bear on akusala vipaaka! With Metta, Ã?caro #62870 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:44 am Subject: nama and rupa nilovg Hi TG, ------- N: We are so attached to the ruupas of the body, but we can learn to be aware of different characteristics, such as hardness, heat or cold. ----------- TG: I think we are naturally aware of these things in general. ------- N: I like your remarks, they help me to consider more. What you refer to is body-consciousness that experiences them and then they are known through mind-door, and after that there is defining, etc. Also a child experiences hardness. This is different from awareness of the characteristic of hardness that appears and the understanding of it *as a dhamma*, not an idea about hardness of a thing or of the body. Sati knows it in a way different from citta without sati. I find this a difficult point to understand myself and to explain. Still, it is important, it touches on the nature of sati of satipa.t.thaana. Usually, when we are not aware (without sati) we touch hard things and we are distracted with moha, or we know that this is hard, without having to say it to ourselves. But, when there is more understanding of what sati is and what the object: one dhamma at a time through one doorway, there can be a moment of sati. It is intellectual understanding that can condition right awareness of exactly this rupa or that nama. But it arises unplanned, not wished for. Not by trying. We can learn what sati is and what it means that an object that appears to sati is dhamma, a conditioned dhamma. Very gradually it can be learnt that a characteristic that appears now is dhamma. ----------- TG: The point is to be intently mindful of their arising and changing and passing away along with the CONDITIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT INSTIGATE SUCH CHANGES, impermanence. Insight is keyed into understanding the conditional circumstances 'motivating' change. Awareness of the actual experience is the way insight is "tested" as being accurate. When insight realizes that conditionality produces change that MUST disintegrate all conditions, DETACHMENT is the result. ----- N: This step is too fast, too fast! The first stage of insight: knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa comes first. Detachment has to be there from the beginning, but it grows in the course of insight. -------- TG: "known as they are" is where the fallacy creeps in IMO. An experience cannot insightfully be known as "it is." Because "it is" nothing of itself. It is empty of itself. It is a resultant, a phantom, a shadow of others "empties." Note: If knowing it as "it is" is actually knowing the experience as "having nothing of itself" ... then I might be inclined to agree. ------- N: I do not deny emptiness of self. But I mean: knowing the truth about them. Known as they are is actually a translation of yaata bhuuta, used in the texts. The word *is* or *are* has different meanings in different contexts. ------------- TG: The Buddha used the terminology available to him and his audience. He did not become the Buddha because he understood such terminology. He became the Buddha because he correctly observed his experiences and surroundings and implemented appropriate action to oust ignorance completely. ------- N: I want to add something, not to find fault with you, but because it is of interest. The Buddha also had acquired the four Discriminations, patisamdbhidas, and it is of interest to know that the third one is of language, nirutti. He knew people's dispositions and thus he could perfectly express the truth in language that they understood. He had this gift in the highest degree, and also the great disciples had this gift, but in a lesser degree. Nina. #62871 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:05 am Subject: nibbana nilovg Hi Paul, --------- P: Then, it appears that the experience of nibbana is unmediated by the cycle of dependent arising. It appears that it is its own thing. Then, to what extent is the lokutara kusala citta also free from conditions? Nibbana must be experienced by a citta (albeit a special citta), but why must the citta which experiences nibbana be kusalacitta and not vipakacitta? It makes perfect sense, but I'll need to study this one more. ---------------------- N: Lokuttara kusala citta is conditioned by many factors, by natural strong dependence-condition, that is the accumulation of pa~n~naa and all the enlightenment factors, all kusala represented by the perfections. It is accompanied by all the accompanying sobhana cetasikas that condition it in different ways (conascence, presence, association, etc.). It is conditioned by the object that is nibbaana. It is kusala citta, that is citta that is cause, it produces vipaaka. The phalacitta, that is lokuttara vipaakacitta, also experiences nibbaana. You speak of the cycle. Lokuttara kusala citta is not an addition to the brickwall that is built up in our life by heaping up kamma that brings result and makes the cycle go on. It is the taking down of bricks. At that moment there is no heaping up but dispersion. There are four stages of enlightenment, and at the stage of the arahat there will be the end of the cycle. But when the stage of the sotaapanna is reached, the end is of the cycle is sure to come, after seven births at most. Even though a lifespan in a higher plane may last very long. Nina. #62872 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:20 am Subject: Re: Nama and rupa scottduncan2 Dear Plamen, Just trying to catch up... P: "I believe ruppati means "molesting" in the sense of rUpaka rather than "being molested" in the sense of rUpya." You seem to be making a subject/object distinction. Can you please say more of this for my benefit? Ruupa itself, as I understand, can have no intention since it is the dhamma that does not experience. From this I think that any sense of "molesting" or "being molested" is, as it were, "in the eye of the beholder." Is this about how dukkha, as a quality or characteristic of all conditioned dhammas, is experienced by the so-called person? From the Visuddhimagga: "Herein, The meaning, characteristic, relative Extent, series, account abridged and full, Thus for our judgement must we apprehend And into [due] consideration take. Of these, as to the distinctive, that which enjoys is the eye. It enjoys, reveals, the visible object, is the meaning. That which manifests [itself] is shape ('Ruupa, matter, material quality, as well as shape and form,'). It manifests the desire of the heart in one whose colour is changed. That which listens is the ear. That which is uttered is sound. It speaks, is the meaning. That which smells is the nose. That which discovers (or betrays itself) is odour. It discovers (or betrays) its own physical basis, is the meaning. That which summons (the taste of food which sustains)life is the tongue. That which creatures relish is taste; they enjoy it, is the meaning. That which is the course of despicable states associated with the cankers, is the body. 'Course' denotes arising ('Or, 'course' is the place of arising). That which is in contact is the tangible. That which thinks is the mind. That which bears its own characteristic is the mental state," The Pathway of Purity, tr. Pe Maung Tin, pp. 568-569, chap. XV, The Exposition of Sense-Organs and Elements. I find "rUpaka" to correspond to "ruupaka" meaning "having form, figure, likeness of, image"; "of selected appearance." I find "rUpiya" to denote "well-shaped, beautiful", or "of selected appearance." P: "Buddha clearly says that it is we, the people, that are suffering molestation at the blows of rupa by means (kena ruppati?) of cold, heat, etc." I think that the nature of dukkha is characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. "People" are "suffering molestation" perhaps since this is characteristic of conditioned existence. In particular, I think it is naama when an exerience, pleasant or unpleasant, is in question. Have I come close at all to the gist of your arguments? Sincerely, Scott. #62873 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Alcohol? matheesha333 Hi Steven, Howard, Thanks for the replies > Precepts are not something which one must take > otherwise it would be a "sin". We take precepts > knowing of its benefits and based on current > conditions. Yes, I think I know what you mean. At the same time there is the issue of whether one believes in kamma or not. I certainly do believe in it. Just as someone of another religion would believe that there is final judgment so that they should not sin, I blieve that there are karmic consequences so I avoid doing certain things. Same difference? It says in the suttas (AN) that a person who does citta bhavana (samatha) will reap the effects of his kamma in this lifetime. I certainly have seen this effect. I was tempted to test out the drinking and drinking to moderation hypothesis! But something holds me back and tells me not to. Is it blind faith? I think we tend to underestimate the benefits of faith. It is a very powerful force and motivator and can be harnessed to further practice in ways very few other things can. I also worry about the cascading effect. How much will one drink lead to? Are there better ways to solve the problem without alcohol? Then another related issue: what about sweets with alcohol in them? I dont think that they cause any harm in the rational sense. But what about karmic? (I certainly dont think so). I guess the practice of precepts is very important to me. I'm probably a bit attached to the whole thing as well. I think if you aim for sila visuddhi no one will take it lightly. with metta Matheesha #62874 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:05 am Subject: Re: Nama and rupa jwromeijn Hallo Plamen, all The first time we can discuss, I'm glad to do. You say: " As for the present topic of nama and rupa, yes, they are interdependent - and it is their interdependence that makes them not that universal and paramarthata as we would like them to be. In fact they are thus limited to the anthropological unity known as Man. Dharmas are all what we are... The problem is that We are not All that is." That's - to me - not a problem: not in understanding rupa. Because one should not try to understand it ontological; 'rupa' is not atoms, galaxies etc. I even prefer to understand it as: '(by a human being) experienced material qualities.' See Nyanaponikas remark that the Dhamma had to be understood as a phenomenology and not as a ontology. The Buddha simply didn't talk about 'matter' as such, he remained silent on quenstions on it because this does not help anybody to awaken. What helps (or can help) is to understand how we experience material qualities and immediately make a physical theory based on that experience. Curious how you, from your scholarship, look at this view (I think ut's not a general Theravada view, many Theravadins have ontological ideas) Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Plamen Gradinarov" wrote: > > > Dear Nina, > > Thank you for the welcoming words, I really enjoy being a member of this > very active online sangha. Yes, I use Sanskrit because of my background > - Buddhist and Indian Logic, plus lot of translation work in the > classical Sanskrit commentaries of Yoga-darsana. And that's why I am > here - to solve some logical queries and to learn more about the > Theravada stages of samapatti, which in Yoga-darsana is identical with > samadhi and has eight forms: savitarka & nirvitarka, savicara & > nirvicara, sananda & nirananda, and finally sasmita and > nirasmita-samapatti. > > As for the present topic of nama and rupa, yes, they are interdependent > - and it is their interdependence that makes them not that universal and > paramarthata as we would like them to be. In fact they are thus limited > to the anthropological unity known as Man. Dharmas are all what we > are... > > The problem is that We are not All that is. > > What about matter outside us and prior to our existing in this Universe? > In what way is the keybord you are typing your brilliant and > enlightening letters on related to my namas. There is no way for it to > depend on my namas, or even on yours - unless you decide to break it > into pieces... > > Or, to take the strong form of the question. How is it that the atoms > and elementary particles after the Big Bang depend on our nama? Are > Buddhists to follow the weird logic of the Anthropic Cosmological > Principle and make the fundamental constants teleologically depend on > our future existence in the Universe? > > And the epistemological question: What are the rupas - energies of > matter existing independently of our mind, or just raw data - which is > the only way they can be interpreted as interdependent with namas? If > they are raw data, then they are sense-data, kind of indefinite > "perceptions" - hence, namas that have not yet been identified as > definite perceptions. > > On the other hand, if they were raw data, it would be impossible to say, > The eyes see, The ears hear, The nose smells, The tongue tastes, The > skin senses the touches. For raw data are raw data, they cannot sense > anything. In the same way as perceptions cannot perceive anything, > feelings cannot feel anything, intentions cannot intend anything, > cognitions cannot cognize anything. > > It is something else that sees, hears, smells, tastes, touches, > perceives, feels, intends, and knows - and this Else is the Man referred > to as Pancaskandhakam. Yes, it is empty and it is anatta, but so are the > skandhas, and even the paramartha-dharmas, so this is not an argument > against its existence. > > It is true that we can analyse it away to reach the higher things > (paramarthas) as prescribed by Vasubandhu (probably not without > reference to the teachings of the Elders) - that's why this Bharahara > (the Bearer of the burden) is called Pancaskandhakam. But let us not > stop the reductive analysis down at the level of paramartha- dharmas, and > see whether they can stand the analysis of self-substantiality. > > They cannot, because they are not the bearers of themselves. A dharma > being the dharmin of itself is a logical nonsense and such claim drives > us into petitio principii. So any dharma must have a dharmin different > from itself in which it should reside, and this Dharmin is You and Me, > the individual pancaskandhaka. It is we that do all the things listed > above, not our ultimate properties (dharmas). > > Best reagrds, > > Plamen > #62875 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Plamen - In a message dated 8/28/06 4:52:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, pgradinarov@... writes: > > Dear Howard, > > Thank you for your definition and content interpretation > of "mindstream." > > It probably goes without saying that whatever western and many of > the "eastern" Buddhists understand by mindstream now has dependently > originated from our James and Bergson reading rather than from > original Buddhist sources. I may even concede that the great > Stcherbatsky contributed much to this standing confusion by > comparing namarupa dharmas to cinematographic frames, and our > experience to movie. This is very much misleading because it > practically puts an equal sign between nama and rupa, turning rupa > paramarthatah (ultimately) into nama. > > If namarupa is synonymous with mindstream (defined as content of > consciousness), then all rupas and namas should be vijnanas only, > because it is the vijnanas that are the only content of > consciousness (citta). If this is the case, then the only > philosophical position that makes sense in Buddhism is that of > Yogacara and its vijnaptimatrata-siddhi. > > I strongly believe early Buddhism is realistic. It is based on the > interplay of nama and rupa rather than on the reduction of rupa to > nama, and of most namas to vijnana (citta). > > As for the famous "manopubbangamA dhammA manoseTThA manomayA" of DP, > it is a moral rather than ontological injunction. > > Best regards, > > Plamen ========================= We interpret the Dhamma differently as regards the "realistic"-"phenomenalistic" axis. Now, to clarify, I would better have said "namarupic stream" than "mindstream", because I do distinguish (though do not separate) the knowing from the known. I see the knowing as a mental operation. I see the known as distinct from the knowing of it, but I see the two as interdependent, not seeing the known as something "out there", but as the content of consciousness - the "mere object". To get concrete, I do not presume some hardness "out there" waiting to be observed. I see hardness as a quality arising inseparable from the concomitantly-arising knowing of the hardness, and existing only as object of consciousness. I see the hardness as mere sensation. Likewise, I also do not see the consciousness as something existing and waiting for hardness or some other dhamma to appear for that consciousness to observe. Consciousness is not some "thing that knows" and waiting for an object. It is the knowing. And it is an operation that occurs, that arises, and it never does so without object content (or, in the case of concept, what I think of as apparent object). For me, niether knowing nor known is a thing in itself. Further, I do not, as do the Lankavarara-Sutra admirers, consider rupas to be "mind-only", like little pieces of some ocean of mind. Rupas are quite different from the knowing of the them, but they are not independent of the knowing of them as I see the matter. Sights, sounds, tastes, odors, and bodily sensations are nothing at all except as content of consciousness. With no vi~n~nana, no objects of vi~n~nana, and with no rupas, no vi~n~nana. Because of rupas, there is consciousness of those rupas, and there are also derivative namic objects of consiousness. I view the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta as teaching the interdependence of subject and object, of vi~n~nana and namarupa, with the (elements of) the former constituting the objects of the latter, and, should either sheaf fall, so would the other. If this perspective is close to or even the same as the yogacara of Vasubandhu, so be it. I see such a view in the Pali suttas as well: In such suttas as the Bahiya Sutta, the Kalaka Sutta, and the Sabba Sutta. With metta, Howard #62876 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Swee Boon - > > In a message dated 8/26/06 10:55:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > nidive@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > >So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha > > >as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to be, > > >a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't > > >cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of suffering > > >that comes with awakening? > > >Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not so? > > >Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, prior > > >to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? > > >Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > > >anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > > >whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases > > >with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion and > > >the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. > > > > If "right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > > anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > > whatsoever that is a thing of its own", then there is also nothing > > called a self that is or can be annihilated. > > > > What then is "annihilated"? Just stress and stress itself. > > > > And what is stress? > > > > Ignorance is stress. > > Fabrications is stress. > > Consciousness is stress. > > Name-&-form is stress. > > The six sense media is stress. > > Contact is stress. > > Feeling is stress. > > Craving is stress. > > Clinging is stress. > > Becoming is stress. > > Birth is stress. > > Aging &death is stress. > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > All of these are *unsatisfactory* (i.e., not sources of satisfaction), > and they are sources of outright suffering *when clung to*. The second noble > truth provides the primary cause of suffering, and it is tanha. Dhammas, > themselves, are not stress. > --------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: In short, you are telling me that the "truthness" of the First Noble Truth depends on the Second Noble Truth. But I believe that the Buddha taught the First Noble Truth as an absolute truth and not as a relative truth. I believe that the Buddha when he taught in the First Noble Truth that birth, aging and death are suffering, he really meant it as it is whether or not there is craving. I believe that when the Buddha taught the Second Noble Truth, he really meant that craving is the cause, and birth, aging and death are the delayed effects. > --------------------------------------------- > > > > > These are the 12 stresses to be "annihilated". > > > > This is the complete "annihilation" of stress, the ultimate emptiness. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Suffering is ended entirely, right then and there, with full and final > awakening. The Buddha did *not* suffer. > ------------------------------------------ Swee Boon: No, no, no. He did! He experienced bodily pains, experienced aging and finally experienced death. All these sufferings are included in the First Noble Truth. > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > If you want some "stress" to remain forever after the complete ceasing > > of "mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable", > > say for example, consciousness not inflicted by "I", or feeling not > > inflicted by "I", or contact not inflicted by "I", or the six sense > > media not inflicted by "I", or name-&-form not inflicted by "I", or > > fabrications not inflicted by "I", then I say this is impossible. Even > > the Buddha would say this is impossible. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I think you are playing word games and mind games with yourself. An > arahant is entirely free of dukkha. There is no sense of person, there is > nothing to grasp, there is complete and direct understanding, and there is total > freedom. Nothing is lacking. There is nothing more to be done. For an arahant, > should experience cease or continue matters not in the slightest. Peace is utter > and complete, with nothing further required. > ------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: Only a dead arahant is entirely free of suffering. Suffering for an arahant ceases only when all experience ceases. > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > Why? Because consciousness not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > > feeling not inflicted by "I" is still stress, contact not inflicted by > > "I" is still stress, the six sense media not inflicted by "I" is still > > stress, name-&-form not inflicted by "I" is still stress, fabrications > > not inflicted by "I" is still stress. > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There is no clinging and no stress. There is no affliction of any > sort. The arahant has done what was needed to be done. Nibbana is realized. > -------------------------------------------- > > > > > The desire to keep something that remains is just a manifestation of > > the inner primate craving for continued existence. It is the result of > > incomplete understanding of stress, the First Noble Truth. > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think you misunderstand it. An arahant lacks in its entirety the > cause of dukkha. An arahant is entirely free - free of self, free of other, free > of dukkha. > -------------------------------------------- > Regards, Swee Boon #62877 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:52 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing, no 12 nilovg Dear friends, In the Samyutta nikaya V (Sayings on stream entry p347 The great chapter Dhammadina ) 5oo rich merchants came to see the Buddha . They asked how they should live their lives. The Buddha suggested that they train themselves thus: "as to those discourses uttered by the Tathagatha, deep, deep in meaning, transcendental and concerned with the void (about anatta) from time to time we will spend our days learning them. That is how you must spend your days." In the satipatthana sutta the Buddha explains the four foundations of mindfulness. These can be cultivated in any position at any time. ____ Question: Talk about accumulations, or lack > thereof, is also baffling to me. Certainly some would > find seclusion and tranquillity easier to cultivate > than others, but if you don't accumulate now, when are > you going to accumulate? After you're dead? ____ It is relevant because this is a Buddha sasana - a very rare event. If one develops samatha bhavana that is wonderful. Indeed all of us have developed samatha and we must have succeeded in gaining jhana in countless lives. This is because of the vast time of samsara. However only very rarely has there been insight into anatta, into the lakkhana (characteristic) of elements. That is why some of us believe that we should give stress to this aspect of the Dhamma. The Buddha sasana will soon be extinguished and it will be a long time before another samma-sammbuddha arises. RobertK ------------ bodhi2500" wrote: >> It is said, "Anapanasati is difficult,difficult to develop, a field > in which only the minds of Buddhas,paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons > are at home" and "The most difficult of the 40 meditation subjects" > > > Why then is anapanasati recommended for a "Moha carita person"? > > What is the definition of "Buddhas sons"? ============ Rob K: Dear Steve, I think the texts indicate that the Buddha's sons means Mahapurisa, those with great accumulations. When you look at the other 37 objects of samatha in the Visuddhimagga we see that only anapanasati is singled out for this special attention. Anapanasati is the samatha object that all the Buddha's use on the eve of their attainment, it is such a wonderful object for those who can develop it. But that doesn't mean it is easy. From visuddimagga 211 viii the pali: Ki~ncaapi hi ya.mki~nci kamma.t.thaana.m satassa sampajaanasseva sampajjati. Ito a~n~na.m pana manasikarontassa paaka.ta.m hoti. Ida.m pana aanaapaanassatikamma.t.thaana.m garuka.m garukabhaavana.m buddhapaccekabuddhabuddhaputtaana.m mahaapurisaa na.myeva manasikaarabhuumibhuuta.m, na ceva ittara.m, na ca ittarasattasamaasevita.m. Yathaa yathaa manasi kariiyati, tathaa tathaa santa ~nceva hoti sukhuma~nca. Tasmaa ettha balavatii sati ca pa~n~naa ca icchitabbaa. =============== It is a stock phrase in the commentaries with regard to anapanasati. E.g: Patisambhidhimagga -atthakatha anapanassatikatha and in the Commentary to vinaya Parajika khanda attakatha . There are other places too. ============= You wonder why in the Visuddhimagga Buddhaghosa in one section says it is the hardest of all samatha objects and in another says that it is suitable for the mohacarita, one with a temperament on the ignorant side? As I mentioned in an earlier letter anapanasati is suitable for both mohacarita as RoBM mentioned and also the vitakkacaritassa (discursive ) type. The six temperaments come in pairs: so the one of hating temperament is parallel to the one of intelligent temperament in that both are disaffected and do not cling; hating in an unprofitable way and intelligence in a profitable way. The discursive type has many applied thoughts due to thinking over various aspects. Anapanasati is the meditation which especially stills vitakka and vicara, which both vittakka and mohacarissa types have a lot of. The Visuddhimagga III 122 "Mindfulness of breathing should be developed for the purpose of cutting off of applied thought.." Interesting to see that the one of greedy temperament - who when doing any task "acts skillfully, gently evenly and carefully" should ideally not have much time in a sitting posture when trying to develop samatha:"the right kind of posture for him is standing or walking"III 98. Back to the question: why give the most difficult of all subjects to the one of deluded temperament? Because it is the outstanding one for cutting off thinking, and the deluded temperament conjectures unskillfully about all manner of things. Does this then mean that it is easy to develop? No, as the Visuddhimagga says it is the most difficult. Can the one of deluded temperament develop it then? Yes, if they have the parami etc. No, if not. Remember that one can have enormous skillful parami and still be one of the `not so good` in temperament. This is because the temperament is to a large degree decided by the the type of rebirth producing kamma in this life. There are also other classifications of recommended objects. Death, maranasati, for example, is recommended for the one of intelligent temperament when considering the carita. But it is recommended for all when considering by way of its great helpfulness (vis. iii 59) Again metta is recommended for the one with hate temperament when considering carita but is said to be good for all when considered by way of its "general usefulness" and "great helpfulness" iii59. Note that even though metta is said to be especially suitable for the hating type it doesn`t necessarily follow that the one of hating temperament will succeed in developing jhana by using it. The same for breath and the mohacaritassa. RobertK (end of quotes on mindfulness of breath.) ****** Nina. #62878 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:00 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe, 62 nilovg Dear friends, Thus, there are fifteen types of ahetuka citta which are vipåka. Summarizing them, they are: 10 cittas which are dvi-pañca-viññåùa (five pairs) 1 sampaìicchana-citta (receiving-consciousness) which is akusala vipåka 1 sampaìicchana-citta which is kusala vipåka 1 santíraùa-citta (investigating-consciousness) which is akusala vipåka, accompanied by upekkhå (indifferent feeling) 1 santíraùa-citta which is kusala vipåka, accompanied by upekkhå 1 santíraùa-citta which is kusala vipåka, accompanied by somanassa (pleasant feeling) Seven types of the ahetuka vipåkacittas are akusala vipåka and eight types are kusala vipåka, since there are two types of santíraùa-citta which are kusala vipåka. As we have seen, there are altogether eighteen ahetuka cittas. Of these eighteen ahetuka cittas fifteen are vipåkacittas and three are kiriyacittas. Kiriyacittas are different from akusala cittas and kusala cittas and from vipåkacittas. Akusala cittas and kusala cittas are cittas which are cause; they can motivate ill deeds and good deeds which are capable of producing their appropriate results. Vipåkacittas are cittas which are the result of akusala kamma and kusala kamma. Kiriyacittas are cittas which are neither cause nor result. ******* Nina. #62879 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:07 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 43 nilovg Dear friends, In the Buddha's time there were many monks who had accumulations for jhana (absorption), and also the Buddha himself, when he was still a Bodhisatta had developed it, but he had found that this was not the way to enlightenment. When someone has accumulations for calm, what should he do? He should know the characteristic of calm as not self, as impermanent. Thus, he should see it as only a reality which arises because of conditions. And when there are conditions for akusala citta, also that characteristic should be known as not self. The Buddha did not say that one should first develop calm; this depends on one's accumulations. And then, if one thinks that one has accumulations for calm, right understanding has to be very keen and sharp in order to know whether there is not a subtle attachment to self who is so calm. One can be misled one's whole life. As regards the persons who are our teachers, one can listen to different teachers, but finally we have to decide for ourselves which way we wish to go in life. I have never liked the idea of obedience to a teacher. The Buddha said that there is no refuge outside, only the development of satipatthana can be one's refuge. A teacher cannot do it for you. Khun Sujin is a good friend, not a teacher. She did not 'devise' any method, as you seem to think. She reads all the teachings and the commentaries, and suggests others to do the same and verify them for oneself. It is the Buddha who explained to be mindful of any reality which appears in daily life. How then did I have the idea to listen to Khun Sujin? Because I found that she has practical advice which really works. I liked her insistence to verify everything myself. From time to time I pass Bangkok but most of the time I am on my own and I like it. I have the teachings, the scriptures, and my writing is a way to study and to be reminded to develop more understanding. If someone else has different accumulations and finds that he or she has to follow another way, I think that no arguments at all can stop that person; accumulated inclinations are so deep, so strong. They drive someone into this or that direction. ******* Nina #62880 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Hi Howard and Swee Boon, I think the translation of dukkha by stress is confusing. The Truth of dukkha pertains to the five khandhas. They arise and fall away, they are impermanent and thus no refuge. Thus, for the arahat there are still the khandhas arising and falling away. He has kilesa parinibbaana (in this sense he has freedom), but not yet khandha parinibbaana. Thus there is still dukkha for him. But the term stress is misleading. Nina. #62881 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/28/06 11:43:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Swee Boon - > > > >In a message dated 8/26/06 10:55:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > >nidive@... writes: > > > >>Hi Howard, > >> > >>>So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha > >>>as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to > be, > >>>a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't > >>>cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of > suffering > >>>that comes with awakening? > >>>Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not > so? > >>>Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, > prior > >>>to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? > >>>Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > >>>anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > >>>whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases > >>>with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion > and > >>>the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. > >> > >>If "right now there is no self that does anything, no self that > knows > >>anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > >>whatsoever that is a thing of its own", then there is also nothing > >>called a self that is or can be annihilated. > >> > >>What then is "annihilated"? Just stress and stress itself. > >> > >>And what is stress? > >> > >>Ignorance is stress. > >>Fabrications is stress. > >>Consciousness is stress. > >>Name-&-form is stress. > >>The six sense media is stress. > >>Contact is stress. > >>Feeling is stress. > >>Craving is stress. > >>Clinging is stress. > >>Becoming is stress. > >>Birth is stress. > >>Aging &death is stress. > > > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > All of these are *unsatisfactory* (i.e., not sources of > satisfaction), > >and they are sources of outright suffering *when clung to*. The > second noble > >truth provides the primary cause of suffering, and it is tanha. > Dhammas, > >themselves, are not stress. > >--------------------------------------------- > Swee Boon: > In short, you are telling me that the "truthness" of the First Noble > Truth depends on the Second Noble Truth. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, I'm telling you that 'dukkha' in the 1st noble truth would better be rendered by "unsatisfactory" or "unsatisfying" or "not a source of satisfaction" or even by "stressful" than by "stress". And the second noble truth DOES give the primary cause of dukkha. It is stated as follows: "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: 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." --------------------------------------------- > But I believe that the Buddha taught the First Noble Truth as an > absolute truth and not as a relative truth. > I believe that the Buddha when he taught in the First Noble Truth that > birth, aging and death are suffering, he really meant it as it is > whether or not there is craving. -------------------------------------------- Howard: It is a one-sided view to latch onto the 1st noble truth but ignore the 2nd. What you say here contradicts the 2nd. ------------------------------------------- > I believe that when the Buddha taught the Second Noble Truth, he > really meant that craving is the cause, and birth, aging and death are > the delayed effects. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I see that as a contortion. -------------------------------------------- > >--------------------------------------------- > > > >> > >>These are the 12 stresses to be "annihilated". > >> > >>This is the complete "annihilation" of stress, the ultimate > emptiness. > > > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > Suffering is ended entirely, right then and there, with full > and final > >awakening. The Buddha did *not* suffer. > >------------------------------------------ > Swee Boon: > No, no, no. He did! > He experienced bodily pains, experienced aging and finally experienced > death. --------------------------------------------- Howard: You are confusing pain (unpleasant bodily feeling) with suffering. You are confusing the 1st dart with the second, unnecessary, dart. [Pease reread the sutta on this - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.nypo.html] ---------------------------------------------- > All these sufferings are included in the First Noble Truth. > >------------------------------------------ > > > >> > >>If you want some "stress" to remain forever after the complete > ceasing > >>of "mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the > ungraspable", > >>say for example, consciousness not inflicted by "I", or feeling > not > >>inflicted by "I", or contact not inflicted by "I", or the six > sense > >>media not inflicted by "I", or name-&-form not inflicted by "I", > or > >>fabrications not inflicted by "I", then I say this is impossible. > Even > >>the Buddha would say this is impossible. > > > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > I think you are playing word games and mind games with > yourself. An > >arahant is entirely free of dukkha. There is no sense of person, > there is > >nothing to grasp, there is complete and direct understanding, and > there is total > >freedom. Nothing is lacking. There is nothing more to be done. For > an arahant, > >should experience cease or continue matters not in the slightest. > Peace is utter > >and complete, with nothing further required. > >------------------------------------------- > Swee Boon: > Only a dead arahant is entirely free of suffering. > Suffering for an arahant ceases only when all experience ceases. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: That view of liberation is no different from the materialist's view of death-as-liberation. It is a nihilist view, and IMO it is not the view of the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------- > >------------------------------------------- > > > >> > >>Why? Because consciousness not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > >>feeling not inflicted by "I" is still stress, contact not > inflicted by > >>"I" is still stress, the six sense media not inflicted by "I" is > still > >>stress, name-&-form not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > fabrications > >>not inflicted by "I" is still stress. > > > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > There is no clinging and no stress. There is no affliction of > any > >sort. The arahant has done what was needed to be done. Nibbana is > realized. > >-------------------------------------------- > > > >> > >>The desire to keep something that remains is just a manifestation > of > >>the inner primate craving for continued existence. It is the > result of > >>incomplete understanding of stress, the First Noble Truth. > > > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I think you misunderstand it. An arahant lacks in its > entirety the > >cause of dukkha. An arahant is entirely free - free of self, free of > other, free > >of dukkha. > >-------------------------------------------- > ====================== With metta, Howard #62882 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 8/28/06 12:19:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard and Swee Boon, > I think the translation of dukkha by stress is confusing. The Truth > of dukkha pertains to the five khandhas. They arise and fall away, > they are impermanent and thus no refuge. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. They are no refuge. They are not sources of satisfaction. They are dukkha in *exactly* that sense. ----------------------------------------- > Thus, for the arahat there are still the khandhas arising and falling > away. He has kilesa parinibbaana (in this sense he has freedom), but > not yet khandha parinibbaana. Thus there is still dukkha for him. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: It is not dukkha "for him". Firstly, there is no "him" in actuality nor does "he" have any sense of personal self. Secondly, "he" is utterly free of all dhammas and is fully unperturbed. The dukkha of khandhas, their inadequacy, indeed remains, for that is a negative - they never were, are not, and never will satisfy or be worthy of pursuit. ------------------------------------------ But > > the term stress is misleading. ------------------------------------------ Howard: With regard to identifying khandhic elements as "stress", I agree. ------------------------------------------ > Nina. > ==================== With metta, Howard #62883 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nama and rupa TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 8/28/2006 7:50:18 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Usually, when we are not aware (without sati) we touch hard things and we are distracted with moha, or we know that this is hard, without having to say it to ourselves. But, when there is more understanding of what sati is and what the object: one dhamma at a time through one doorway, there can be a moment of sati. It is intellectual understanding that can condition right awareness of exactly this rupa or that nama. But it arises unplanned, not wished for. Not by trying. We can learn what sati is and what it means that an object that appears to sati is dhamma, a conditioned dhamma. Very gradually it can be learnt that a characteristic that appears now is dhamma. TG: I believe our unenlightened minds look toward reality with some measure of a "preconceived model" of what is going on. A Christian, for example, might think God does this and that and can justify the process of the universe based on that model. In fact, such people will often claim full knowledge of The Truth based on these conceptions. I feel that you have fully subscribed to the Abhidhamma model and are so close to it that the wording of the texts has formed your standpoint of what reality is. Can you really claim to know what is going on "one dhamma at a time" or be confident enough to declare that -- "is reality"? I can't. I really don't think Buddha was ever that specific in the Suttas. To me, the Abhidhamma, and the Suttas for that matter, are models to help illuminate reality in the minds of people. These teachings are guides to see beyond the teachings...to see what is real face to face as it were. These models can be enlightening...or they can be a burden depending on how rigidly they are adhered to. ----------- TG: The point is to be intently mindful of their arising and changing and passing away along with the CONDITIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT INSTIGATE SUCH CHANGES, impermanence. Insight is keyed into understanding the conditional circumstances 'motivating' change. Awareness of the actual experience is the way insight is "tested" as being accurate. When insight realizes that conditionality produces change that MUST disintegrate all conditions, DETACHMENT is the result. ----- N: This step is too fast, too fast! The first stage of insight: knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa comes first. Detachment has to be there from the beginning, but it grows in the course of insight. TG: I don't think so. Conditionality and impermanence is basically the starting point of many if not most Suttas. The stage you describe as the first step in my view is a wrong step...a step backward of any Sutta teaching I'm familiar with. I can't think of one Sutta where the Buddha speaks to the importance of "knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and rupa... Or that such knowledge is the first step. Of course its true the Buddha identifies the crucial elements we need to be aware of so that we can understand the mechanisms responsible for experience and conditionality, impermanence, and affliction. But this is a far cry from saying that distinguishing individual "dhammas" one from another is the first step of the Buddha's teaching. I see no evidence in the Suttas, or Tipitika, that the Buddha subscribes to a "one dhamma at a time" view of reality. This method seems to be valuable for you and that's cool, but I don't think its part of the Buddha's teaching and my feeling is he would not have approved of that outlook. I would say that we need to have a good working understanding of the key elements responsible for experience. Then, ASAP, become aware of how those factors are driving the process of conditionality, impermanence, and affliction ... and how such states are empty of anything unto themselves, i.e., unsubstantial. Whatever is unsubstantial and ultimately leading to affliction is surely not worth being attached to. Why would I even want to consider these things as "real dhammas"? That only messes up the process IMO. It forms an artificial attachment that need not be formed IMO. Don't see these things as REAL. See them as hollow, as murderers, as poison, as delusion, as death. TG #62884 From: Daniel Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:33 pm Subject: Re: Alcohol sbhtkk Dear all, With regards to the alcohol issue : If the reason to take precepts is not out of obedience to the buddha, perhaps is it because the precepts are "always right", because Buddha, possesing some knowledge not in our possession knew what always would be right for each one of us, even though we cannot understand the reasons? Why not? I was a bit brain-washed by orthodox judaism, so this is the source of my questions... Daniel #62885 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:43 pm Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 43 scottduncan2 Dear Nina, I like your most recent letter. In particular: N: "... most of the time I am on my own and I like it. I have the teachings, the scriptures, and my writing is a way to study and to be reminded to develop more understanding. If someone else has different accumulations and finds that he or she has to follow another way, I think that no arguments at all can stop that person; accumulated inclinations are so deep, so strong. They drive someone into this or that direction." Just today a person was in contact with me, one with whom I had corresponded months ago (but not recently) and who, at the time, seemed to make sense and was, in fact, helpful. This person, I suppose, had searched and tracked my activity on various fora and suggested that I take great care in not being lead down the garden path. I assume that my affiliation here was implied. I suppose that this person might prefer that I go down the garden path preferred by this person. I don't know for sure. I do know that I find this sort of thing a bit wearying. At any rate, your comments about the solitary pursuit of the Dhamma seem a propos. I suppose you started at a point I am at now and it is clear where your diligence has lead. Just a thought or two . . . Sincerely, Scott. #62886 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:58 pm Subject: Re: Nama and rupa pgradinarov Dear Scott, I am referring only to Khajjaniya sutta where Buddha is said to have announced this description of rupa: Kiñca bhikkhave, rūpaM vadetha: ruppatīti kho bhikkhave, tasmā rūpanti vuccati. Kena ruppati: sītena'pi ruppati uNhena'pi ruppati jighacchāya'pi ruppati pipāsāya'pi ruppati DaMsamakasavātātapasiriMsapasamphassena'pi ruppati. Ruppatīti kho bhikkhave, tasmā rūpanti vuccati. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta- Nikaya/Samyutta3/21-Khandha-Samyutta/02-03-Khajjaniyavaggo-p.html Best regards, Plamen #62887 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:00 pm Subject: Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' scottduncan2 Dear connie, I've been seeing ghosts, ravens and wild horses but I haven't forgotten: c: "...Scott has challenged me to read Conditional Relations and for sure, I'll need help when I get there..." I'm reading Nina's overview of Conditional Relations (and will want to do so two or three times), reviewing the excerpts from Naarada's commentary, and basically preparing for the reading you note above. I hope you are well... With loving kindness, Scott. #62888 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa pgradinarov Hi, Ken! If 'ruppati' in Khajjaniya sutta is used in Passive voice (let those who know Pali help us), then this has more sense to me. > 9. Herein, in what sense is materiality (rupa)? It is materiality in the sense of being molested (ruppanatthena). > Best regards, Plamen #62889 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:16 pm Subject: Re: Nama and rupa pgradinarov Sorry for the mess with the diacritics. Here is how it should look http://www.globalbuddhism.com/forum/topic,180.0/ #62890 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:58 pm Subject: Re: Nama and rupa scottduncan2 Dear Plamen, Thanks, no problem. P: "Sorry for the mess with the diacritics..." I've tried to transcribe it here for easier use, an edit to make sure I've got it would be appreciated... "Ki~nca bhikkhave, ruupam vadetha: rupatiiti kho bhikkhave, tasmaa ruupanti vuccati. Kena ruppati: siitena'pi ruppati unhena'pi ruppati pipaasaaya'pi ruppati .da.msamakasavaataatapisiri.msapasamphassena'pi ruppati. Ruppatiiti kho bhikkhave, tasmaa ruupanti vuccati." Sincerely, Scott. #62891 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter 41.breath. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Of course no misquotations. I respectfully disagree. This point will come up soon in Rob's > forum, we keep contact. Please share when it comes up. Thanks. > Nina. Metta, James #62892 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Swee Boon - > > In a message dated 8/28/06 11:43:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > nidive@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > > >Hi, Swee Boon - > > > > > >In a message dated 8/26/06 10:55:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > >nidive@ writes: > > > > > >>Hi Howard, > > >> > > >>>So, then you are in agreement with those who interpret the Buddha > > >>>as having taught annihilation? What do you take "cessation" to > > be, > > >>>a transition to utter nothingness in every possible sense? Isn't > > >>>cessation the cessation of ignorance, of grasping, and of > > suffering > > >>>that comes with awakening? > > >>>Reality is what it is regardless of how we view it, is that not > > so? > > >>>Is there, as you see it, anything actually present right now, > > prior > > >>>to awakening, any more so than there would be beyond awakening? > > >>>Right now there is no self that does anything, no self that knows > > >>>anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > > >>>whatsoever that is a thing of its own. So, what is it that ceases > > >>>with this final ceasing altogether? As I see it, mere illusion > > and > > >>>the concomitant grasping at the ungraspable. > > >> > > >>If "right now there is no self that does anything, no self that > > knows > > >>anything, and none that grasps anything, and there is nothing > > >>whatsoever that is a thing of its own", then there is also nothing > > >>called a self that is or can be annihilated. > > >> > > >>What then is "annihilated"? Just stress and stress itself. > > >> > > >>And what is stress? > > >> > > >>Ignorance is stress. > > >>Fabrications is stress. > > >>Consciousness is stress. > > >>Name-&-form is stress. > > >>The six sense media is stress. > > >>Contact is stress. > > >>Feeling is stress. > > >>Craving is stress. > > >>Clinging is stress. > > >>Becoming is stress. > > >>Birth is stress. > > >>Aging &death is stress. > > > > > >-------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: > > > All of these are *unsatisfactory* (i.e., not sources of > > satisfaction), > > >and they are sources of outright suffering *when clung to*. The > > second noble > > >truth provides the primary cause of suffering, and it is tanha. > > Dhammas, > > >themselves, are not stress. > > >--------------------------------------------- > > Swee Boon: > > In short, you are telling me that the "truthness" of the First Noble > > Truth depends on the Second Noble Truth. > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No, I'm telling you that 'dukkha' in the 1st noble truth would better > be rendered by "unsatisfactory" or "unsatisfying" or "not a source of > satisfaction" or even by "stressful" than by "stress". And the second noble truth DOES > give the primary cause of dukkha. It is stated as follows: "And this, monks, > is the noble truth of the origination of stress: 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." > --------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: If the Second Noble Truth is craving that MAKES FOR FURTHER BECOMING, in what way am I contorting it when I say that craving is the cause, and birth, aging & death are the delayed effects? > --------------------------------------------- > > > > > > But I believe that the Buddha taught the First Noble Truth as an > > absolute truth and not as a relative truth. > > I believe that the Buddha when he taught in the First Noble Truth that > > birth, aging and death are suffering, he really meant it as it is > > whether or not there is craving. > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is a one-sided view to latch onto the 1st noble truth but ignore > the 2nd. What you say here contradicts the 2nd. > ------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: No. It doesn't contradict the Second Noble Truth. In fact, it is in line with the forward order of Dependent Co-arising. > ------------------------------------------- > > > I believe that when the Buddha taught the Second Noble Truth, he > > really meant that craving is the cause, and birth, aging and death are > > the delayed effects. > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I see that as a contortion. > ------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: No, I don't see that as a contortion. > -------------------------------------------- > > > >--------------------------------------------- > > > > > >> > > >>These are the 12 stresses to be "annihilated". > > >> > > >>This is the complete "annihilation" of stress, the ultimate > > emptiness. > > > > > >------------------------------------------ > > >Howard: > > > Suffering is ended entirely, right then and there, with full > > and final > > >awakening. The Buddha did *not* suffer. > > >------------------------------------------ > > Swee Boon: > > No, no, no. He did! > > He experienced bodily pains, experienced aging and finally experienced > > death. > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > You are confusing pain (unpleasant bodily feeling) with suffering. You > are confusing the 1st dart with the second, unnecessary, dart. [Pease reread > the sutta on this - > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.nypo.html] > ---------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: [Ven. Sariputta:] "Now what, friends, is the noble truth of stress? Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful; separation from the loved is stressful; not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging- aggregates are stressful. ... "And what is pain? Whatever is experienced as bodily pain, bodily discomfort, pain or discomfort born of bodily contact, that is called pain. ... "And what is distress? Whatever is experienced as mental pain, mental discomfort, pain or discomfort born of mental contact, that is called distress. ... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca1/index.html ... Both darts are included in the First Noble Truth. > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > All these sufferings are included in the First Noble Truth. > > >------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> > > >>If you want some "stress" to remain forever after the complete > > ceasing > > >>of "mere illusion and the concomitant grasping at the > > ungraspable", > > >>say for example, consciousness not inflicted by "I", or feeling > > not > > >>inflicted by "I", or contact not inflicted by "I", or the six > > sense > > >>media not inflicted by "I", or name-&-form not inflicted by "I", > > or > > >>fabrications not inflicted by "I", then I say this is impossible. > > Even > > >>the Buddha would say this is impossible. > > > > > >------------------------------------------ > > >Howard: > > > I think you are playing word games and mind games with > > yourself. An > > >arahant is entirely free of dukkha. There is no sense of person, > > there is > > >nothing to grasp, there is complete and direct understanding, and > > there is total > > >freedom. Nothing is lacking. There is nothing more to be done. For > > an arahant, > > >should experience cease or continue matters not in the slightest. > > Peace is utter > > >and complete, with nothing further required. > > >------------------------------------------- > > Swee Boon: > > Only a dead arahant is entirely free of suffering. > > Suffering for an arahant ceases only when all experience ceases. > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > That view of liberation is no different from the materialist's view of > death-as-liberation. It is a nihilist view, and IMO it is not the view of the > Dhamma. > ------------------------------------------------- Swee Boon: The Buddha teaches suffering and the ending of suffering. The highest praxis of Buddhist meditation is the Cessation of Perception & Feeling. You are telling me that anyone who enters this highest praxis is a nihilist. > ------------------------------------------------- > > > >------------------------------------------- > > > > > >> > > >>Why? Because consciousness not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > > >>feeling not inflicted by "I" is still stress, contact not > > inflicted by > > >>"I" is still stress, the six sense media not inflicted by "I" is > > still > > >>stress, name-&-form not inflicted by "I" is still stress, > > fabrications > > >>not inflicted by "I" is still stress. > > > > > >-------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: > > > There is no clinging and no stress. There is no affliction of > > any > > >sort. The arahant has done what was needed to be done. Nibbana is > > realized. > > >-------------------------------------------- > > > > > >> > > >>The desire to keep something that remains is just a manifestation > > of > > >>the inner primate craving for continued existence. It is the > > result of > > >>incomplete understanding of stress, the First Noble Truth. > > > > > >-------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: > > > I think you misunderstand it. An arahant lacks in its > > entirety the > > >cause of dukkha. An arahant is entirely free - free of self, free of > > other, free > > >of dukkha. > > >-------------------------------------------- #62893 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:49 pm Subject: Re: Alcohol? buddhatrue Hi Math, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > It seems clear from the 5th precept that one should not consume > alcohol. However different people interpret it differently. Some > would say that the 5th precept talks of not doing akusala after > drinking alcohol, rather than just the matter of drinking a certain > type of fluid. This is a very controversial subject because everyone has an opinion about it; and they usually believe that their opinion is the right one. Leaving all opinions aside and just following the words of the text, I believe that it is clear that the texts state that for householders, simply drinking alcohol isn't breaking the fifth precept. And, actually, I will go so far as to state (now this is going to be very controversial) that even getting extremely drunk isn't a breaking of the fifth precept. Monks, however, are not allowed to drink any amount of alcohol (for practical reasons). The precept states that one shouldn't consume alcohol leading to carelessness. The point of this rule is that one shouldn't consume alcohol to the extent that it will result in a moral transgression. Drinking alcohol in and of itself isn't a moral transgression, and when the Buddha listed moral transgressions in suttas he always listed the first four precepts (killing, lying, stealing, and sexual misconduct) but left out the fifth precept- that is because there is nothing morally wrong with drinking alcohol. Drinking alcohol, in and of itself, will not result in an unfavorable rebirth- however, if taken to excess, it can result in a rebirth where one is unintelligent and has a poor memory. However, the problem with alcohol is that it is a highly addictive drug and that some people are more susceptible to this addiction than others. Alcohol can also result in drunk driving deaths, child abuse, violence, health problems, etc. So, should you avoid alcohol? Yes, by all means you should avoid alcohol if you are prone to excessive drinking. However, if you do indulge in alcohol, even to the point of getting smashing drunk, and you don't commit any moral transgressions, you aren't breaking the fifth precept. (Actually, I think that there is a story in the texts of someone who became sotapanna while drunk- but I would think that that is extremely, extremely rare). As for myself, since you asked for personal information, I have been a Buddhist since I was eighteen and I have been drinking alcohol since I was 19. As long as my drinking of alcohol didn't cause me to kill, steal, lie, or commit sexual misconduct, I don't see any problems with it. However, nowadays I have to stay away from alcohol because I have hypoglycemia (which developed from eating too much sugar, not drinking alcohol). It's a personal choice and people are going to judge you no matter what you choose. Good luck. Metta, James ps. Consuming alcohol does adversely affect your meditation practice and daily mindfulness. #62894 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:06 pm Subject: Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! buddhatrue Ven. Bhikkhu Samahita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > > What is an Idiotic, Imbecile & Moronic Fool? > > A certain bhikkhu once asked the Blessed Buddha: > Venerable Sir, it is said: An idiotic fool, an idiotic fool... > In what way, Venerable Sir, can one rightly be called an idiotic fool ? > Bhikkhu, it is because one has neither developed nor cultivated these > Seven Links to Awakening that one rightly is called an idiotic fool !!! Would you consider this wrong speech- calling someone an idiotic fool? I had a discussion with Jon and Sarah in Hong Kong and this subject came up. I reminded them that the Buddha often used harsh speech against those who contradicted (didn't follow) his teachings. They replied that that was okay since the Buddha's motives were pure, but for the rest of us it isn't okay. But I wonder what difference that makes to the person receiving the harsh speech? Being called an idiotic fool by a Buddha or by a wordling is still being called an idiotic fool! What do you think about this matter? Metta, James #62895 From: "Paul" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] nibbana paulgrabiano... Hi Nina, Thank you. That is a splendid explanation. N: Lokuttara kusala citta is conditioned by many factors, by natural strong dependence-condition, that is the accumulation of pa~n~naa and all the enlightenment factors, all kusala represented by the perfections. It is accompanied by all the accompanying sobhana cetasikas that condition it in different ways (conascence, presence, association, etc.). It is conditioned by the object that is nibbaana. It is kusala citta, that is citta that is cause, it produces vipaaka. The phalacitta, that is lokuttara vipaakacitta, also experiences nibbaana. You speak of the cycle. Lokuttara kusala citta is not an addition to the brickwall that is built up in our life by heaping up kamma that brings result and makes the cycle go on. It is the taking down of bricks. At that moment there is no heaping up but dispersion. There are four stages of enlightenment, and at the stage of the arahat there will be the end of the cycle. But when the stage of the sotaapanna is reached, the end is of the cycle is sure to come, after seven births at most. Even though a lifespan in a higher plane may last very long. Nina. P: This I would particularly like to stress! N: It is the taking down of bricks. At that moment there is no heaping up but dispersion. It certainly makes sense that the experience of nibanna would have to be a dispersion. paul #62896 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Hi Howard, you are right, the khandhas of the arahat are not khandhas of clinging, upadanakkhandhas, and in the sutta the Buddha said: the khandhas of clinging are dukkha. Thus 'for him' there is no dukkha in this sense. But there is another aspect: sa'nkhaaradukkha, dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas. Dispeller of Delusion p. 113 explains about figurative suffering and literal suffering. end quote. This is the sankhaara dukkha. This is being oppressed by rise and fall. They arise and fall away, and this is 'oppression' no matter one clings to it or not. I remember that this was dicussed before, but I cannot handle yahoo google. We should revive this old post. I am sure there is more to it. There is dukkha as one of the three general characteristics, and there is the noble Truth of dukkha. Different texts should be compared. Nina. Op 28-aug-2006, om 18:38 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Thus, for the arahat there are still the khandhas arising and falling > > away. He has kilesa parinibbaana (in this sense he has freedom), but > > not yet khandha parinibbaana. Thus there is still dukkha for him. > > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is not dukkha "for him". Firstly, there is no "him" in actuality > nor does "he" have any sense of personal self. Secondly, "he" is > utterly free of > all dhammas and is fully unperturbed. The dukkha of khandhas, their > inadequacy, indeed remains, for that is a negative - they never > were, are not, and > never will satisfy or be worthy of pursuit. #62897 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:48 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 97 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 97. Presence-condition. (continuation). Text Vis.: 97. But in the Question Section, after setting forth conascence, prenascence, postnascence, nutriment, and faculty, the description is given first under conascence in the way beginning, 'One aggregate is a condition, as presence condition, for three aggregates and for materiality originated thereby' (P.tn.1,178). Under prenascence the description is given according to the prenascent eye and so on. Under postnascence the description is given according to postnacent consciousness and consciousness-concomitants as condition for this body. Under nutriment and faculties [respectively] the description is given thus: 'Physical nutriment is a condition, as presence condition, for this body', and 'The material life faculty is a condition, as presence condition, for materiality due to kamma performed' (P.tn.1,178).16 ----------------------- N: The Tiika to this section refers to the Question Section (Pa~nhaa vaara) in the Pa.t.thaana where presence-condition is classified as thirteenfold. This refers to conascent presence-condition, pertaining to nåma which conditions another nåma, to nåma which conditions mind- produced rúpa, and to rúpa which conditions another rúpa. Moreover, it refers to prenascent presence-condition, pertaining to the rúpas which are bases, vatthus, and the rúpas which are the sense objects. It refers to postnascent presence-condition, pertaining to citta that consolidates rúpas of the body which have previously arisen but have not fallen away yet. Moreover, this section refers to edible food (ahaara) and physical life-faculty (jiivitindriya) which are presence-condition. This section of the Pa.t.thaana gives more details than the section which gives a sevenfold clssification, dealt with in Vis. 96. In the text of the sevenfold classification we read: But in the Question Section of the Pa.t.thaana we read that at the moment of rebirth-consciousness <...one resultant indeterminate aggregate [N: naama-khandha that is vipaaka) is related to three aggregates and kamma-produced matter by presence- condition....aggregates are related to (heart-)base by presence- condition; (heart-)base is related to aggregates by presence-condition.> At the first moment of our life, kamma produces the decads (groups of ten ruupas) of bodysense, of sex and of heartbase. Just as in the case of conascence-condition, the rebirth-consciousness (the four naama-khandhas) is related to kamma produced ruupas by conascent presence-condition, but only in the case of the heart-base this relationship is mutual. The citta consolidates and supports the kamma- produced ruupas, but only the heart-base among these ruupas is related to rebirth-consciousness by way of presence-condition as it consolidates and supports that citta. The "Paììhåna'' (Faultless Triplet,Investigation Chapter,§ 435,,VII,d,e) mentions food and also physical life-faculty (rúpa- jívitindriya) separately under presence-condition. We read: After edible food has been taken and it has pervaded the body, the nutritive essence it contains supports the internal nutritive essence present in the groups of rúpa of the body, so that new groups of rúpa can be produced. The rúpa which is nutritive essence present in each group of rúpas of the body can produce new rúpas, but it cannot do so without the support of the nutritive essence present in food. Nutritive essence is one of the four factors which can produce rúpas of the body, the other being kamma, citta and temperature. Edible food conditions the rúpas of the body by way of presence- condition, it supports and consolidates them. It supports also the groups of ruupa produced by kamma, citta and temperature. As regards physical life faculty, rúpa-jívitindriya, this is always present in the groups of rúpa produced by kamma. It does not occur in the groups of rúpa produced by citta, heat or nutrition. Eyesense, for example, is produced by kamma, and thus there must also be jívitindriya together with it in that group of rúpas. The same is true for the other senses. It maintains the life of the kamma-produced rúpas it arises together with in a group; it consolidates them, and then it falls away together with them. Past kamma is a cause in the production of rúpa, but it is not present in the same way as the other three factors which produce rúpa. A deed, done in the past has fallen away, but the intention or volition which motivated that deed is accumulated from moment to moment. The force of past kamma is carried on and therefore kamma still has the power to produce rúpa at present. Life faculty is compared to a "wetnurse'' taking the place of kamma, the "mother'', in maintaining the life of the kamma-produced rúpas. Thus, life faculty conditions these rúpas by way of presence-condition. Life faculty performs its task of consolidating kamma- produced rúpas from birth to death. Nutriment and physical life-faculty are not included among the conascent conditions as the Tiika states. They give assistance by way of consolidation, not at the moment of their arising, but at their moments of presence (ti.t.thi) and therefore they are mentioned separately (See Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 316). The Tiika refers to the Pa.t.thaana text which enumerates as thirteenfold the different kinds of presence-condition, including nutrition and life-faculty. The Tiika states that when presence-condition is classified in short, it is fivefold, namely as pertaining to kusala, akusala, vipaaka, kiriya and ruupa. ------------ Note 16 (taken from the Tiika). 'The presence (atthi) condition is not applicable to nibbana. For a presence condition is that which is unhelpful by its absence of existingness (atthibhaavaabhaava) and becomes helpful by obtaining existingness. And nibbana does not, after being unhelpful by its own absence of existingness to those states that have nibbana as their object, become helpful to them by obtaining existingness. Or alternatively, the presence condition, which by its non-existingness is the opposite of helpfulness to those states that are associated with arising, etc., is helpful to them by its existingness. So nibbana is not a presence condition' (Pm.597). ******** N: The term existingness stands for the Pali: atthi-bhaava, the nature of presence. What is present has arisen, but nibbaana does not arise, it is unconditioned. Presence-condition is not applicable to nibbaana. -------- Conclusion: We take it for granted that we have the strength to move around and engage in our usual activities. However, there are many conditions necessary to enable us to do so. Each citta in our daily life consolidates and supports the ruupas of the body by way of postnascent presence-condition. Moreover, also nutrition supports the ruupas of the body by way of presence-condition. When we consider the relation of nutrition to the body it helps us to see that we go on living because of conditions. We are seeing time and again, and we take it for granted that we have eyesense. We should remember that past kamma produces eyesense which arises in a group of ruupas that also contain physical life-faculty, jiivitindriya. Jiivitindriya maintains and consolidates kamma- produced ruupas by way of presence-condition. Life faculty is a condition for distinguishing kamma-produced rúpa from other kinds of rúpa. We cling to the body which is alive, we cling to eyesense and earsense and take them for self. They are only elements maintained by life faculty, a kind of rúpa which is not self. They arise because there are the appropriate conditions for their arising. Since cittas succeed one another and ruupas that fall away are replaced by new ruupas, it seems that they last. They appear to be present all the time. However, dhammas that condition other dhammas by way of presence-condition are only present to each other for an extremely short moment and then they fall away. Learning details about the different ways dhammas consolidate and assist other dhammas by being present to them will help us to have more understanding of the fact that they have no possessor. There is no person who can control or direct them. ****** Nina. #62898 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:52 pm Subject: Clever and Wise ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Who is Clever, Intelligent and Wise? A certain bhikkhu once asked the Blessed Buddha: Venerable Sir, it is said: Clever and wise, clever and wise... In what way, Venerable Sir, can one rightly be called clever and wise ? Bhikkhu, it is because one has indeed developed and cultivated these Seven Links to Awakening, that one rightly is called clever and wise !!! What seven? 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening. 5: The Tranquillity to Awakening. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening. It is because one has indeed developed and made much of these Seven Factors of Enlightenment, that one is called clever and wise... Source of reference: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 100] 46: The Links. 45: Intelligent... Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62899 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:02 pm Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear James who asked: Reg: Is calling somebody 'Idiotic Fool' wrong and harsh speech? >What do you think about this matter? It depends on the mental state behind using this expression! If this is Hate or Anger, then this is wrong and harsh speech! If this is Kind Understanding, then this is right & good speech! Saying what is true and advantageous cannot always be kind, but one should know the right time for using rough speech in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! vandana Friendship is the Greatest... Bhikkhu Samahita #62900 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:51 am Subject: Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! icarofranca Hi James! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Would you consider this wrong speech- calling someone an idiotic > fool? I had a discussion with Jon and Sarah in Hong Kong and this > subject came up. I reminded them that the Buddha often used harsh > speech against those who contradicted (didn't follow) his > teachings. They replied that that was okay since the Buddha's > motives were pure, but for the rest of us it isn't okay. But I > wonder what difference that makes to the person receiving the harsh > speech? Being called an idiotic fool by a Buddha or by a wordling > is still being called an idiotic fool! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Not considering the high purpose of Buddha, the use of these words inflicts in a fault against the Noble Path issues - Right Words. It can be counted as a demerit for our dear Ven.Samahita! Mettaya, Ã?caro #62901 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:58 am Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? icarofranca Hi Bhikkhu Samahita --------------------------------------------------------------------- > It depends on the mental state behind using this expression! > If this is Hate or Anger, then this is wrong and harsh speech! > If this is Kind Understanding, then this is right & good speech! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry, but the Noble Path issue called "Right Words" hasn´t such ideological conotation. Au Contraire, such Noble Path´s instruction is direct in meaning and doesn´t support other interpretations - if this words are suffering, cause of suffering, cause of other´s suffering, so it isn´t a right word. It can be a demerit for the user! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! -------------------------------------------------------------------- Even so, a demerir is only a demerit, a bad accumulation in all means. Mettaya, Ã?caro #62902 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/29/06 4:51:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > you are right, the khandhas of the arahat are not khandhas of > clinging, upadanakkhandhas, and in the sutta the Buddha said: the > khandhas of clinging are dukkha. Thus 'for him' there is no dukkha in > this sense. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you very much for saying this, Nina! :-) ---------------------------------------------- > But there is another aspect: sa'nkhaaradukkha, dukkha inherent in all > conditioned dhammas. Dispeller of Delusion p. 113 explains about > figurative suffering and literal suffering. oppression even in the paths and fruitions, therefore these states > should be understood to be called 'suffering of the formations' by > their being included in the Truth of suffereing.> end quote. > This is the sankhaara dukkha. This is being oppressed by rise and fall. > They arise and fall away, and this is 'oppression' no matter one > clings to it or not. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I take no exception to this. I agree with it. I understand all sankhara as dukkha in their not at all being sources of satisfaction - for anyone, whether worldling or ariyan. Because they are dependent, impermanent, empty of own-being, insubstantial, and ungraspable, because they are like foam, a bubble, a mirage, a pithless tree, and a magician's trick, there is no sustenance, solice, or refuge to be found in them. Each, like an out-of-kilter cart with different size wheels, "just doesn't make it"! ----------------------------------------------- > I remember that this was dicussed before, but I cannot handle yahoo > google. We should revive this old post. I am sure there is more to > it. There is dukkha as one of the three general characteristics, and > there is the noble Truth of dukkha. Different texts should be compared. > Nina. > Op 28-aug-2006, om 18:38 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > >Thus, for the arahat there are still the khandhas arising and falling > >>away. He has kilesa parinibbaana (in this sense he has freedom), but > >>not yet khandha parinibbaana. Thus there is still dukkha for him. > >> > >----------------------------------------- > >Howard: > >It is not dukkha "for him". Firstly, there is no "him" in actuality > >nor does "he" have any sense of personal self. Secondly, "he" is > >utterly free of > >all dhammas and is fully unperturbed. The dukkha of khandhas, their > >inadequacy, indeed remains, for that is a negative - they never > >were, are not, and > >never will satisfy or be worthy of pursuit. > ========================== With metta, Howard #62903 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:08 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 44. nilovg Dear friends, I just received a letter from Sarah with interesting quotes of her discussions with Khun Sujin about daily life. The suggestions are again so practical, so full of 'common sense' as we would say in conventional terms. But they are the fruit of right understanding in daily life. First I will quote a remark of Sarah. She first thought that she had to be in a quiet place and she lived for some time in a temple. She said about her experience: ******* Nina. #62904 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:11 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 63 nilovg Dear friends, One type of ahetuka kiriyacitta is the five-door-adverting- consciousness, in Påli: pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta. When an object impinges on one of the five senses, there has to be a citta which adverts or turns towards the object through that sense-door. When visible object impinges on the eyesense, there has to be the adverting-consciousness which adverts to visible object through the eye-door, the eye-door-adverting-consciousness (cakkhu-dvåråvajjana- citta; ``cakkhu'' means ``eye''), before there can be seeing- consciousness (cakkhu-viññå.na). When sound impinges on the earsense, the ear-door-adverting-consciousness ( sota-dvåråvajjana-citta; ``sota'' means ``ear'') has to advert to the sound through the ear- door before there can be hearing-consciousness (sota-viññå.na). The pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta merely turns towards the object which impinges on one of the five senses. It turns, for example, towards the visible object or sound which impinges on the corresponding sense- organ, but it does not see or hear. The pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta is an ahetuka kiriyacitta, it arises without hetu (root); there is not yet like or dislike when this citta arises. The pañca-dvåråvajjana- citta is succeeded by one of the dvi-pañca-viññåùas, which is vipåkacitta. Each citta which arises in the process of cittas experiencing an object has its own function. The cittas which experience an object through one of the sense-doors do not know anything else but that object. When one, for example, is reading, the citta which sees experiences only visible object and it does not know the meaning of the letters. After the eye-door process has been completed visible object is experienced through the mind- door and then there can be other mind-door processes of cittas which know the meaning of what has been written and which think about it. Thus, there are processes of cittas which experience an object through one of the senses and processes of cittas which experience an object through the mind-door. ***** Nina. #62905 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:54 am Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? philofillet Hi ven samahita, James and all >>> Saying what is true and advantageous cannot always be kind, but one should know the right time for using rough speech in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! James, beware when reading the above from the venerable- you're already overconfident about your ability (?) to use harsh speech in a wholesome (kusala) way - that's my impression of you, though as you know I'm very fond of you. Don't go overboard. Only people with great wisdom can "know the right time for using rough speech in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up!" I don't think you fall in that basket - I don't think anyone here falls in that basket. Don't get burned by a misguided belief in the wholesomeness of shock tactics. Phil p.s I saw your note about being sad about my giving up meditation. That was sweet of you. As it happens, I never ever thought about seeking jhanas (how could it be possible for busy people who live in small apartments with loved ones in the middle of big noisy cities to seek jhanas) so those long posts about jhanas - I have never read them. Yes, I did give up metta meditation, but I like to do what I suppose is meditation every morning, while reflecting on suttas or abhidhamma teachings. I use the breath as a kind of attention post, but I don't think this is vipassana or anything. It just helps me concentrate on the teaching. It's not the samadhi that helps to condition panna, that's for sure - just thinking that has become a little bit more refined. No need to reply to this, unless you want to, because I won't be talking about this subject ever ever ever again. :) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > Dear James who asked: > > Reg: Is calling somebody 'Idiotic Fool' wrong and harsh speech? > >What do you think about this matter? > > It depends on the mental state behind using this expression! > If this is Hate or Anger, then this is wrong and harsh speech! > If this is Kind Understanding, then this is right & good speech! > Saying what is true and advantageous cannot always be kind, > but one should know the right time for using rough speech > in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! > > vandana > > Friendship is the Greatest... > Bhikkhu Samahita > #62906 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:12 am Subject: Re: Is 'Fool' wrong speech? bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear Friend Ã?caro >It can be a demerit for the user to say "Fool"! Ill repeat: If the INTENTION is good, then there is no demerit there at all...! Buddha often called various fools: "This Foolish Man" yet never in any anger! Some examples: Dhp V Balavagga The Fool: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.05.budd.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.002.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.12.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html There are many, many others...!!! [3] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html If I may dare be so brute (again) here: Dearest friend Ã?caro: Please don't be so foolish so as to postulate, that the Buddha accumulated demerit on all these occasions, where he at least tried to teach fools (which as now is not so easy)... Au Contraire: If you should do so, then I will guarantee you with my life as put on a stake, that you thereby (again) acquire much demerit... In equanimity... vandana Friendship is the Greatest... Bhikkhu Samahita #62907 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:27 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 97 and Tiika. philofillet Hi Nina Reading the following was some kind of decisive condition for me to suddenly rejoin DSG. I am making some progress on kicking my internet addiction so I really hope I won't be posting until November, but I will be reading all of your posts - I'd be foolish not to - and I'm not foolish! :) Phil > Conclusion: > > We take it for granted that we have the strength to move around and > engage in our usual activities. However, there are many conditions > necessary to enable us to do so. Each citta in our daily life > consolidates and supports the ruupas of the body by way of > postnascent presence-condition. Moreover, also nutrition supports the > ruupas of the body by way of presence-condition. When we consider the > relation of nutrition to the body it helps us to see that we go on > living because of conditions. > We are seeing time and again, and we take it for granted that we have > eyesense. We should remember that past kamma produces eyesense which > arises in a group of ruupas that also contain physical life- faculty, > jiivitindriya. Jiivitindriya maintains and consolidates kamma- > produced ruupas by way of presence-condition. > Life faculty is a condition for distinguishing kamma-produced rúp a > from other > kinds of rúpa. We cling to the body which is alive, we cling to > eyesense and > earsense and take them for self. They are only elements maintained by > life faculty, > a kind of rúpa which is not self. They arise because there are the > appropriate > conditions for their arising. > Since cittas succeed one another and ruupas that fall away are > replaced by new ruupas, it seems that they last. They appear to be > present all the time. However, > dhammas that condition other dhammas by way of presence-condition are > only present to each other for an extremely short moment and then > they fall away. > Learning details about the different ways dhammas consolidate and > assist other dhammas by being present to them will help us to have > more understanding of the fact that they have no possessor. There is > no person who can control or direct them. > > ****** > Nina. > #62908 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:04 am Subject: nama and rupa nilovg Hi TG, --------- Can you really claim to know what is going on "one dhamma at a time" or be confident enough to declare that -- "is reality"? I can't. I really don't think Buddha was ever that specific in the Suttas. ------- N: We have to learn, but this is a gradual process. In countless suttas the Buddha speaks about visible object, eye, seeing- consciousness, sound, ear, hearing. He speaks about being heedless as regards those dhammas or being heedful. This theme is repeated again and again. Kindred Sayings IV, at the very beginning:and so on. -------- T.G.To me, the Abhidhamma, and the Suttas for that matter, are models to help illuminate reality in the minds of people. These teachings are guides to see beyond the teachings...to see what is real face to face as it were. These models can be enlightening...or they can be a burden depending on how rigidly they are adhered to. ------ N: Well said. Enlightening if one has correct understanding of them and this depends on association with a wise friend, listening, wise reflection, practice in accordance with the dhamma. ----------- TG: The point is to be intently mindful of their arising and changing and passing away along with the CONDITIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT INSTIGATE SUCH CHANGES, impermanence. (snipped) DETACHMENT is the result. ----- N: This step is too fast, too fast! The first stage of insight: knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa comes first. Detachment has to be there from the beginning, but it grows in the course of insight. -------- TG: I don't think so. Conditionality and impermanence is basically the starting point of many if not most Suttas. The stage you describe as the first step in my view is a wrong step...a step backward of any Sutta teaching I'm familiar with. I can't think of one Sutta where the Buddha speaks to the importance of "knowing the difference between the characteristic of nama and rupa... Or that such knowledge is the first step. -------- N: Kindred Sayings, IV, 14, the Chapter on the All. Here we learn that the eye and visible object, etc. is the all that have to be known. § 26, Comprehension: Without fully knowing, without comprehending the all, monks, without detaching himself from, without abandoning the all, a man is incapable of extinguishing dukkha.> The all is visible object, seeing, all objects appearing through the six doors. The Commentary explains that these are the three pari~n~nas (full comprehensions that develop in the course of the stages of insight: full comprehension of the known, of investigation (of the three characteristics) and abandoning, the detachment that grows in the course of insight. You are reading now and it seems that you are seeing and reading at the same time. But this is not so. There are moments of experiencing just what appears through eyesense, and later on there is remembering, recognizing the letters and getting their meaning. Through the development of insight you learn different characterstics one at a time. Not more than one, since each moment of consciousness can know only one object at a time. We are always clinging to names of phenomena, only knowing the theory. Through the Abhidhamma and insight that go hand in hand, you directly learn to understand characteristics, without having to name them. § 83, the world: Our safe and secure world of persons and things we are familiar with crumbles away. In the ultimate sense there is only one world at a time appearing through one doorway. ----------- ... I would say that we need to have a good working understanding of the key elements responsible for experience. Then, ASAP, become aware of how those factors are driving the process of conditionality, impermanence, and affliction ... and how such states are empty of anything unto themselves, i.e., unsubstantial. Whatever is unsubstantial and ultimately leading to affliction is surely not worth being attached to. Why would I even want to consider these things as "real dhammas"? ------- N: At first we only thought of concepts of persons and things, but now we learn that whatever is experienced is only a dhamma. This is the beginning. We cannot ASAP be aware, also awareness is anatta, it has no owner. The arising and falling away of seeing or visible object cannot be known if there is no understanding what precisely falls away. Not a whole of nama and rupa, only one reality is known at a time. This is not easy, because we are so used to thinking of seeing and visible object as a whole, one impression. This is not according to the truth. Nama has to be thoroughly known as nama, and rupa as rupa, otherwise their arising and falling away cannot be realised. Nina. #62909 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 97 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Phil, It is a happy surprise to suddenly see you here. I am glad about the proximate cause, the Visuddhimagga. Perhaps you may write a few lines before November. Best wishes for your writing of stories. Nina. Op 29-aug-2006, om 12:27 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > Reading the following was some kind of decisive condition for me > to suddenly rejoin DSG. I am making some progress on kicking my > internet addiction so I really hope I won't be posting until > November, but I will be reading all of your posts - I'd be foolish > not to - and I'm not foolish! :) #62910 From: connie Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:41 am Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 43 nichiconn Nina: If someone else has different accumulations and finds that he or she has to follow another way, I think that no arguments at all can stop that person; accumulated inclinations are so deep, so strong. They drive someone into this or that direction. Connie: This reminded me of Udaana 8-7: Dvidhaapathasutta.m where his attendant wanted to go one way at a fork in the road and the Buddha the other.... quoting from Sacred Texts: << A third time the venerable Naagasamaala said to the Blessed One: "This, Sire, is the way, let us go in this direction." And the venerable Naagasamaala threw down on the ground the bowl and tunic of the Blessed One, saying: "There, Sire, are your bowl and tunic." And as the venerable Nâgasamâla proceeded on the road, robbers came and assaulted him with their hands and feet, broke his alms-bowl and tore his garments. ..." >> The commentary, p1056 says "(yet) finding himself unable to give the Teacher his bowl and robe, he set these down on the ground (bhuumiya.m) and then, **being urged on by a deed conducive to dukkha that was ready to present itself**, departed..." and then (p1058): "One is "ignorant" (a~n~no) in that one does not know (na jaanaati) that which is to one's own well-being and detriment, meaning unknowing (avidvaa), foolish." peace, connie #62911 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:57 am Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear Sarah and Jonothan, Thank you so much for your kind words of welcome. I shall do my best, but do not count too much on me! Warm regards, Lodewijk #62912 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:01 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear Howard, thank you very much for your kind words of welcome to me. As always, I shall closely follow your spirited dialogue with Nina and, where possible, join in. Warm regards, Lodewijk #62913 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:10 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear Matheesha, thank you very much for your kind words of welcome. As to ahappy marriage; constant attention, give and take, common interests and ideals, like, in our case, study, religion, music, litterature, foreign cultures, hiking etc.. I am looking forward to follow your dialogue with Nina. Warm regards, Lodewijk #62914 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:14 pm Subject: nieuw lid lodewijkvang... Beste Icaro, veel dank voor je hartelijke woorden. Ik hoop veel goede ideen over Dhamma van je te lezen. Beste wensen, Lodewijk #62915 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:19 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear Christine, thank you so much for your kind words of welcome. I, too, have so many good memories of our meeting in Bangkok and India, like our early morning walk to Anathapindika's gardens. We hope to see you next year January in Bangkok. With warm regards, Lodewijk #62916 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:24 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear Han, thank you very much for your kind and moving words of welcome. We are looking forward to meeting you next year January in Bangkok, to begin with for breakfast or lunch at The Oriental and also at the Foundation. With warm regards, Lodewijk #62917 From: Lodewijk van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:34 pm Subject: new member lodewijkvang... Dear James, thank you very much for you kind words of welcome. Do not count too much on me! I would rather leave the serious dialogue to Nina! My believe that the Buddha's path takes aeons rests on my own reading of the scriptures, like the Jataka Stories, and Nina's reading of the commentaries, but foremost on the realisation of the the extent and the depth of my own defilements and the heavy burden of tne five Khanda's. Nina and I will discuss this important point further in the n ext few weeks and Ishall come back to it. With warm regards, Lodewijk #62918 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nama and rupa TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/29/2006 12:07:00 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: N: At first we only thought of concepts of persons and things, but now we learn that whatever is experienced is only a dhamma. This is the beginning. We cannot ASAP be aware TG: 'As soon as possible' is the only way it is possible. (To be technically picky.) , also awareness is anatta, it has no owner. The arising and falling away of seeing or visible object cannot be known if there is no understanding what precisely falls away. TG: Absolute precision of what is arising and falling away is highly unlikely. To me, what is needed is a foundation of general understanding of the elements with enough depth that insight into impermanence, affliction, and no-self come to be utilized for the purpose of detaching the mind. After that its a matter of practice, practice, practice. Spending too much time on stage one is going to thwart progress in further stages of insight. Not a whole of nama and rupa, only one reality is known at a time. This is not easy, because we are so used to thinking of seeing and visible object as a whole, one impression. This is not according to the truth. TG: There are countless things going on simultaneously that support cognition. And, there is a flowing process occurring simultaneously as well. (This is not really a disagreement with your above, nor is it an agreement.) Nama has to be thoroughly known as nama, and rupa as rupa, otherwise their arising and falling away cannot be realised. Nina. TG: If this were true or important, the Suttas would be full of exact quotes over and over again of THIS above exact point. But I feel this is a marginal stance. To me this is a third or fourth generation commentary that is lacking in authority. This point is often stressed by you. It seems to be the heart of your message. But it comes from a rather broad interpretation of Suttas. I don't feel it was the Buddha's message. I think its an offshoot analysis of Suttas and I see evidence provided for its accuracy as a series of broad interpretations. Again, if it was so important, it would appear verbatim in many, many Suttas IMO. TG #62919 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:26 pm Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? buddhatrue Ven. Bhikkhu Samahita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > Dear James who asked: > > Reg: Is calling somebody 'Idiotic Fool' wrong and harsh speech? > >What do you think about this matter? > > It depends on the mental state behind using this expression! > If this is Hate or Anger, then this is wrong and harsh speech! > If this is Kind Understanding, then this is right & good speech! I agree. Very well put! > Saying what is true and advantageous cannot always be kind, This I really agree with!! Unfortunately, not everyone sees things this way. > but one should know the right time for using rough speech > in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! True, true. It is all about timing. Unfortunately, over the Internet, that is very difficult. > > vandana > > Friendship is the Greatest... > Bhikkhu Samahita > Thank you for your well-considered answer. I completely agree with everything you have to say!! Metta, James #62920 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! buddhatrue Hi Icaro, > > Not considering the high purpose of Buddha, the use of these words > inflicts in a fault against the Noble Path issues - Right Words. > It can be counted as a demerit for our dear Ven.Samahita! I don't think that one necessarily has to be a Buddha in order to use shocking words in order to wake someone up. There are many factors at play and it is best to judge each situation on its own merits. In this day and age of political correctness, I think that people look for a reason to be offended; they look for something to get them all riled up. It is like they carry a big chip on their shoulder asking for someone, anyone, to knock it off so that they can react. This is western culture. In Asian culture, the culture of the Buddha, it isn't that way. I tend to identify more with Asians than Americans/Europeans. Metta, James #62921 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:42 pm Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 44. buddhatrue Hi Nina and Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Some people may be naturally > inclined to living in a temple, but not everybody has such > inclinations.... No matter where we live, we need to be aware of the > realities appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind > at this moment. I would agree with this and think that this is very reasonable. Some people are inclined to become monks and some are not. Some people are inclined to practice meditation and some are not. It was the same during the Buddha's time and he taught each according to their inclinations. Metta, James #62922 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:11 pm Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi ven samahita, James and all > > >>> Saying what is true and advantageous cannot always be kind, > but one should know the right time for using rough speech > in order to shock to move or advantageously wake up! > > James, beware when reading the above from the venerable- you're > already overconfident about your ability (?) to use harsh speech in > a wholesome (kusala) way Oh, shut up you idiotic fool!! ;-)) (just kidding). Good to see you posting again. Hadn't heard from you for a while so I was wondering if you were okay. I will be sending you an update about Taiwan in a bit but I have been very lazy (sooooo hot here! ;-)) - that's my impression of you, though as > you know I'm very fond of you. Don't go overboard. Only people with > great wisdom can "know the right time for using rough speech in > order to shock to move or advantageously wake up!" I don't think you > fall in that basket - I don't think anyone here falls in that basket. Well, if you don't 'fall into that basket', that means that you don't have insightful wisdom; and if you don't have insightful wisdom then you can't really judge anyone else's wisdom either. So, what you have just written is a non sequitur. So, it would be best to not make generalized statements about everyone, I think. As far as myself, sometimes I write shocking things to wake people up, and sometimes I write them just because I'm pissed off! You never can tell with me. ;-)) But, Phil (aka Jimminy Cricket ;-) you don't always have to be my conscience- I was just asking a question. I wasn't looking for a justification to slash and burn my way through dsg ;-)). (It really amuses me how people in this forum view me. They think I am one way when I am really a different way entirely. Jon and Sarah learned this when they met me. You see, I view this forum as a forum of religious/ideological debate. And when it comes to debate I am ruthless! However, in person I am gentle, kind, and soft spoken...and would never dream of calling someone an idiotic fool!)* > > Don't get burned by a misguided belief in the wholesomeness of > shock tactics. > > Phil > > p.s I saw your note about being sad about my giving up meditation. > That was sweet of you. As it happens, I never ever thought about > seeking jhanas (how could it be possible for busy people who live in > small apartments with loved ones in the middle of big noisy cities > to seek jhanas) Well, of course not! You would have to go on retreat to seek jhanas, or at least set some time aside each day and sit with earplugs. ;-)) so those long posts about jhanas - I have never > read them. Well, I think you should read about them and know about them even if you don't achieve them in this lifetime. Such knowledge could condition their development in future lifetimes. Yes, I did give up metta meditation, but I like to do > what I suppose is meditation every morning, while reflecting on > suttas or abhidhamma teachings. I use the breath as a kind of > attention post, but I don't think this is vipassana or anything. It > just helps me concentrate on the teaching. It's not the samadhi that > helps to condition panna, that's for sure - just thinking that has > become a little bit more refined. No need to reply to this, unless > you want to, because I won't be talking about this subject ever ever > ever again. :) Yeah, right. ;-)) Metta, James *ps. If you want to know more of what my personality is like you should use my letters to the star kids as a guide. That is what I am like- because I wasn't debating with them. #62923 From: connie Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:17 pm Subject: Re: nama and rupa. nichiconn Hi Ken O, TG, all I think TG said something about ruupa and ruppati along the first few lines of this Summary and Expo quote (p9): "that which comforts": << That which is afflicted (ruppati) is materiality (ruupa); that which 'comes to or is brought to change (vikaara) as a result of such opposing conditions as cold and heat' is what is meant. So the Blessed One spoke the words beginning: 'It is afflicted by cold, it is afflicted by heat.' Here, being afflicted is just taking a different form in the presence of opposing conditions like cold. If this is so, does not the designation 'materiality' apply to immaterial dhammas? It does not apply. The fact of referring to cold, etc., shows that only great affliction is meant. When the ordinary expression 'it is afflicted' alone is sufficient elsewhere, why are cold, etc., referred to? It is because the afflictions of what is touched by cold, etc., are greater. Therefore, in order to show that just this is what is meant here, cold, etc, are referred to. If this is so, how is the designation 'materiality' used with reference to the Brahmaa World, for there is no cold, etc., to cause harm there? Although there is none that causes harm, there is that which comforts; therefore in that way 'affliction' is obtained there. Alternatively, it is enough to explain that, since the particular nature of affliction is not overcome there, the designation 'materiality' is used. That which is deliverance (nikkhanta) from craving, considered as 'entanglement' (vaana) because it stitches and weaves together existence and non-existence, or that by means of which the fires of greed, etc., are extinguished (nibbaati) is nibbaana.>> Thanks, Ken O. peace, connie #62924 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:21 pm Subject: Re: new member buddhatrue Hi Lodewijk, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lodewijk van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James, thank you very much for you kind words of welcome. > Do not count too much on me! I would rather leave the serious > dialogue to Nina! Oh, I hope not! I believe that you would have much to contribute in your own right. > My believe that the Buddha's path takes aeons rests on my own > reading of the scriptures, like the Jataka Stories, You may have something here. I have never really given the Jataka Stories that much consideration; actually, I am not even convinced that all of them are true. However, they might have been used by the Buddha as a teaching tool- and then the question becomes what was he teaching? Interesting. I will investigate this matter further and get back to you. and Nina's > reading of the commentaries, but foremost on the realisation of the > the extent and the depth of my own defilements and the heavy burden > of tne five Khanda's. Nina and I will discuss this important point > further in the n ext few weeks and Ishall come back to it. I will look forward to that. > With warm regards, > > Lodewijk Metta, James > #62925 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa ashkenn2k Hi TG > TG: "known as they are" is where the fallacy creeps in IMO. An > experience cannot insightfully be known as "it is." Because "it is" nothing of itself. It is empty of itself. It is a resultant, a phantom, a shadow of others "empties." k: Empty of itself is nihilism because it means rupa is non existence. Dhamma is not phantom because it can be experience directly just like one could feel pain when painful feeling arise. If you are saying that rupa is empty of self, empty of permanancy that I agree with you. k: The reasons of understanding the khandhas two fold a. to understand that is no being, no self, we are just a chariots of the five khandhas b. To show what exist and what not. Because only what exist could exhibit the three characteritics and they are used for development of the path k: Then we have to ask ourselve this question, if it nama and rupa is not important to Buddhism, why Buddha bother to teach this over and over again Cheers Ken O #62926 From: Ken O Date: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: insubstaintial as in Dispeller of Delusion ashkenn2k Hi Plamen >And since dharmas are the properties, to say that they have a >dharmin (substance) and this dharmin is their essential >characteristic, entails lots of inconsitences and self-contradictions. k: can we say that fire do not have the characteristics of hotness. That is what meant by essential characteristics of a dhamma. The meaning of sabhava is essential characteristics of a dhamma. It does not mean it is an entity on its own because it arises due to causes and conditions. When one talk about identity, it is refering to a self, a permanent being. It is nothing to do about naming a dhammas as rupa, as perception or in the instance Nibbana. We cannot say Nibbana an identity just because we name it. Naming is for clarity and for deveopment of the path. Just imagine if we mixed up lobha with dosa. A dhamma is experience because of citta that cognize the object and the cetasikas that "colour" the object for eg feelings, preception etc. That is the reason why there is a need to understand the five khandhas. Cheers Ken O #62927 From: Daniel Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:41 am Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 43 sbhtkk Hi all, I did not understand this : << A third time the venerable Naagasamaala said to the Blessed One: "This, Sire, is the way, let us go in this direction." And the venerable Naagasamaala threw down on the ground the bowl and tunic of the Blessed One, saying: "There, Sire, are your bowl and tunic." And as the venerable Nâgasamâla proceeded on the road, robbers came and assaulted him with their hands and feet, broke his alms-bowl and tore his garments. ..." >> Does it mean that he was somehow "punished" for throwing the bowl and the tnic on the ground? Pople say that the budhdist idea is not of someone who punishes, but natural ause and effect. But why is it not? Are there any arguments against "someone who punishes"? Daniel #62928 From: Daniel Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:49 am Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 44 sbhtkk Dear Nina (and Sarah), Thank you very much for the wise letter. Daniel #62929 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:47 am Subject: Re: nama and rupa. pgradinarov "And why, bhikkhus, do you say 'body'? 'It is afflicted' (ruppati), bhikkhus, therefore it is called 'body' (ruupa). Afflicted by what? Afflicted by cold and heat, hunger and thirst, afflicted by coming into contact with gnats, mosquitoes, wind, sun and snakes. 'It is afflicted,' bhikkhus, therefore it is called 'body.' — SN 22.79 "Why does one say 'form' (rupa)? It is deformed (ruppati), that is why it is called 'form.' Deformed by what? By cold and heat and hunger and thirst, by contact with mosquitoes, flies, wind, sunburn, and creeping things." — S. XII, 79 The Buddha defines the noun "form" (rupa ) with its corresponding verb "forming" (ruppati). -- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/desilva/bl120.html It is also defined as "that which is being worn away" (ruppati), thus underlining its general characteristics of instability. -- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel017.html Materiality changes its form (ruppati) under physical conditions of heat, cold, etc., and because of this changeableness under contrary physical conditions, it is called rupa in Pali. -- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/wheel370.html Ruppa in ruppa--rupakan (nt.) Th 2, 394 is not clear. It refers to something which is not rupa, yet pretends to be rupa, i. e. a sham performance or show. Thus ruppa may correspond to *rupya & with rupaka mean "having the form (i. e. the appearance) of form, i. e. substantiality. " The Cy. (ThA 259) interprets as "rupiya-- rupasadisan saran saran upatthahantan asaran ti attho"; and Mrs. Rh. D. (Sisters, p. 154) trsls: "deluded by puppet shows (seen in the midst of the crowd)." Ruppati [rup=lup, one of the rare cases of P. r. representing a Sk. 1., whereas the opposite is frequent. The same sound change Idg., as Lat. rumpo to break corresponds to Sk. lumpati. Besides we find the Sk. form ropayati to break off. -- The root has nothing to do with rupa, although the P. Commentators combine these two. -- Cp. also Sk. ropa hole; Ags. reofan to break, reaf (theft)= Ger. raub, rauben, and many other cognates (see Walde s. v. rumpo). -- The root rup is defd at Dhtm by nas, i. e. to destroy; another rup is given at Dhtm 837 in meaning "ropana"] to be vexed, oppressed, hurt, molested (always with ref. to an illness or pain) Sn 767 (salla-- viddho va r.) 1121; Nd1 5 (=kuppati, ghattiyati, piliyati); Nd2 543 (=kuppati pilayati ghatayati). -- ppr. gen. ruppato S I.198 (salla-- viddhassa r.; expld at K.S. 320 by "ghattan--atthena")= Sn 331 (reads salla--viddhana ruppatan, i. e. pl. instead of sg.); Th 1, 967 (salla--viddhassa ruppato (C. sariravikaran apajjato, Brethren, 338); J II.437 (C. ghattiyamana piliyamana)=Vism 49 (dukkhitassa r.); J III.169 (salla--viddhassa r.=ghattiyamana C.). --ruppati to Pali exegesis with its fondness of allegorical ("orthodox") interpretation, is the etym. base of rupa, thus at S III.86: "ruppati ti tasma rupan ti vuccati kena r.? sitena, unhena etc. (all kinds of material dukkha: dukkha II.3b) ruppati." -- Or at Sn 1121 (ruppanti rupena), & at other passages given under rupa (A). See also ruppana. Ruppana (nt.) [fr. rup) molestation, vexation, trouble J III.368 (=ghattana dusana kuppana C.). Frequent in allegorical exegesis of rupa, e. g. at DhsA 52 (naman' atthena naman ruppan' atthena rupan), 303 (rup' adihi ruppana--bhava--dipana); VbhA 4 (ruppan' atthena rupan in expln of passage S III.86 (mentioned under ruppati); KhA 78, 79 (ruppan' atthena . . . rupan rupan ti vuccati). -- Pali-English Dictionary #62930 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:36 am Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? philofillet Hi James > Oh, shut up you idiotic fool!! ;-)) Please sir, may I have another? > (just kidding). Good to see > you posting again. Hadn't heard from you for a while so I was > wondering if you were okay. I'll be away pretty much until the baseball season ends. That consumes too much computer time. I'll try discussing again starting in November. I will be sending you an update about > Taiwan in a bit but I have been very lazy (sooooo hot here! ;-)) I was wondering about how you'd take the climate. Egypt must be a lot drier. Please send me an update off-list. > > - that's my impression of you, though as > > you know I'm very fond of you. Don't go overboard. Only people > with > > great wisdom can "know the right time for using rough speech in > > order to shock to move or advantageously wake up!" I don't think > you > > fall in that basket - I don't think anyone here falls in that > basket. > > Well, if you don't 'fall into that basket', that means that you > don't have insightful wisdom; and if you don't have insightful > wisdom then you can't really judge anyone else's wisdom either. Can't judge when people have wisdom, because wisdom is about moments of understanding the characteristics of dhammas, and that doesn't show up on a computer screen, that's for sure. But we can tell when people *lack* wisdom based on things they say. But I know you have stated that you believe there are probably several sotapannas in DSG (!!!) so we obviously have different approaches, whatever. So, > what you have just written is a non sequitur. So, it would be best > to not make generalized statements about everyone, I think. Maybe you're right. I base those kind of statements on my understanding of the Buddhas cardinal suttas, especially "Burning" - the "all" is burning with ignorance, greed and hatred and only the ariyana develops a way out. It seems a sobering world view, but it doesn't pollute my attitude towards people - in fact, it conditions metta, because I know we're all in the same boat. > > As far as myself, sometimes I write shocking things to wake people > up, and sometimes I write them just because I'm pissed off! You > never can tell with me. ;-)) But, Phil (aka Jimminy Cricket ;-) you > don't always have to be my conscience- I was just asking a > question. I wasn't looking for a justification to slash and burn my > way through dsg ;-)). Just a friendly warning because I'm fond of you. There was definitely metta when I wrote it, and now. Phil #62931 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:39 am Subject: Re: Is 'Fool' wrong speech? icarofranca Dear Ven.Samahita --------------------------------------------------------------------- > If I may dare be so brute (again) here: --------------------------------------------------------------------- If you dare to be brute with any being it would count only for your demerit, Bhante. You will be only misleading yourself on the path...not speaking about others! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Au Contraire: > If you should do so, then I will guarantee you with > my life as put on a stake, that you thereby (again) > acquire much demerit... --------------------------------------------------------------------- If I decide to speak arabic and become muslim - a recurrent temptation for me: The Islam is very interesting! - putting me on a stake won´t do any good for you Kamma, and it will be a great demerit for you - only you - Bhante...lest you become a G.I.Joe who can be even condecorated for it! Anyway, the Medal of Congress for murdering U.S.A. enemies or the Purple Heart to be harmed for them don´t guarantee you a good kusala accumulation, you see... Mettaya and Semper Fi, Ícaro #62932 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 97 and Tiika. philofillet Hi Nina > Perhaps you may write a few lines before November. > Best wishes for your writing of stories. Thanks, it's going well and I will concentrate on it and my Japanese studies (writing the stories in Japanese, actually -it's fun) and baseball (Dhamma is the only thing that comes close to the depth of meaning and beauty of baseball!) until November. I'll be reading your posts though. You see, I have an addictive personality. It was much easier to stop drinking alcohol than to go a day without internet. Come to think of it, I didn't stop drinking alcohol - I guess that's why it was easier! :) Phil p.s how nice to see Lodewijk here! #62933 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:04 am Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? philofillet Hi again James Just an afterthought I had meant to post. I remember one of the first teachings I came across was "The Buddha taught that people should mix together like milk and water" or words to that effect. I don't know how kosher it is - it was in a bilingual Japanese colllection of the Buddha's teaching left in a hotel room a la Gideon - but it sounds like an authentic teaching. That may sound bland, and politically correct to you, but I think it is the Buddha's way. The moments when the Buddha or other ariyans used harsh speech to help people should not be models for our behaviour, I really feel because we are not the Buddha and so on, blah blah blah. When we fail to mix like milk and water, it is nothing to worry about, but also nothing to be proud of, I'd say. Phil p.s last word to you if you wanna add anything. Talk to you again (here) in November. #62934 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:06 am Subject: Re: nieuw lid icarofranca Dag, Mijnheer Van Gorgon! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Beste Icaro, veel dank voor je hartelijke woorden. Ik hoop veel > goede ideen over Dhamma van je te lezen. > Beste wensen, > Lodewijk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hartelijk Dank! Het Spijt me dat ik geen betere Dhamma verklaringen kan geven,maar ik bezit niet alle nodige gegevens! (Er... sorry for any grammar error on Dutch!) Beste wensen! Ícaro #62935 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:19 am Subject: Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! matheesha333 Hi James, Icaro, In > this day and age of political correctness, I think that people look > for a reason to be offended; they look for something to get them all > riled up. It is like they carry a big chip on their shoulder asking > for someone, anyone, to knock it off so that they can react. This is > western culture. In Asian culture, the culture of the Buddha, it > isn't that way. Very perceptive of you James. When an asian (stereotyping here but..) is 'scolded' he will feel shame and want to rectify things. Less isues of conceit. Shame and fear of wrong doing (hiri otappa) is considered the cornerstone for keeping precepts, in the dhamma. I guess in the west we would be looking for good rational reasons for doing something (nothing wrong with that). Having less conceit means the teacher- student relationship is strong. They have no issues of prostrating and worshipping someone they see as more advanced along the path than they are. I personally find it difficult to teach buddhism in the west, the uptake is less, there's too much rationalising without getting on with it! More used to the comforts in life, so going on retreat and intense practice becomes more difficult. As a result there is less progress. The numbers clearly reflect this. There are always exceptions though.. with metta Matheesha #62936 From: Daniel Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:52 am Subject: I sbhtkk Hello all, If I am not any other person, from an early age, I always remained "myself" in a certian sense, I did not become George Bush, or Monica Lewinski, does not it mean that there must be something which did not change? Otherwise, why am I still "the same person"? Bill clinton is still the same little bill clinton he was when he was a child in a certain sense, he DID NOT become Al Gore... Daniel #62937 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and TG) - In a message dated 8/30/06 2:44:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: > >TG: "known as they are" is where the fallacy creeps in IMO. An > >experience cannot insightfully be known as "it is." Because "it > is" nothing of itself. It is empty of itself. It is a resultant, a > phantom, a shadow of others "empties." > > k: Empty of itself is nihilism because it means rupa is non > existence. Dhamma is not phantom because it can be experience > directly just like one could feel pain when painful feeling arise. > If you are saying that rupa is empty of self, empty of permanancy > that I agree with you. > ======================== As I see it, the following are the case: 1) "Existing in and of itself" is essentialism/substantialism. 2) "Not existing at all" is nihilism. 3) "Exisiting dependently and empty of self" is the middle way. The Buddha said to Venerable Kaccayana "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." With metta, Howard #62938 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha (and James. and Icaro) - In a message dated 8/30/06 7:20:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dhammachat@... writes: > In > >this day and age of political correctness, I think that people look > >for a reason to be offended; they look for something to get them all > >riled up. It is like they carry a big chip on their shoulder asking > >for someone, anyone, to knock it off so that they can react. This is > >western culture. In Asian culture, the culture of the Buddha, it > >isn't that way. > > Very perceptive of you James. When an asian (stereotyping here but..) > is 'scolded' he will feel shame and want to rectify things. Less isues > of conceit. Shame and fear of wrong doing (hiri otappa) is considered > the cornerstone for keeping precepts, in the dhamma. ====================== I agree with you, Matheesha, but I would like to add a bit of a disclaimer: There is more than one sort of "shame". A remorse at having acted immorally that engenders the wish, out of goodness, to rectify matters as possible and to not repeat the unwholesome action is proper shame. But much that goes by the name of "shame" is ego-based embarrassment and aversion to "losing face", and that, quite common and though not the most terrible response by any means, is also not proper shame, IMO. With metta, Howard #62939 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Idiotic Fool ... !!! icarofranca Hi Howard! --------------------------------------------------------------------- But much that goes by > the name of "shame" is ego-based embarrassment and aversion to "losing face", > and that, quite common and though not the most terrible response by any > means, is also not proper shame, IMO. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Exactly, Howard!!! "Hiri-Ottapa" mustn´t be confound with the "Ego-base embarrassment": the first is a sound foundation for raising Dhamma. The second is only suffering and cause of suffering. At this point the average-minded reader can ask "But one must begin at some point! If you haven´t such ego-base embarrassment, how can you reach Hiri-Ottapa and beyond? How one can reach such far frontiers without a beginning?" Well, IMHO, one has to learn to walk before learn to run. Even so, you can have, with a contricted heart and so on, an ego-based embarrassment... and pass through years and years without take another step further: you aversion of "Losing Face" didn´t make you grow in understanding at the end! So, you need Hiri-Ottapa for achieve a sound progress on Dhamma! Keep boostin´ pal!!! Mettaya, Ã?caro #62940 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:41 am Subject: Particular Stream of Ignorance pgradinarov Hi, Daniel! I don't know about individual nama-rupic streams, but one is for sure - each of us is a particular stream of ignorance. This is what makes us individuals. The particular stream of ignorance called Bill Clinton would never degrade/upgrade (select whatever applies) to the particular stream of ignorance called George Bush, and vice versa. At least in this life. Best regards, Plamen #62941 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:13 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 45. nilovg Dear friends, As to Sarah's discussions with Khun Sujin, Sarah felt torn into many directions in her daily life in order to do her many different duties well. .....Khun Sujin is emphasizing how it is not just understanding the problem, but understanding one's defilements which conditions that problem.... otherwise the understanding is very superficial; because the root is not the problem itself, but one's own lack of understanding and one's own defilements... When we talked about the problem I found in certain social situations, when perhaps the conversation seemed uninteresting and I was wishing for another situation, Khun Sujin emphasized the importance of metta (loving kindness). We have heard so much about metta and about its characteristic, namely, that it is the quality of loving kindness to all, to anyone we can help at the present moment. Yet we seem to forget and need to be reminded over and over again. Khun Sujin kept asking, when I said I tended to think a lot about family and friends a long way off, 'What about the people around one now?'... When there is a little metta to those around, one can see how much more happily or easily one's life begins to run and how we can see others as friends at such times (however unknown to us they may be), instead of looking critically towards them. End quote. ***** Nina #62942 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:12 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe, 64 nilovg Dear friends, Another type of ahetuka kiriyacitta is the mind-door-adverting- consciousness, in Påli: mano-dvåråvajjana citta. This type of citta arises both in the sense-door process and in the mind-door process but it performs two different functions according as it arises in each of those two kinds of processes, as we will see. When an object contacts one of the sense-doors, the pañca- dvåråvajjana-citta (five-sense-door-adverting consciousness) turns towards the object, one of the dvi-pañca-viññå.nas experiences it, sampaticchana-citta receives the object and santíra.na-citta investigates it. The process of cittas experiencing the object through that sense-door is, however, not yet over. The santíra.na- citta is succeeded by an ahetuka kiriyacitta which experiences the object through that sense-door and ``determines'' that object, the determining-consciousness, in Påli: votthapana-citta. It is actually the same type of citta as the mano-dvåråvajjana-citta (mind-door- adverting-consciousness, the first citta of the mind-door process), but when it arises in a sense-door process it can be called votthapana-citta, since it performs the function of votthapana, determining the object, in the sense-door process. The votthapana- citta, after it has determined the object, is followed by akusala cittas or by kusala cittas. The votthapana-citta itself is neither akusala citta nor kusala citta; it is kiriyacitta. This citta which determines the object is anattå, non-self. There is no self who can determine whether there will be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. The akusala cittas or kusala cittas which succeed the votthapana-citta are non-self either; it depends on one's accumulations of akusala and kusala whether the votthapana-citta will be succeeded by akusala cittas or by kusala cittas. ****** Nina. #62943 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:25 am Subject: Phenomenology of nama and rupa pgradinarov Dear Joop, Thank you for your most interesting intervention. > See Nyanaponika's remark that the Dhamma had to be understood as a > phenomenology and not as a ontology. I agree. Have even written several articles and a book on the subject (Phenomenology and Indian Epistemology, 1990). It is difficult to differentiate between phenomenology and ontology, especially if one takes phenomenology to be a positivist description of what one sees/perceives or graps (to use the general Indian term introducing the dialectics of grahya, grahana and grahitr). But just because Buddhist analysis is deeply rooted in the anthropological unity known as man, Buddhist phenomenology is only possible as fundamental ontology (even the atoms are viewed as collisional units, starting as octets of 'primary' and 'secondary' properties - sanghata-paramanu). The difference between this understanding and the well-known statement of Heidegger is that Buddhist phenomenology is at the same time an all-encompassing radical soteriology, it is the methodology of the uncomparable and perfect liberation. Best regards, Plamen #62944 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:10 am Subject: Re: I nidive Hi Daniel, > If I am not any other person, from an early age, I always remained > "myself" in a certian sense, I did not become George Bush, or > Monica Lewinski, does not it mean that there must be something > which did not change? > > Otherwise, why am I still "the same person"? Bill clinton is still > the same little bill clinton he was when he was a child in a > certain sense, he DID NOT become Al Gore... What you are postulating is just an assumption. The fact that you can't point out in concrete terms the thing that did not change shows the vacuity of your assumption. How can you be "yourself" if you can't even point out in concrete terms the thing about "yourself" that didn't change? If you are really "yourself", you won't even be asking this question on this forum. Regards, Swee Boon #62945 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letters from Nina, 43 nilovg Dear Daniel, Op 30-aug-2006, om 10:41 heeft Daniel het volgende geschreven: > << A third time the venerable Naagasamaala said to the Blessed One: > "This, > Sire, is the way, let us go in this direction." And the venerable > Naagasamaala threw down on the ground the bowl and tunic of the > Blessed > One, saying: "There, Sire, are your bowl and tunic." > And as the venerable N×’gasam×’la proceeded on the road, robbers > came and > assaulted him with their hands and feet, broke his alms-bowl and > tore his > garments. ..." >> > > Does it mean that he was somehow "punished" for throwing the bowl > and the tnic > on the ground? > > Pople say that the budhdist idea is not of someone who punishes, > but natural > ause and effect. But why is it not? Are there any arguments against > "someone > who punishes"? -------------- N: This was akusala kamma and that could bring an unpleasant result. But, nobody can tell whether the painful feeling he experienced was the result of that kamma, or of another kamma performed a long time ago. In the ultimate sense there is no person who punishes or who receives punishment. There are kamma and vipaaka, cause and result. The idea of punishment does explain the events of life. Someone who is always kind may receive a very unpleasant result. That may be caused by akusala kamma in the past, even in a former life nobody knows about. ----------- Q: If I am not any other person, from an early age, I always remained "myself" in a certain sense, I did not become George Bush, or Monica Lewinski, does not it mean that there must be something which did not change? ------ N: The life of an individual is a long series of cittas arising and falling away, succeeding one another. In this way tendencies, inclinations, good and bad qualities are accumulated from moment to moment. The accumulations of this person are not those of another person. In this sense we speak of the character of an individual. But there isn't anything that lasts. What you are now is conditioned by past moments. You are neither the same nor another. What we call a person are citta, cetasika and ruupa. Nina. #62946 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:24 am Subject: A student approached Albert Einstein pgradinarov Dear Bhikkhu Samahita, A student approached Albert Einstein and asked him: - Dear Sir, it is said: An idiotic fool, an idiotic fool... In what way, Knowledgeable Sir, can one rightly be called an idiotic fool? - My dear colleague, it is because one has neither developed nor cultivated these Seven Links to STO that one rightly is called an idiotic fool!!! - What seven? 1: The Relative Distance and Time Links to STO. 2: The Relative Time and Space Links to STO. 3: The Energy-Matter Link to STO. 4: The Joy Link to STO, found in E=mc2. 5: The Tranquillity Link of Low Speed to STO. 6: The Concentration Link of Inertial Frames to STO. 7: The Equanimity Link of Gravity to STO. It is because one has neither developed nor ever cultivated these Seven Factors of Grasping STO that one is called an idiotic fool... #62947 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa nidive Hi Howard, Ken & TG, > As I see it, the following are the case: > > 1) "Existing in and of itself" is essentialism/substantialism. > 2) "Not existing at all" is nihilism. > 3) "Exisiting dependently and empty of self" is the middle way. > > The Buddha said to Venerable Kaccayana "By & large, Kaccayana, this > world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of > existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the > world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with > reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the > cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, > existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." I beg to differ on this. When the Buddha says "existence", he means existence with respect to a self. This is eternalism. When the Buddha says "non-existence", he means non-existence with respect to a self. This is annihilationism. Avoiding these two extreme views with respect to a self, the Buddha teaches not-self through dependent existence, and the ending of this very dependent existence. Eternalism and annihilationism are always respect to a self in the Buddha's teachings. This is evident from the Brahmajala Sutta. I quote just the annihilationism portion from the Brahmajala Sutta from www.metta.lk. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/1Digha-Nikaya/Digha1/01- brahmajala-e.html#q-001 The Annihilationists [176] 9. [34] `There are, brethren, recluses and Brahmans who are Annihilationists, who in seven ways maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being [177]. And on account of what, starting out from what, do they do so? 10. `In the first place, brethren, some recluse or Brahman puts forth the following opinion, the following view: ßSince, Sir, this soul has form, is built up of the four elements, and is the offspring of father and mother, it is cut off, destroyed, on the dissolution of the body; and does not continue after death; and then, Sir, the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living, being, 11. `To him another says: `There is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul - divine, having form, belonging to the sensuous plane, feeding on solid food. That you neither know of nor perceive. But I know [\q 047/] and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. 12. `To him another says: ßThere is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul-divine, having form, made of mind, with all its major and minor parts complete, not deficient in any organ. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. 13. `To him another says: ßThere is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing beyond ideas of form, by the dying out of ideas of resistance, by paying no heed to ideas of difference, conscious that space is infinite, reaches up to the plane of the infinity of space [178]. This you neither know of nor perceive. [35] But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. 14. `To him another says: ßThere is, Sir, such ,a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. [\q 048/] For there is a further soul, which having passed beyond the plane of the infinity of space, knowing that consciousness is infinite, reaches up to the plane of the infinity of consciousness [179]. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. 15. `To him another says: ßThere is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing quite beyond the plane of the infinity of consciousness, knowing that there is nothing, reaches up to the plane of no obstruction [180]. This you neither know of nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off and destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated.û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living, being. 16. `To him another says: ßThere is, Sir, such a soul as you describe. That I do not deny. But the whole soul, Sir, is not then completely annihilated. For there is a further soul, which by passing quite beyond the plane of no obstruction, realises `This is good, this is excellent,' and reaches up to the plane of neither ideas nor the absence of ideas [181] This you [\q 049/] neither know of, nor perceive. But I know and have experienced it. And since this soul, on the dissolution of the body, is cut off, destroyed, does not continue after death, then is it, Sir, that the soul is completely annihilated. û Thus is it that some maintain the cutting off, the destruction, !the annihilation of a living being. 17. `These, brethren, are the recluses and Brahmans who are Annihilationists and in seven ways maintain the cutting off, the destruction, the annihilation of a living being. [36] And whosoever do so they, all of them, do so in one or other of these seven ways. There is none beside. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon #62948 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:12 am Subject: Re: A student approached Albert Einstein nidive Hi Plamen Gradinarov, > A student approached Albert Einstein and asked him: > > - Dear Sir, it is said: An idiotic fool, an idiotic fool... > In what way, Knowledgeable Sir, can one rightly be called an idiotic > fool? > > - My dear colleague, it is because one has neither developed nor > cultivated these Seven Links to STO that one rightly is called an > idiotic fool!!! > > - What seven? > > 1: The Relative Distance and Time Links to STO. > 2: The Relative Time and Space Links to STO. > 3: The Energy-Matter Link to STO. > 4: The Joy Link to STO, found in E=mc2. > 5: The Tranquillity Link of Low Speed to STO. > 6: The Concentration Link of Inertial Frames to STO. > 7: The Equanimity Link of Gravity to STO. > > It is because one has neither developed nor ever cultivated these > Seven Factors of Grasping STO that one is called an idiotic fool... You are so cute! Regards, Swee Boon #62949 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:51 am Subject: Re: A student approached Albert Einstein pgradinarov Dear Swee Boon, Let those who have developed and cultivated the sixth sambodhi-angam, i.e., samadhi, raise their hand and be excluded from the number of the idiotic fools - provided they have clultivated also the rest of the sapta bodhyangani. Mastering the Special Theory of Relativity (referenced above as STO) would be easier in comparison. Best regards, Plamen #62950 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/30/2006 6:25:37 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: As I see it, the following are the case: 1) "Existing in and of itself" is essentialism/substantialism. 2) "Not existing at all" is nihilism. 3) "Exisiting dependently and empty of self" is the middle way. The Buddha said to Venerable Kaccayana "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." With metta, Howard Hi Howard You are exactly right! And when I say "empty of itself" I do indeed mean that it is empty of itself BECAUSE it is dependently structured. What appears due to something else is not something "of itself." TG #62951 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/30/2006 6:25:37 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: The Buddha said to Venerable Kaccayana "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." With metta, Howard Hi All One more point. Those who accuse of nihilism are generally those hold onto the view of existence. Those who understand conditionality hold to neither view. This just confirms my long held standpoint that Abhidhamma tends to inculcate a view of existence. TG #62952 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:29 am Subject: The svabhava of svabhava pgradinarov Hi Ken, > k: can we say that fire do not have the characteristics of hotness. > That is what meant by essential characteristics of a dhamma. We cannot say this, because we would turn the dharma of fire into a dharmin, i.e., bearer of such properties like hotness, lightness, etc. Let's analyse the sentence, Fire is hot. Hot is dharma (property, predicate), fire is dharmin (substance, subject). If there was no fire (S), there would have been no way to say anything about it, i.e., to predicate it with properties like hotness, etc. If, on the other hand, we consider fire to be dharma (P), then the only functional relation it can exist is to be predicated of something else, say of the earth - bhutala vahniman. Here bhutala (earth ground) is the Subject, while vahni is the Predicate. Should we say that vahni is dhumavan (fire is possessing smoke), then automatically vahni turns into Subject (dharmin), and smoke - into Predicate (dharma). > The meaning of sabhava is essential characteristics of a dhamma. It does > not mean it is an entity on its own because it arises due to causes > and conditions. Disagree on the above grounds. A predicate (dharma) cannot possess predicates without automatically turning into Subject (dharmin, bearer of predicates). The definition of svabhAva according to Nyaya-kosa is: A specific property (dharma-visesa) of the thing (vastu) that differentiates it from the other things. Ontologically, there is no reasonable explanation as to why prefer dharma to dharmin. Just because phenomenologically we deal with dharmas, does not mean that they hang on in the air, without whatsoever support, niralambanatah. There is alambana - both synchronically and diachronically. Synchronically this is the pancaskandhakam, diachronically - the circle of the 12 nidanas. Best regards, Plamen #62953 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:29 am Subject: Re: A student approached Albert Einstein buddhatrue Hi Plamen, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Plamen Gradinarov" wrote: > > Dear Swee Boon, > > Let those who have developed and cultivated the sixth sambodhi- angam, > i.e., samadhi, raise their hand and be excluded from the number of the > idiotic fools - provided they have clultivated also the rest of the > sapta bodhyangani. > > Mastering the Special Theory of Relativity (referenced above as STO) > would be easier in comparison. :-) Good point. When I first Bhikkhu Samahita's post I thought to myself, "Well, goodness, we're all idiotic fools!" ;-)) > > Best regards, > > Plamen > Metta, James #62954 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa nilovg Hi TG, you say first and then you disagree with the Abhidhamma. But I think that you know that the Seventh book, the Book of the Patthaana, deals with all the conditions of life. You could follow our Visuddhimagga study now. Nina. Op 30-aug-2006, om 19:22 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > One more point. Those who accuse of nihilism are generally those > hold onto > the view of existence. Those who understand conditionality hold to > neither > view. > > This just confirms my long held standpoint that Abhidhamma tends to > inculcate a view of existence. #62955 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:19 am Subject: nama and rupa nilovg Hi TG, N: Nama has to be thoroughly known as nama, and rupa as rupa, otherwise their arising and falling away cannot be realised. ---------. TG: If this were true or important, the Suttas would be full of exact quotes over and over again of THIS above exact point. But I feel this is a marginal stance. To me this is a third or fourth generation commentary that is lacking in authority. .. Again, if it was so important, it would appear verbatim in many, many Suttas IMO. ------- N: I do not know what to add without repeating myself. The stages of insight are also in the Path of Discrimination (p. 53), that is included in the Khuddaka Nikaaya, beginning with the second stage of tender insight. I shall not go into the question of the Commentaries, since there were many posts about this already. I find it very reasonable that one has to know which dhamma is arising and falling away. When it is not one dhamma at a time but a mixture of more things, there is merely thinking of impermanence, one thinks of the name impermanence. But momentaay impermanence has to be realized, without having to think about it. For example of seeing now, thinking now, not of a mixture of seeing and thinking. In addition to what I quoted in my previous post, I could add many other suttas where it is emphasized that realities should be investigated. For example: III. 2. 5. Bahudhaatukasutta.m- (115) The Discourse on Many Elements (transl. by Sister Upalavanna) <...At one time the Blessed One lived in the monastery offered by Anaathapindika in Jeta’s grove in Saavatthi. From there the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus. ‘Whatever fears, misfortunes and dangers arise, they all arise from the foolish not from the wise. Thus bhikkhus, the foolish are with fears, misfortunes and dangers.Therefore bhikkhus, to become wise inquirers, you should train thus. When this was said, venerable Aananda asked the Blessed One, ‘Venerable sir, saying it rightly how does the wise bhikkhu become an inquirer?’ ‘Aananda, when the bhikkhu becomes clever, in the elements, in the spheres, in dependent arising and in the possible and impossible, he becomes an inquirer’ ‘Venerable sir, saying it rightly how is the wise bhikkhu clever in the elements?’ ‘Aananda, there are eighteen elements. They are the elements of eye, forms and eye consciousness; ear, sounds, and ear consciousness; nose, scents and nose consciousness; tongue, tastes and tongue consciousness; body, touches and body consciousness; mind, ideas and mind consciousness. Aananda, these are the eighteen elements, when the bhikkhu knows and sees them, he becomes clever in the elements....> Again, visible object and seeing etc. are realities of daily life and these should be known as elements. Not as self, but, we can also say: they should be known as dhammas. **** Nina #62956 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/30/2006 12:19:28 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, you say first and then you disagree with the Abhidhamma. But I think that you know that the Seventh book, the Book of the Patthaana, deals with all the conditions of life. You could follow our Visuddhimagga study now. Nina. Hi Nina I don't disagree with Abhidhamma nor have I ever said so. The Abhidhamma of the Tipitika is OK by me and I have praised it on several occasions in my posts. What I disagree with is the way it is sometimes, if not often, interpreted. I've read the Visuddhimagga cover to cover 10 times...not to brag, but to let you know I don't ignore or disregard it. Always useful to study more however. Heck, I read your book cover to cover 3 times. But when the blood started gushing out I had to quit. ;-) Just kidding on the blood!!!! TG #62957 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:42 am Subject: Abhidhamma and Daily Life, from Rob' s Forum, 1. nilovg Dear friends, I quote from Rob K's forum: Abhidhamma and Daily Life RobertK post May 27 2006, 05:37 AM (end quote). ********* Nina. #62958 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:46 am Subject: The status of ideas pgradinarov Dear Nina, Thank you very much for this quote. Could you please elaborate on the status of ideas in the last triad - are they part of the vijnana- skandha, and if yes, which part? And since I have difficulties in identifying any of the 7 vijnanas (the five sense-vijnanas, manas plus manovijnana) to correspond to the ideas, my second guess is that ideas are samskaras, just like any other views... Best regards, Plamen > Aananda, there are eighteen elements. They are the elements of eye, > forms and eye consciousness; ear, sounds, and ear consciousness; > nose, scents and nose consciousness; tongue, tastes and tongue > consciousness; body, touches and body consciousness; mind, ideas and > mind consciousness. Aananda, these are the eighteen elements #62959 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa nilovg Hi TG, I am glad you say so. Interpretations can be discussed. Nina. Op 30-aug-2006, om 20:37 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't disagree with Abhidhamma nor have I ever said so. The > Abhidhamma of > the Tipitika is OK by me and I have praised it on several occasions > in my > posts. What I disagree with is the way it is sometimes, if not often, > interpreted. #62960 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Is 'Idiotic Fool' harsh speech? buddhatrue Hi Phil, Phil: But I know you have stated that you believe there are probably several sotapannas in DSG (!!!) so we obviously have different approaches, whatever. James: Oh brother, I get so much flak for this comment! And it is no wonder; this is a group where false humility reigns supreme. It may seem non-egotistic to label oneself as a `beginner' (when that is clearly not the case), but that is actually just a different form of ego gratification. On this issue I follow a strict interpretation of the texts without any of the commentarial baggage: The three fetters broken at stream entry are: 1) Belief in a soul or lasting self; 2)Doubt about the Triple Gem; 3)Grasping at precepts, rites, and rituals. That's it. If I had stated that there were lots of sotapannas in the general public, I should be rightly labelled as a lunatic. However, believing that there are sotapannas in this highly advanced Buddhist discussion group, even if I am incorrect, is not that far-fetched. Metta, James #62961 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa rjkjp1 Dear group These are notes to the sutta http://www.abhidhamma.org/KaccanagottaSutta.htm robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > > In a message dated 8/30/2006 6:25:37 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > upasaka@... writes: > > The Buddha said to Venerable Kaccayana "By & large, Kaccayana, this > world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & > non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually > is > with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not > occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is > #62962 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:48 pm Subject: Beautiful Deliverance ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How is Release by Friendliness Achieved? The Blessed Buddha once said: And how, Bhikkhus, is the mental release by universal friendliness achieved? What does this liberation have as its destination, what is its culmination, what is its sweet fruit, what is the final goal of such mental release by universal friendliness? Here, Bhikkhus, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading the frontal quadrant, with a mind imbued with infinite friendliness, so the second quarter, the third quarter, and the fourth quarter. Thus above, below, across, and everywhere, and to all beings as to himself, he dwells pervading the entire universe with a mind saturated with unlimited friendliness, immense, exalted, vast, measureless, without hostility, without enmity, without any ill will! Thus prepared and expanded he then develops: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless friendliness. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such friendliness. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite friendliness. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute friendliness. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with open friendliness. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with friendliness. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless friendliness. Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release. If he then wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in the unrepulsive & tempting, then he can dwell experiencing the repulsive therein. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in the disgusting repulsive, then he dwells experiencing the unrepulsive in whatever disgusting! If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he dwells experiencing repulsive disgust in it. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he experiences only unrepulsive beauty by it! If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I dwell in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending, then he dwells in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending. Or else he enters and dwells in the mental deliverance by the beautiful... I tell you Bhikkhus for a wise Bhikkhu here who has not penetrated to an even more superior mental release, this release of mind by pure infinite friendliness has the beautiful deliverance as its culmination! Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness... Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62963 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:58 am Subject: e-card from cold and wet Noosa! sarahprocter... Dear All, We're on the second leg of our surfing holiday -now in Noosa, Ken H's home turf in Queensland, where the sun always shines and the waves are just right for beginners like us. As a bonus, one is assured of Ken H's dhamma wit and probing should one have any free-time between the surf sessions. Ken H had been preparing his 'theories on surfing in action' which I understand entail following his lead into the water off the rocks or even cliffs. We had fantasies of going back to Hong Kong's little plastic-bag beach (with occasional waves) as real stars. He'd also been talking about the fine Spring weather here (in his note to Howard) and our arrival being in time for the best swell for a while.... Ha ha! Poor Ken H and his wife are very sick with pneumonia.....a highly infectious kind which have sent half his wife's (school) class home ill and a colleague into hospital. He's still muttering about surf-boards and swells on the phone but isn't in any state to even look out of the window. So we ended up in a class in the roughest surf for weeks and later met Andrew in some of the stormiest rain here for months! In other words, just the same conditions as we were having further south and for our car journey of many hours yesterday. No problem, we're equipped this year having faced the coldest August day ever here last year:-) We met Andrew T for a coffee and dhamma chat for about an hour and a half in the rain and watched him shiver his way through both valiantly. I hope he may add a few comments. Lots on compassion. ======================== 1.Andrew always strikes me as a very understanding and compassionate man. He and his wife take care of various sick cats and last night, a stray cat they'd been nursing had died. He mentioned a sutta which refers to there be more compassion for humans than animals(like the suttas about giving to humans, englightened beings and so on as a hierarchy). What determines the greater compassion being for people rather than animals? I thought it was the greater effort and intention involved as in the examples of killing humans as opposed to animals, all other things being equal. We all agreed that no rule should be set and we couldn't look at a particular situation to determine the compassion. It would be quite wrong to think one should nurse humans instead and the desire for having more compassion would not be kusala. What we do now is conditioned already. A little on the unconditional love of animals.... 2. Anatta and compassion and the other brahma viharas. Some people don't like to hear there is no self, but I mentioned I was struck by part of a tape we listened to in the car as we drove up here yesterday. (It's the last track of the 'Erik series' on dhammastudygroup.org) A friend mentioned that her mother-in-law is very wealthy but very stingy and asked how this could be so. KS's reply was to ask what kind of cittas (on the part of the friend)thinks like this about the other person. Actually, there is no mother-in-law or anyone who behaves badly. There are just kusala and akusala cittas. Appreciating that there are just dhammas can be the condition for more metta and friendliness, more compassion as the person is not happy when stingy, and more upekkha when one appreciates how kamma will bring its results. I also listened and reflected more on the journey about the association with good friends as referring to our friendly and wise attitude and understanding, no matter who we're with and no matter how the others behave. Association with the enemy always refers to the enemy within us, not outside us. 2b. Looking at the stray cat that has just passed away,however, it's not readily apparent that there are merely namas and rupas and what the meaning of continuity (santati)is (as referred to recently by Larry). 3. Compassion for others who like ourselves need to hear a lot, ask a lot and have the same kinds of blockages. We need to listen again and again sometimes for reassurance when our understanding is weak and the social aspect can also be important. Face-to-face can be helpful in this regard. On the other hand, if people have different views and don't wish to listen to other views any more, it's better to 'rest' the discussions. Here, of course, there are always other people 'listening' who might find the comments useful. We can also adopt different stances in different situations. Reminders that there are no shoulds and when we read suttas about prompting and so on, they really are descriptive. 4. Different styles on DSG and the need for tolerance, patience and more compassion. Gettting agitated about different viewpoints is useless, but then any responses depend on conditions and inclinations. Sometimes we may decide not to write to someone who gets agitated, but we do anyway. And then, praise and blame, not taking either personally, assisting as we can. And then there's the Viking saying (???)to effect that the greatest wrath is often to those we care most about. 5. An abhidhamma question we were at a loss with. Why is the sense-door adverting consciousness (panca-dvara vajjana citta)not a vipaka citta? (It's a kiriya citta arising between the bhavanga cittas and the sense door consciousness such as seeing or hearing). There was a brief discussion about this citta not being the determining factor in whether the visible object or sound is experienced which may have helped a little. Andrew may wish to elaborate on his question. The cold and wet were not making it easy to focus on the details of sense door and mind door processes:-). 6. Plagiarism and the aspect of taking what is not given, greed and so on. Andrew's tough learning curve and experiences as a writer. Discussion about whether to take legal action and his other options (all in the past). No rule from a dhamma point of view. There can be understanding whatever the situation and however one responds or doesn't. 7. Writing the 'definitive text' on Buddhism and then finding out how ignorant we really are! 8. Misinterpreting 'instant bliss' and other special experiences for jhana and so on. Meditation in action nowadays.... ***** My Conclusion - life is so much easier when we appreciate we can follow our lifestyles naturally and easily, without any special rules, and develop awareness and understanding anytime......even whilst shivering in the pouring rain or whilst running a fever back home with pneumonia and missing out on all that had been planned. Anything can happen unpredictably at any time.....the dhamma really is our only refuge. Metta, Sarah ======== #62964 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] e-card from cold and wet Noosa! nilovg Dear Sarah, Thank you for your e-card. Inspite of the climate, it was a good opportunity to meet Andrew, and Ken H, although he was too sick? I hope to hear more comments from them. Yes, we learnt that often on our trips: we can make beautiful plans, but they may turn out differently. As to the sense-door adverting-consciousness being kiriya, it is the first adverting to a new object after the bhavangacittas have been arrested. It merely adverts, it is not able to experience the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the object, that is only at the moment of seeing, hearing, etc. and of the following vipaakacittas, receiving-consciousness and investigating-consciousness. This is only my personal idea about this citta. Nina. Op 31-aug-2006, om 9:58 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > My Conclusion - life is so much easier when we appreciate we can > follow > our lifestyles naturally and easily, without any special rules, and > develop awareness and understanding anytime......even whilst > shivering in > the pouring rain or whilst running a fever back home with pneumonia > and > missing out on all that had been planned. Anything can happen > unpredictably at any time.....the dhamma really is our only refuge. #62965 From: Ken O Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa ashkenn2k Hi Howard > ======================== > As I see it, the following are the case: > > 1) "Existing in and of itself" is > essentialism/substantialism. > > 2) "Not existing at all" is nihilism. > > 3) "Exisiting dependently and empty of self" is the middle > way. k: I agreed with the 3rd choice hence we said in Abhidhamma, citta cannot arise on its own likewise for cetasika and also for rupa. They dependent on each other to arise :-) Cheers Ken O #62966 From: Ken O Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa ashkenn2k Hi TG Empty of itself, can mean different things. empty of itself is not link to dependently structured. Depend structure as the name imply, a dhamma is dependently on other conditions to arise, it is does not mean dhamma is empty of itself. Sorry for being repetitive I have to be clear that empty of itself is not the same as empty of self. A very difficult differentiation but a very important one. Dependent does not mean it does not exist, it exist due to dependency. if a dhamma is empty itself, are we saying that heat is empty of heat? Dhamma can be empty of self but not empty of itself even though it is dependent of other causes to arise :-) Cheers Ken O #62967 From: Ken O Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The svabhava of svabhava ashkenn2k Hi Plamen Sorry could you put it in a better way because I dont quite follow what you are saying with the sankrist and philosophical terms because I am not good at it all but I do try to answer. If I misunderstand you, could you please explain again. > We cannot say this, because we would turn the dharma of fire into a > dharmin, i.e., bearer of such properties like hotness, lightness, > etc. k; What is a dharmin? > > Let's analyse the sentence, Fire is hot. > Hot is dharma (property, predicate), fire is dharmin (substance, > subject). If there was no fire (S), there would have been no way to > say anything about it, i.e., to predicate it with properties like > hotness, etc. > > If, on the other hand, we consider fire to be dharma (P), then the > only functional relation it can exist is to be predicated of > something else, say of the earth - bhutala vahniman. Here bhutala (earah ground) is the Subject, while vahni is the Predicate. Should we say> that vahni is dhumavan (fire is possessing smoke), then automatically vahni turns into Subject (dharmin), and smoke - into Predicate (dharma). k: definitely all paramathas dhammas are dependent on causes and condition to exist. What I am saying is that at the moment of fire, heat is a characteristics. Definitely fire depends on other factors like wood or paper, but even then there is characterisitics for wood, as it is also made up of the four elements :-) > > > The meaning of sabhava is essential characteristics of a dhamma. > It does not mean it is an entity on its own because it arises due to causes and conditions. > > Disagree on the above grounds. A predicate (dharma) cannot possess > predicates without automatically turning into Subject (dharmin, > bearer of predicates). k: Does fire possess heat? Does feeling possess of painful or pleasurable feeling? If feeling possess of pain or pleasurable feeling then we have many possessions. The whole dependent originations are in possession also as ignorance is in possession of delusion. Since the endless beginging, from what you said, we can never be enlighted as every dhamma is in possession of ignorance and craving, > The definition of svabhAva according to Nyaya-kosa is: A specific > property (dharma-visesa) of the thing (vastu) that differentiates > it from the other things. k: as long as it does not mean that the thing exist on its own right. sabhava is just simply characteristics of a paramatha dhamma. > Ontologically, there is no reasonable explanation as to why prefer > dharma to dharmin. Just because phenomenologically we deal with > dharmas, does not mean that they hang on in the air, without > whatsoever support, niralambanatah. > > There is alambana - both synchronically and diachronically. > Synchronically this is the pancaskandhakam, diachronically - the > circle of the 12 nidanas. > k: could you please rephrase it as I am not very good at a lot of terms you are using Cheers Ken O #62968 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:45 am Subject: Re: The svabhava of svabhava scottduncan2 Dear Plamen, May I ask a question or two? First, is the sanskrit "svabhava" equivalent to the paali "sabhaava?" P: "Let's analyse the sentence, Fire is hot." Secondly, in the above, which is, in the ultimate sense, the object? Is it "fire?" Or is fire pa~n~natti? Or is it "heat?" I'd say the latter : it is dhaatu or Mahaa-bhuuta (tejo-dhaatu). I think that both concept and paramattha dhamma can be subsumed or defined by the term "dhamma," although they differ. Given this, the focus would be on heat not fire, since fire is a conceptual whole with no ultimate existence. Heat would bear the characteristic of "hot" being heat because that is its nature. In other words, there is nothing that is hot, there is just heat and nothing else is heat, just heat. Would you clarify this for me please? Sincerely, Scott. #62969 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:57 am Subject: the status of ideas. nilovg Dear Plamen, ------------ Text: > Aananda, there are eighteen elements. They are the elements of eye, > forms and eye consciousness; ear, sounds, and ear consciousness; > nose, scents and nose consciousness; tongue, tastes and tongue > consciousness; body, touches and body consciousness; mind, ideas and mind consciousness. Aananda, these are the eighteen elements. ---------- P: Could you please elaborate on the status of ideas in the last triad - are they part of the vijnana- skandha, and if yes, which part? And since I have difficulties in identifying any of the 7 vijnanas (the five sense-vijnanas, manas plus manovijnana) to correspond to the ideas, my second guess is that ideas are samskaras, just like any other views... ----------- N: The Pali will clarify this: mind, ideas and mind consciousness. This stands for Pali: The Commentary says that dhammadhaatu stands for object (Ä?ramma.navasena dhammadhÄ?tÅ«ti). Here it is the object experienced through the mind-door. Manodhaatu is the sense-door adverting-citta and the receiving-consciousness. ManoviññÄ?ṇadhÄ?tu are all the other cittas, apart from mano-dhaatu and the sense-cognitions (pa~ncavi~n~naanas). But depending on the context mano can also stand for mind-door: see K. IV, 85, Loko: the world "Mana~nca pa.ticca dhamme ca uppajjati manovi~n~naa.na. " Idea is a poor translation of dhammadhÄ?tu. In this context it includes all objects other than those experienced by seeing, etc. vi~n~naa.nakkhandha (sskr vijnana-skandha) includes all cittas. You speak about samskaras, sskr, in Pali sankhaara which can mean: sankhaara dhamma, all condiitoned dhammas, or sankhaarakkhandha, the khandha of activities (aal cetasikas apart from sa~n~naa and feeling). ****** Nina. #62970 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:44 am Subject: Re: The svabhava of svabhava pgradinarov Dear Scott and Ken, Under 'bhAva' the PTS dictionary says -- sabhAva (sva+bhAva), so we shall assume that this is the characteristic nature of a thing, its specific (sva) feature that make it particular being (sva-bhAva). It is also translated as own nature, intrinsic nature, even essence. But if the etymology is derived from sa+bhAva in the meaning of possessing bhAva, then the word can be interpreted as 'existent'. This may cause much confusion when trying to properly differentiate between svabhAva and sabhAva. It could be argued what precisely is the svabhAva of water - Apata (waterness) or snehata (sinehata, viscosity). The preferred word from the Chinese sources is the waterness, but still the correct answer is snehata, as sneha is the particular property (dharma- vizeSa) that makes up the svabhAva of water. If we take the waterness to be the svahbAva of water, then we would recourse to something that is not recognized in Buddhist logic and epistemology, namely to sAmAnya (universal). Hence the svabhAva of svabhAva in the Buddhist discourse should logically not be a universal property but rather a particular property, and this particular property is called svalakSaNa (salakkhana?) by DignAga. SvalakSaNa is the ultimate particular nature of anything, so according to him, this is the only real thing, the Ultimate Real. Yet, even this ultimate particular - allegedly the last possible predicate, - can be predicated. And its predicate is the efficiency. So ultimately, there is no dharma that could not be turned into dharmin of further dharmas. Even the paramArtha-dharmas should be somehow predicated (characterised), so they fail to preserve their pure dharmatva and start acting in the real life (and language) as dharmins (subjects to which dharma-predicates are appended). Moreover, in order to say something reasonable and logically consistent about them, they have to possess a property that makes possible the action of the first law of logic, and this property is universally recognized in Buddhist logic. It is called tAdAtmya, Identity. Best regards, Plamen #62971 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:49 am Subject: Re: A student approached Albert Einstein nidive Hi Plamen Gradinarov, > Let those who have developed and cultivated the sixth > sambodhi-angam, i.e., samadhi, raise their hand and be excluded > from the number of the idiotic fools - provided they have > clultivated also the rest of the sapta bodhyangani. Excellently agreed! Let me share with you a simile regarding the 7 factors of Enlightenment, courtesy of Bhikkhu Samahita. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/message/7364 Awareness is the eye that sees what should be cut. Investigation is the sword that cuts through. Energy is the arm that swings the sword. Joy is the force that propels the sword. Tranquillity is the hand that holds the sword. Concentration is the stone that sharpens the sword. Equanimity is the scabbard that protects the sword. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Let those who have acquired the sword obtain the stone that sharpens their swords! Let those who have acquired the stone that sharpen swords acquire their very own swords! Regards, Swee Boon #62972 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] e-card from cold and wet Noosa! upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Ken, if you're reading) - In a message dated 8/31/06 4:03:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Ha ha! Poor Ken H and his wife are very sick with pneumonia.....a highly > infectious kind which have sent half his wife's (school) class home ill > and a colleague into hospital. He's still muttering about surf-boards and > swells on the phone but isn't in any state to even look out of the window. > ========================== So sorry to hear this! Please send Ken my best wishes for a rapid recovery! With metta, Howard #62973 From: "matheesha" Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:51 am Subject: Re: A student approached Albert Einstein matheesha333 Hi James, Swee bon, Plamen and others, It is interesting if we look at the source sutta again. A bikkhu asks who should be called an idiotic fool. The Buddha describes it as someone who has not develoeped the 7 factors of enlightenment. This suggests that either 1) the buddha is giving another meaning to the term idiotic fool in his usual style or.. 2) the buddha's view of suffering in the rounds of samsara are so great, that only an idiotic fool would waste even a moment not trying to escape it. ie a statement arising from his insight into suffering. I dont see the passive aggression coming out right now as being particularly helpful. I am experiencing it myself now. with metta Matheesha #62974 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:04 am Subject: Abhidhamma and Daily lIfe, from Rob's forum. no 2. nilovg Dear friends, continuation of a quote from Rob K's forum: < I believe it is not so much a matter of doing and trying but of learning to see. The dhammas in the Abhidhamma are here and now. We don't have to go anywhere or do anything; but there does have to be sufficient conditions. There should be awe and respect for the Dhamma so that one studies not with the aim of getting something, but rather of genuinely testing out what is heard against this moment. The more we listen and consider and investigate directly, then for sure there are more conditions been built up for insight. In the very beginning there are only conditions for ignorance and craving so almost everyone tries so hard to see. But the sort of seeing that the Buddha meant is detached. Thus real insight comes not from trying and wanting but through fulfilling the correct conditions. Then there are moments, maybe a few more every year, where awareness arises just because it must, and this is deeper than when we try to make it come about. Then awareness too is known as anatta, as not under control of anyone. However, this doesn't mean 'well it's all conditioned, I'll just let it happen'. So I am not saying 'don't try to be aware", but by being awake to lobha (craving) we know it is always trying to slip in. It can be extremely refined. Also I feel the moments when there is only heedlessness are very natural , conditioned , not self: we don't need to be frightened of unwholesome moments as they are only conditioned dhammas- so insignificant and fleeting- we should see them as they are. Then again it is not the middle way if we tolerate the kilesa either, then we are not sincere... Another point. I find different reminders and different ways of considering very helpful. Otherwise there is a tendency, because life has become easier (through more understanding, or samattha or sila), to get comfortable and coast. Reading different suttas reminds us of different realities and the complex ways they are conditioned; it helps us see these dhammas as anatta when they appear in daily life These are just my reflections. I think there are not rules we should follow because everyone's accumulations are vastly different. I like what Dan wrote about this:"Instead of prescribing a ritual to guarantee enlightenment, the Buddha described the nature of reality and suggested that we carefully consider his words, not just intellectually, but as they apply to each moment in the day." robert> (end quote). ****** Nina. #62975 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:19 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 46 nilovg Dear friends, I would like to add something. One can understand more about metta if one sees that it all comes back to the citta now. Is it a citta with metta? Then there is friendship, no need to think of this person or that person. If one misses a particular person and likes his company when he is around it has nothing to do with metta, it is attachment. The difference should be known, only through mindfulness of the different characteristics. When considering metta, metta is not to be limited to particular people or situations. I will continue quoting from Sarah's letter now: (end quote.) I would like to add: then one minds less whatever reality arises, it arises because of conditions. When there are conditions for akusala it will arise and all that can be done is knowing it with right understanding. When there is more 'tolerance' one will not try to force a change of situation. I quote from Sarah's letter: End quote. I add: If I am honest, I like steady pleasant feeling and all good things in life, but I also know that this is an illusion. With Susie I like the four pleasant worldly conditions and I need to be reminded that they lead to sorrow. ****** Nina. #62976 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:10 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe, 65 nilovg Dear friends, The cittas arising in a sense-door process which experience a sense object such as colour or sound, arise and fall away, succeeding one another. When the sense-door process of cittas is finished, the sense object experienced by those cittas has also fallen away. Cittas arise and fall away extremely rapidly and very shortly after the sense-door process is finished, a mind-door process of cittas starts, which experience the sense object which has just fallen away. Although it has fallen away, it can be object of cittas arising in a mind-door process. The mano-dvåråvajjana-citta is the first citta of the mind- door process, it adverts through the mind-door to the object which has just fallen away. In the sense-door process the pañca- dvåråvajjana-citta adverts to the object which has not fallen away yet. For example, it adverts to visible object or sound which is still impinging on the appropriate sense-door. The mano-dvåråvajjana- citta which arises in the mind-door process, however, can experience an object which has fallen away already. It adverts, for example, to visible object which has been experienced through the eye-door or to sound which has been experienced through the ear-door. After the mano- dvåråvajjana-citta has adverted to the object it is succeeded by either kusala cittas or akusala cittas (in the case of non-arahats), which experience that same object. The mano-dvåråvajjana-citta is neither akusala citta nor kusala citta; it is kiriyacitta. It depends on one's accumulations by which types of cittas the mano-dvåråvajjana- citta is succeeded: by akusala cittas or by kusala cittas. All cittas arise because of their own conditions; they are anattå, not a person, not self. ******* Nina. #62977 From: Daniel Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:31 pm Subject: Repression sbhtkk Hi all, Perhaps anyone could give me an advice as to what is helpful to do in a case of repression of certain feelings? When feelings like envy arise in me, I think "I do not want to be such a person thinks envious thoughts! So I should try not to think them ". Or at least "I should not belong to that type of nasty person that act because of envy! ". I read someone saying in this group that "the self cannot generate kusala and akusala cittas". But I would be happy to recieve a down-to-earth advice, something which one does not even has to be a buddhist for, or have a thourough understanding of anatta... Thank you, Daniel #62978 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Repression lbidd2 Hi Daniel, Regarding what to do about unwanted mind states, I don't do anything, but the more you study abhidhamma, the more they are recognized. That in itself is something. I believe that substitution of the opposite is recommended in the texts. So in the case of envy (issaa), which is an akusala cetasika, its function is to be dissatisfied with others' success. This is what the Visuddhimagga has to say: Vism.III,95. In one of hating temperament there is frequent occurrence of such states as anger, enmity, disparaging, domineering, envy and avarice. 98. A suitable resting place for one of hating temperament is not too high or too low, provided with shade and water, with well-proportioned walls, posts and steps, with well-prepared frieze work and lattice work, brightened with various kinds of painting, with an even, smooth, soft floor, adorned with festoons of flowers and a canopy of many-coloured cloth like a Brahmaa-god's divine palace, with bed and chair covered with well-spread clean pretty covers, smelling sweetly of flowers, and perfumes and scents set about for homely comfort, which makes one happy and glad at the mere sight of it. 99. The right kind of road to his lodging is free from any sort of danger, traverses clean, even ground, and has been properly prepared. And here it is best that the lodging's furnishings are not too many in order to avoid hiding-places for insects, bugs, snakes and rats: even a single bed and chair only. The right kind of inner and outer garments for him are of any superior stuff such as China cloth, Somaara cloth, silk, fine cotton, fine linen, of either single or double thickness, quite light, and well dyed, quite pure in colour to befit an ascetic. The right kind of road on which to wander for alms is free from dangers, level, agreeable, with the village neither too far nor too near. The right kind of village in which to wander for alms is where people, thinking 'Now our lord is coming', prepare a seat in a sprinkled, sweet place, and going out to meet him, take his bowl, lead him to the house, seat him on a prepared seat and serve him carefully with their hands. 100. Suitable people to serve him are handsome, pleasing, well bathed, well anointed, scented with the perfume of incense and the smell of flowers, adorned with apparel made of variously-dyed clean pretty cloth, who do their work carefully. The right kind of gruel, rice, and hard food has colour, smell and taste, possesses nutritive essence, and is inviting, superior in every way, and enough for his wants. The right kind of posture for him is lying down or sitting. The object of his contemplation should be any one of the colour kasinas, beginning with the blue, whose colour is quite pure. This is what suits one of hating temperament. L: The four Brahma Viharas are also recommended. Larry #62979 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:54 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,98 Vism.XVII,99 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XVII 98. (22) Immaterial states that, by their ceasing in contiguity [before], assist by giving opportunity to immaterial states that arise proximately (next) after them are 'absence conditions, according as it is said: 'States of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants that have ceased in contiguity are a condition, as absence condition, for present states of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants' (P.tn.1,7). 99. (23) Those same states, because they assist by their disappearance, are a 'disappearance condition', according as it is said: States of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants that have disappeared in contiguity are a condition, as disappearance condition, for present states of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants' (P.tn.1,7). *********************** 98. attano anantaraa uppajjamaanaana.m aruupadhammaana.m pavattiokaasadaanena upakaarakaa samanantaraniruddhaa aruupadhammaa natthipaccayo. yathaaha ``samanantaraniruddhaa cittacetasikaa dhammaa pa.tuppannaana.m cittacetasikaana.m dhammaana.m natthipaccayena paccayo´´ti. 99. te eva vigatabhaavena upakaarakattaa vigatapaccayo. yathaaha ``samanantaravigataa cittacetasikaa dhammaa pa.tuppannaana.m cittacetasikaana.m dhammaana.m vigatapaccayena paccayo''ti. #62980 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa TGrand458@... Hi Ken O In a message dated 8/31/2006 6:02:29 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Hi TG Empty of itself, can mean different things. empty of itself is not link to dependently structured. Depend structure as the name imply, a dhamma is dependently on other conditions to arise, it is does not mean dhamma is empty of itself. TG: I believe I qualified my statement by stating that is was due to DO that states are empty of themselves. I'll stand by the "itself" comment. I don't see a meaningful difference between self and itself especially when the justification for such language is already established as being DO based. Sorry for being repetitive I have to be clear that empty of itself is not the same as empty of self. A very difficult differentiation but a very important one. Dependent does not mean it does not exist, it exist due to dependency. TG: I did not say and will not say that "empty of itself" means non-existence. (I can see how you think so though.) It is really an attempt to strongly "de-entify" the mind's outlook. if a dhamma is empty itself, are we saying that heat is empty of heat? Dhamma can be empty of self but not empty of itself even though it is dependent of other causes to arise :-) TG: Heat arises due to "other" conditioning factors. Heat is not an entity or a quality "of itself." The state of heat arises and alters, but it is an "echo" of "other echos/conditions." Heat does not contain "its own" quality. Heat dissipates and alters because it cannot "live with itself." So too all conditions. None of these terms can satisfactorily describe the indescribable -- emptiness. They are just tools to prompt insight so that the mind can become aloof and detached from conditions. We might say that an echo has "its own" qualities...but that approach just instills attachment to conditions IMO. If I said an echo was "empty of itself" that might be easier to swallow? But that statement equally applies to all conditions. BTW, The main rap against the Buddha during his lifetime, by his contemporaries, was that he was a nihilist!!! Cheers Ken O TG #62981 From: "Leo" Date: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:49 pm Subject: village monk 2 leoaive Hi I think I've seen something like that: "Wherever the Arhats dwells in a village or in a forest, in a valley or on a hill, that spot is a place of delight and happy." I am still looking for other similar padas. At the same time I was thinking: Now, if it belongs to Worthy, then Village Way is worthy. Why not to have Village monk as Category? Or why not to have Hill Monk as Category. I really see advantage in that. For instance, if I am a Hill Monk, than people think it is good way, so in case of Tsunami, it would not be so many death, because many would follow hill monks and stay mostly there. So I would be a right guide. Or if I am Village monk, it can be a good guide for city monk who tired of all that and go back to lay life, but here I am a Village monk, suggesting a better way of Village and forest next to it. With Metta Leo #62982 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 4:01 am Subject: Re: Repression matheesha333 Hi Daniel, > When feelings like envy arise in me, I think "I do not want to be such a person > thinks envious thoughts! So I should try not to think them ". Or at least "I > should not belong to that type of nasty person that act because of envy! ". > > I read someone saying in this group that "the self cannot generate kusala and > The first and perhaps the hardest - stop the splitting of your self into purely good and purely bad. No such situation exits, atleast for us mere mortals. We are made up of both. We need to accept both sides of the coin. If we dont accept, we will be in conflict with one side, attached to the other. Hence giving rise to more defilements. Understand why you feel jealous. Where is it coming from. Why have you not achieved what the other person has? Maybe there is a conflict in you - it maybe something you want, but dont feel is worth the trouble. Maybe your circumstances are different from his. Whatever it is, there would be a good reason why you dont have what the other person has. Ultimately we can only do anything with the tools we are given with and to compare superficially is not realistic. This type of thinking is what is mentioned in the vitakkasantana sutta. (Read the rest of the same sutta - many more methods of dealing with thoughts.) If you repeatedly utilize this type of rationalising it will become a part of your thinking, and thoughts of jealousy should not arise. What are the defilements behind jealousy? Aversion towards the other person. Conceit in the form of measuring yourself against him. Being more mindful of these when they arise can help you work at a deeper level. Also developing mudita - joy in another's success - the 3rd brahmavihara, is helpful to turn an akusala thought into kusala. Metta will help with the aversion. Also questioning the value of whatever possetion/attribute you were jealous of. How worthy of clinging is it? Thoughts on impermanance. Hope that helps. Sorry I'm a bit rushed today. regards Matheesha #62983 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Ken O) - In a message dated 9/1/06 2:24:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Heat arises due to "other" conditioning factors. Heat is not an entity > or a quality "of itself." The state of heat arises and alters, but it is > an > "echo" of "other echos/conditions." Heat does not contain "its own" > quality. Heat dissipates and alters because it cannot "live with itself." > So too > all conditions. None of these terms can satisfactorily describe the > indescribable -- emptiness. They are just tools to prompt insight so that > the mind > can become aloof and detached from conditions. > ========================= TG, in my opinion this is wonderfully put! It is original, poetic, and marvelously clarifying. I love your echo metaphor, and I find truly profound the statement "Heat dissipates and alters because it cannot "live with itself." If I may, I'd like to add one or two comparatively prosaic words: It is not that instances of heat don't arise, nor that they aren't distinguishable from other instances of heat and from other sorts of phenomena, nor that they are imagined. It is that in any occurrence of heat or any other dhamma there is no self-existent phenomenon, nor is there any core of self or "ownness". Dhammas per se are not imagined, but they *are* imagined as things-in-themselves. As soon as any one of the words 'self', 'itself', 'own', or 'identity', each pointing to independent status, is used with non-figurative intention, the speech is erroneous. I would add one more thing: The final line of yours that I quoted above points directly at the aim of the Buddha's teaching: Relinquishment, detachment - the realization of freedom. With metta, Howard #62984 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 5:12 am Subject: Re: The svabhava of svabhava scottduncan2 Dear Plamen, Thanks you for your well-crafted reply. P: "Hence the svabhAva of svabhAva in the Buddhist discourse should logically not be a universal property but rather a particular property, and this particular property is called svalakSaNa (salakkhana?) by DignAga. SvalakSaNa is the ultimate particular nature of anything, so according to him, this is the only real thing, the Ultimate Real." Each dhamma has its own particular property or characteristic mark or attribute. I'm not familiar with DignAga. He says, then, that the "Ultimate Real" is the particular characteristic of each dhamma? P: "Yet, even this ultimate particular - allegedly the last possible predicate, - can be predicated. And its predicate is the efficiency. So ultimately, there is no dharma that could not be turned into dharmin of further dharmas." I'm assuming you don't take this to an infinite regress? One stops when one predicates once, it this correct? The characteristic mark or property of water, as dhaatu, is I think cohesion. Do you then say that one must then predicate "cohesion?" It doesn't seem as if you are, at least given DignAga above. He seems to stop at saying the characteristic is the ultimate. P: "Even the paramArtha-dharmas should be somehow predicated (characterised), so they fail to preserve their pure dharmatva and start acting in the real life (and language) as dharmins (subjects to which dharma-predicates are appended). Moreover, in order to say something reasonable and logically consistent about them, they have to possess a property that makes possible the action of the first law of logic, and this property is universally recognized in Buddhist logic. It is called tAdAtmya, Identity." In other words, they have to exist? I think you are saying, then, that logically one must be able to predicate even the paramattha dhammas, that is, these have their own nature or characteristic and this is why we can talk about them, conceptualise them, think about them and discuss them. Sincerely, Scott. #62985 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 6:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] village monk 2 nilovg Hi Leo, I think that not the place itself is praised, but the person who has eradicated all defilements. The purity is not in the place but in the citta of that person. Nina. Op 1-sep-2006, om 7:49 heeft Leo het volgende geschreven: > "Wherever the Arhats dwells in a village or in a forest, in a valley > or on a hill, that spot is a place of delight and happy." #62986 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Repression nilovg Hi Daniel, your point is worth considering. The Buddha emphasized understanding, understanding kusala and akusala. Matheesha and Larry gave you already some good advices, and I shall try to add something. What is the citta like that says, I do not want to be a nasty person? There is aversion, and conceit, there is clinging to a self. Metta and sympathetic joy as Larry and Matheesha suggested are ways to be less envious. But these have to be developed in daily life, when you are with others. One cannot escape knowing oneself, one's cittas. Before one realizes it one takes selfish affection for metta, or happiness that accompanies clinging for sympathetic joy. It is understanding that sees the benefit of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala. You may try and try to avoid akusala and you may suppress it for a while, but clinging to an idea of self which conditions many other defilements will arise again and again. But we can learn from our failures, we can learn that there is no self who can have kusala at will. Khun Sujin gave a sound advice: think of the wellbeing of others, and then you will be less selfseeking. This is fulfilled in the development of the perfections: it is the development of all good qualities without seeking personal gain and with the aim to have less defilements. As I quoted from Rob K's forum: . We always have to find the Middle Way and before we know it we are off the Middle way. We should understand that kusala and akusala arise because of conditions. This does not mean indolence and heedlessness. We can develop kusala, but not with clinging to an idea of . Nina. Op 1-sep-2006, om 0:31 heeft Daniel het volgende geschreven: > When feelings like envy arise in me, I think "I do not want to be > such a person > thinks envious thoughts! So I should try not to think them ". Or at > least "I > should not belong to that type of nasty person that act because of > envy! ". > > I read someone saying in this group that "the self cannot generate > kusala and > akusala cittas". But I would be happy to recieve a down-to-earth > advice, > something which one does not even has to be a buddhist for, or have > a thourough > understanding of anatta... #62987 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 7:35 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe, 66. nilovg Dear friends, The ahetuka kiriyacitta which is classified as mano-dvåråvajjana- citta can perform two functions: in the mind-door process it performs the function of åvajjana or adverting, it adverts to the object through the mind-door; in the sense-door process this citta performs the function of votthapana or determining the object. The citta which determines the object in the sense-door process can be called, after its function, the votthapana-citta. When sound impinges on the earsense it can be experienced by cittas arising in the ear-door process and after that it is experienced by cittas arising in a mind-door process. Processes of cittas which experience an object through one of the five senses and through the mind-door succeed one another time and again. How can there be akusala cittas or kusala cittas in the process of cittas which experience an object through one of the sense-doors, when one does not even know yet what it is that is experienced? There can be akusala cittas or kusala cittas before one knows what it is. One can compare this situation with the case of a child who likes a brightly coloured object such as a balloon before it knows that the object is a balloon. We can have like or dislike of an object before we know what it is. Another ahetuka kiriyacitta is the hasituppåda-citta, the smile- producing-consciousness of the arahat. Only arahats have this type of citta. When they smile the hasituppåda-citta may arise at that moment. Smiling can be motivated by different types of cittas. When people who are not arahats smile, it may be motivated by lobha or by kusala citta. Arahats do not have any defilements; they do not have akusala cittas. Neither do they have kusala cittas; they do not accumulate any more kamma. Instead of kusala cittas they have kiriyacittas accompanied by sobhana (beautiful) roots, sobhana kiriyacittas. Arahats do not laugh aloud, because they have no accumulations for laughing; they only smile. When they smile the smiling may be motivated by sobhana kiriyacitta or by the ahetuka kiriyacitta which is called hasituppåda-citta. ***** Nina. #62988 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 7:42 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 47 nilovg Dear friends, When I was on my journey through Indonesia with the princess and prince of the Netherlands, I did not like being overlooked, being unimportant. Yet I took up a sutta and was reminded by words I had heard over and over again. I quote: from Kindred Saying IV, Part VIII, Kindred Sayings about Headmen, par. 11. We read that the Buddha asked Bhadragaka: 'Now what think you, headman? Are there any people in Uruvelakappa owing to whose death or imprisonment or loss or blame there would come upon you sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair ?' 'There are such people in Uruvelakappa, lord.' 'But, headman, are there any people in Uruvelakappa owing to whose death or imprisonment or loss or blame, no sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair would come upon you?' 'There are such people in Uruvelakappa, lord.' 'Now, headman, what is the reason, what is the cause why sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair would come upon you in respect of some, but not of others?' 'In the case of those, lord, owing to whose death or imprisonment or loss or blame there would come upon me sorrow.... I have desire and attachment. And as for the others, lord, I do not have such desire and attachment in their case.' We read further on that the Buddha said that he would also know with regard to the past and future thus: '...Whatever ill that has arisen in the past,--all that is rooted in desire, caused by desire. And whatsoever ill that will arise in the future,-- all that is rooted in desire, caused by desire. Desire, indeed, is the root of ill.' I had to solve all my problems alone, Lodewijk was in Holland and I accompanied the princess and the prince on their journey for ten days. It helps to be reminded by words of the sutta and one can hear them over and over again. One is reminded of realities, it all depends on conditions what will happen next, gain or loss, praise or blame. But it is our own attachment, attachment to self one finds so important which makes us unhappy. The sutta reminded me to be aware of the present moment. When one sees that it is the only way to cope with life and when one sees how ignorant one is and how much one clings to the self, one is really motivated to go on developing right understanding. There are conditions for sati in daily life if one is really motivated. ****** Nina. #62989 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 2:42 am Subject: Final Cut on Advantageous yet Harsh Speech! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: A confused friend repeatedly insisted on this false statement: >"Harsh speech is always demeritorious...!!!" Yet this is actually not quite exactly so: One can indeed say: 'Harsh Speech is (generally) Disadvantageous' That is a conventionally correct statement... But one cannot say: 'Harsh Speech is always & unambiguously Disadvantageous' That is an absolutely incorrect statement!!! Why is it so? To common Examples from Daily Real-Life Situations: A: A father have 52 times told his son not to enter the high-way. His son (9 years) is about to go out onto the highway after his ball. He has not seen the nearby approaching full-speed truck! His father uses full volume harsh speech, shocks his son, who then stops up long enough to the truck has passed and he has been saved his (heedless and absent-minded) life... Here the fathers harsh speech is ADVANTAGEOUS! because: 1: He saved the life of his inattentive naughty son thereby. 2: He saved the truck-driver for a psychic stigma & shock. 3: He saved his family for much long-term sorrow. And noteworthy: The father indeed intended to do exactly so! B: A big young dog is about to set teeth in the newly arrived kitten. The dog-owner uses full volume harsh speech, shocks his dog, who forgets the kitten long enough for the family to save it. Here the dog-owner harsh speech is ADVANTAGEOUS! because: 1: He saved the life of kitten thereby. 2: He saved the dog of the bad kamma of having killed a kitten. 3: He saved his family for much medium-term sorrow. And noteworthy: The dog-owner indeed intended to do exactly so! Note that in both cases is the INTENTION! behind the Harsh Speech beneficial & neither associated with ignorance, hate nor greed, but only with goodwill, which furthermore KNOWS! that the 'sweet-speech carrot' cannot be successfully applied here! Only the 'verbal whip' will make the necessary difference preventing an otherwise catastrophic outcome! Because the upcoming catastrophe is far, far, worse, than the trivial mental pain of the naughty son & young dog by being addressed with harsh speech, this can be utilized here over-ruling the dogma: 'Harsh speech is not good'! It may NOW hopefully have become crystal-clear for many, but not all here that: When formulating a rule, exceptions to the rule usually also have to be formulated and importantly noted & learned... This crucial last issue of learning the exceptions to a given rule seems to have been forgotten, neglected or yet still ignored by our confused friend, who therefore is unable to discriminate & thus keeps rigidly insisting on: >"Harsh speech is always demeritorious...!!!"... If that really was so, then would our sons and kittens always die... There is many other similar and quite obvious examples of the correctly applied yet quite advantageous verbal 'whip'... The calm yet clear composure of this message itself is only one of them! Implications of the specific case of relevance here: To repeatedly - against all reason - deny sound logic facts and proper documentation even referring to the Buddha himself is a clear and unambiguous sign of the mental state of: 3: Attachment to rule as if it were a ritual (silabbata-paramasa), which is an initial mental chain, fetter or samyojana 3. It tends to induce a misapprehension of duty towards both the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha, and the Good Friend & Teacher !!! One may e.g. perceive that a good teacher should be criticized in a situation, where this is not warranted, even when told so repeatedly! This metal chain, which is a state related to simple stubbornness, & obstinacy, often result in these difficult and dogged "crusades"!!! It can though be used as a mental diagnostic indicating two things: 1: Low beginner & not yet a learner level of Understanding... 2: Farness from Nobility, which again implies: a: Proneness to future states as Ghost. b: Proneness to future states as Demon. c: Proneness to future states in Hell. d: Proneness to future states as Animal. e: Specific liability to 512 rounds as unhappy brokenleg ant!!! Please imagine the inherent pain of such situations thoroughly... This is relevant to mention explicitly here in this specific case since we hope it may induce right reflection along these lines: Buddha once noted after having corrected a slight wrongdoer: Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled. Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil. Dhammapada 121 Hope this issue then is COLD & CLEAR-CUT to the many! If not then ask again, then ill try neon-bending once more. Thanx for your proper attention here ;-) Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62990 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 3:55 pm Subject: Re: Final Cut on Advantageous yet Harsh Speech! icarofranca Dear Ven.Samahita! Your daily Life examples are brightly coloured, indeed...but THE FACT is Harsh Speech goes against the Noble Path, namely the issue called "Right Words". Who could jugde a Harsh Speech´s good intentions ? You or Buddha ? It´s easy to perceive that´s impossible, Bhante. So, Harsh Speech IS a demerit, a terrible demerit! May Allah have pity of your soul! Mettaya and Illhandu Lillah Ícaro #62991 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 5:03 pm Subject: Re: e-card from cold and wet Noosa! philofillet Hi Nina > As to the sense-door adverting-consciousness being kiriya, it is the > first adverting to a new object after the bhavangacittas have been > arrested. It merely adverts, it is not able to experience the > pleasantness or unpleasantness of the object, that is only at the > moment of seeing, hearing, etc. and of the following vipaakacittas, > receiving-consciousness and investigating-consciousness. This is only > my personal idea about this citta. What do you mean this is your "personal idea" about this citta? I think there is a tendency for people to express personal ideas (speculation, pet theories, experience analyzed with cittas rooted in lobha and moha) about cittas but I have always thought that you were serving the straight dish about cittas as found in the tipitaka rather than expressing personal ideas. That's what makes you my important Dhamma friend! It seems from the visitor-at-the-door simile that the adverting consciousness most certainly only adverts and does not experience - it is compared to...what is it compared to in that simile? Phil #62992 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Sep 1, 2006 11:01 pm Subject: Space Compassion ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How is Release by Infinite Pity Achieved? The Blessed Buddha once said: And how, Bhikkhus, is the mental release by universal pity (karuna) achieved? What does this liberation have as its destination, what is its culmination, what is its sweet fruit, what is the final goal of such mental release by universal pity? Here, Bhikkhus, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading the frontal quadrant, with a mind imbued with infinite pity, so the second quarter, then the third quarter, and the fourth quarter. As above, so below, across, and everywhere, and to all beings so to himself, he dwells pervading the entire universe with a mind saturated with such unlimited pity, immense, exalted, vast, measureless, without hostility, without enmity, without any ill will! Thus prepared and expanded he then develops: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless pity. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such pity. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite pity. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute pity. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with spacious pity. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with pity. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless pity. Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release. If he then wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in the unrepulsive & tempting, then he can dwell experiencing the repulsive therein. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in the disgusting repulsive, then he dwells experiencing pleasing beauty in whatever disgusting! If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he dwells experiencing repulsive disgust in it. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he experiences only unrepulsive beauty by it! If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I dwell in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending, then he dwells in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending. Or else, completely transcending of all experience of form, fully stilling any perception of sense-reaction, non attending to experience of any diversity, only aware that space is infinite, he enters and dwells in the realm of the infinitude of space... I tell you Bhikkhus for a wise Bhikkhu here, who has not penetrated yet to an even more superior mental release, this release of mind by pure, infinite & universal pity has the sphere of the infinitude of space as its culmination! Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness... Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62993 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samadhi sutta SN 35.99 jonoabb Hi Howard Continuing with my reply to this post of yours. --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Matheesha, and Kel) - ...> > > Jon: > > In the sutta passage you quote, concentration is given as one of > several > > relevant factors (the ones preceding it being Virtuous ways of > conduct, > > Non-remorse, Gladness, Joy, Serenity and Happiness) and is not singled > out > > for any particular emphasis. So are we to read this as suggesting the > > need for some special training in these other factors also? > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is not a matter of a bag of "several relevant factors". A > *sequence* of factors was involved, with each factor in the sequence > "providing a basis > for" the next - the terminology used in A VI, 50. The order isn't > accidental. > In A X,1 each factor is said to have the next as "benefit and reward". I agree with this. What I was trying to draw attention to was the particular emphasis you seem to place on just one of the many factors mentioned. Why do you not accord equal importance to the other factors -- Virtuous ways of conduct, Non-remorse, Gladness, Joy, Serenity and Happiness -- and assert the need for their (separate) development also? > Something, BTW, pointed out in the next sutta, A X,2, will be > appreciated by you!, namely that the arising of each subsequent factor > requires no act > of will for its arising (as in "May such and such arise in me"), bu > arises by > natural law in one in whom the previous factor is in place. But that, of > course, is a good news/bad news story for you Jon, because in addition > to showing > that will is not involved at the separate steps (the good news), it IS a > sequential process (the bad news). I think the wording of the sutta does not preclude a co-arising, although I am not saying that is necessarily what is meant here (I'd be guided by what the commentary has to say about it). But even a sequential arising would not be a 'bad news' story because, as I see it, it is not a matter of each factor needing a separate 'practice' of some kind for its development. Jon #62994 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' jonoabb Hi Connie --- connie wrote: > > dear Howard, Joop, Icaro, > ... > For this is said: Which are those dhammas that provide exiting? The > four > ariyan paths unincluded (in the triple world) (cp Dhs 583, 992ff; P.ts i > 84; Asl 50). Many thanks for adding this bit about the path as an outlet (and for the other similar reference in your earlier post to Nina). Very informative. Jon #62995 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher jonoabb Hi Kel Thanks for the quotes from the Vsm. Unfortunately I'm not sure I understand the comments you make about them. So let me just summarise where the discussion stands, as I see it. I have said that the description of a teacher/good friend in the 'Samadhi' section of Vism refers to a person who is a teacher of samatha. You I think are saying that when it mentions an enlightened person in that context it means any enlightened person and not just an enlightened person who is a teacher of samatha. Do the passages you quote in your message refer to this point? If yes, perhaps you could spell out the connection for me, please. Sorry if I'm being slow – I'm in holiday mode now ;-)) Thanks. Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi Jon, > > My basic point is that you're drawing artificial contexts where > there is none. ... > From same section: > > 54: The inhabitants of the vollage had a large pavilion built at > the door of his dwelling, and they came daily to hear the Dhamma. > Explaining by day what had been repeated by night, the Elder > [Dhammarakkhita] eventually completed the instruction. Then he sat > down on the mat on the ground before the Elder Abhaya and > said, 'Friend, explain a meditation subject to me'. -- 'What are you > saying, venerable sir, have I not heard it all from you? What can I > explain to you that you do not already know"' The senior elder > said, 'This path is different for one who has actually travelled by > it'. > > Kel: I suppose you'll tell me that Elder Abhaya was a Sotapanna > with jhanas. > > - Kel #62996 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:13 am Subject: Re: e-card from cold and wet Noosa! philofillet Hi again Nina I asked: >what is it (adverting consciousness) compared to in that simile? Should have said parable, of course. Found it, from the Atthasalini, quoted on p.111 of Survey of Paramattha Dhammas. "A certain king went to bed and fell asleep. His attendant sat shamppoing his feet, a deaf doorkeeper stood at the door. Three guards stood in a row. Then a certain man resident at a border village, bringing a present, came and knocked at the door. The deaf doorkeeper did not hear the sound. He who shamppoed the king's feet gave a sign, but which the doorkeeper opened the door and looked. The first guard took the present and handed it to the second guard, who gave it to the third, who in turn offered it to the king." I don't know why foot shampooing is brought into it, but never mind. I don't want to think about the implications, or speculate. Basically, with processes of this kind all we can do is repeat the teaching. Understanding what goes on is *way* beyond us. We repeat the teaching, we parrot the teaching. If we have something against parroting teaching of this great depth of insight, we are full of ourselves. It is better we parrot than try to sing on our own when we're dealing with this sort of thing. Phil #62997 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna jonoabb Hi James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Math, Nina, and Jon (Rob K. and Phil), ... > I am really glad to see someone as concerned about this issue as I > am. Speaking against jhana, in subtle and blatant ways, is directly > contradicting what the Buddha taught. And the consequences for > those who directly contradict what the Buddha taught can be grave- > that is why this matter is no small matter. > > Jon wrote in one post about how his speech against jhana would not > deter any would-be jhana meditators. Whoa James! Did I really refer to my post as being "against jhana"? I don't think so, because I have never spoken against jhana. It's true I don't share your own particular view on matters such as what the development of jhana involves, or the significance of passages in certain suttas, but that does not make my view an 'anti-jhana' one, surely?? ;-)) I thought about commenting on > that at the time but I let it drop, as I do get tired of arguing > this subject so often. However, maybe now is the time to point out > that Jon is quite mistaken. His comments, and Nina's comments, do > have a great influence on people. For example, I witnessed the > transformation of Phil, a beginning meditator when he joined this > group, into an avowed non-meditator. It broke my heart to see the > transformation, and I did everything I could do to stop it, but my > efforts were to no avail. In that case, text manipulation and fancy > Pali terms beat out common sense. And this is just an example of a > posting member, what about all of the other silent members? In Phil's case he came to realise that what he had been taking for metta was not in fact metta, but was akusala of some form or another. Is that not something to be applauded? > So, what people post here does have a great influence on others and > we each have a responsibility to present the truth. Rob K. > presenting partial texts to support his non-meditation viewpoint is > not the truth. Those who perpetuate this text manipulation are not > presenting the truth. Again, the consequences for these types of > actions can be grave (much graver, I believe, than the consequences > of my harsh speech against them for doing it!). Everyone who quotes texts quotes a selected part only. Even a whole sutta can be a 'partial text' in relation to a point, depending on what the point is. As regards the suggestion of text manipulation, I must say I was not able to follow your point. It seemed to me that the 'omitted' material that you quoted was fully consistent with the comment that breath was a difficult subject for the development of samatha. Jon #62998 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta Revisited jonoabb Hi James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, ... > That's six of one, half dozen of another. If we don't know metta > when meditating, we are probably even less likely to know when it > occurs during our busy and hectic lives. You think that the distinction between true metta and something that seems like metta but isn't can best be known when doing metta meditation rather than in daily life. I'd be interested to know why you think this. To my way of thinking, a person who is consciously trying to have more metta (which is what I understand by 'doing metta meditation') would be more likely to take non-metta for metta than would someone who was not consciously making that effort. Perhaps you see a 'busy and hectic' life as meaning that dhammas cannot be seen as they are. I don't think that need be the case. Of course, if we hold to that view it would certainly be an obstacle to any level of awareness arising during our daily life. Jon #62999 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 2, 2006 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher jonoabb Hi Mateesha --- matheesha wrote: > Hi Jon, Howard, > > Butting in with a quote to spice up your discussion.. Thanks for coming in on this thread, and for the sutta quote. Would you mind saying a few words about the relevance of the quote? As I see it, it is saying that a person who has attained jhana but not enlightenment would seek instruction (from an enlightened person) in the development of insight. Thanks. > > > I agree that in the context of the development of jhaana it is > recommended > > > that one proceed by placing oneself under a teacher. However, > this is a > > > rather special case, and in any event is not a hard and fast rule. ... > "The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, > but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should > approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena > through heightened discernment and ask him: 'How should fabrications > be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen > with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & > experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way. > Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should > be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] > will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of > awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. > AN 4.94 Samadhi Sutta > > metta > > Matheesha