#67000 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: the so-called jhana factors include both piti (joy) and > sukha (pleasant feeling), and these must each be abandoned if the > next higher stage of jhana is to be attained. > > So the jhana practitioner sees danger in even kusala joy and pleasant > feeling. Hello Jon Was thinking about this the other day and how jhana is (sometimes) referred to as "dukkha patipada" (a distressful path). Nyanatiloka's Dictionary lists 4 modes of progress to deliverance: 1. painful progress with slow comprehension 2. painful progress with quick comprehension 3. pleasant progress with slow comprehension 4. pleasant progress with quick comprehension [see "patipada"] Does this mean that jhana does not necessarily involve sukha? Best wishes Andrew #67001 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Forget About Satipatthana!" jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Hi Joop, > ... Hallo Larry, Sarah, all L: I think Khun Sujin is saying forget the concepts, the suttas, and the commentaries and relate to what is happening now. J: There are two words in this sentence that are very simple english words but still - in paramattha perspective - not easy at all: "forget": what is that ? Is forgetting a paramattha dhamma? "what is happening": you (and perhaps mrs Sujin) mean an total unstructured heap of phenomena? I mean: we need a conceptual structure to relate to what is happening, when in some years I suffer (like my father did) on Altzheimer, then I forget but I'm afraid that not the ideal situation mrs. Sujin is talking about. So better forget not the concepts as given in the Satipatthana Sutta. L: I would say, in particular focus on rupa J: I'm not sure what you mean, what is "focus", is focussing an ultimate reality? In my meditation I focus on what happens, that can be breath, that can be pain, that can be thinking. It's anatta not to focus, I think: observe whatever is happening BTW 1: I agree with the advice to forget the commentaries. BTW 2: Sarah, has anybody tried to answer mrs. Sujin on her question 'what is meditation' ? There are some good answers in UP (for example James tot Scott spome weeks ago) Metta Joop #67002 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Forget About Satipatthana!" ken_aitch Hi Larry, I am almost speechless. Surely, after all these years at DSG, you know by now that K Sujin does not teach formal (intentional) vipassana practice. (?) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > <. . .> > L: I think Khun Sujin is saying forget the concepts, the suttas, and the > commentaries and relate to what is happening now. > > I would say, in particular focus on rupa. That's the beginning for most > people, and once there is a well esablished awareness of rupa it stays > with you. It's like wearing anatta. > > Larry > > KS:"Forget About Satipatthana!" > "Don't try to understand satipatthana without any understanding of > realities right now! For example, [if we say] 'Be aware of visible > object!' - it's impossible without the understanding of what is visible > object right now, [how it's] different from dreaming about people and > things after seeing.........So forget about satipatthana....so begin > with understanding reality." > #67003 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/13/07 11:13:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Jon - > > > >In a message dated 1/12/07 10:16:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, > >jonabbott@... writes: > > > >>To my understanding of the texts, crying, like laughing, can only > be > >>akusala. Likewise, dreams are generally akusala (only the > arahant > >>does not dream at all). > >> > >======================= > > Jesus, Jon! You seem to think that it is good to be a dried > out, > >emotionless robot? If I thought that the Dhamma was opposed to joy, > I'd go > >elsewhere. > > Actually, I would say the Dhamma is neither opposed to nor in favour > of joy - it simply tells us how things are. > > The mental factor of 'piti' is sometimes translated as 'joy'. It may > accompany both kusala and akusala cittas. Likewise the mental factor > of 'sukha', 'pleasant feeling'. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Wholesome & unwholesome come in degrees, Jon. Serene and perfect equanimity outshines wholesome joy, and wholesome joy is more perfectly wholesome than rapturous piti. Are you so close to Buddhic perfection that you thought it a good idea to jump on my experience of wholesome, but certainly flawed, rapture & joy with the immediate response of "do you really think it is kusala"? It seems to me that you adhere to texbook definitions of perfection and dismiss less-than-perfect actual experiences as unworthy or false or even unwholesome. If nothing else, Jon, it is an unhelpful approach. ----------------------------------------------- > > I think the texts are clear that laughing is always motivated by > attachment. But I don't see how the fact that I mention this gives > you any insight into my personality ;-)) > > >There is nothing at all wrong with delight, Jon. > > Agreed ;-)) Kusala is to be developed, and akusala is to be > abandoned. But we start from where we are, so we need not feel > there's anything 'wrong' with aksuala joy. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Unwholesome joy arises momentarily often intermixed with wholesome joy. The unwholesome moments can vary from "not so bad" to "far better doing without". There IS "something wrong" with akusala joy - certainly in its more extreme form. Part of starting where we are is seeing as clearly as possible exactly *where* we are, and moving ourselves in a good direction. When I so often say "We start where we are," the point is not to be satisfied with where we are, but that wherever we are, progress [a good word, Jon - an encouraging word] is possible if appropriate measures are taken. In general, what is unwholesome is not to be pursued though it may easily be somewhat tolerated in its less innocuous forms. More at issue is the matter of wholesome joy. If it is only mildly wholesome is it to be depised or put down? Also, we are not so adept at separating out moments of wholesome joy from unwholesome. But if a sequence of states is largely very wholesome and leads to good fruits, I find it foolish at best to pedantically engage in discouragement instead of encouragement, especially when one's Dhamma knowledge is only from books and discussion. (You speak of the piti and sukha of jhana, but heve never yourself cultivated the experience of jhana.) ------------------------------------------------- > > >There is delight in jhana, > >delight in all kusala, delight and utter joy. > > I'm not sure what you mean by 'delight and utter joy'. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry to hear that. ------------------------------------- As you will > > remember, the so-called jhana factors include both piti (joy) and > sukha (pleasant feeling), and these must each be abandoned if the > next higher stage of jhana is to be attained. --------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, Jon, I do remember. -------------------------------------- > > So the jhana practitioner sees danger in even kusala joy and pleasant > feeling. ---------------------------------------- Howard: What does the jhana avoider see danger in? ---------------------------------------- > > >There is delight in metta, > >karuna, mudita, and uppekha. There is delight in wisdom. > > Are you referring to the accompanying feeling, or to subsequent > thinking about the arisen kusala. If the latter, it might well be > akusala (I'm speaking in general terms here and not about you, > Howard, personally). > > Jon > ========================= Jon, you write as if from the mountaintop. Why not start to climb the foothills yourself? Don't you ever wonder why you write primarily in terms of warnings, disclaimers, and dangers instead of encouragement, support, and opportunities. You seem to be taking it upon yourself to do nothing but take pot shots, attempting to point out that we are just not up to distinguishing states, monitoring our behavior, and cultivating calm, clarity, and insight, and you moreover imply that anything less than perfect is not only less than perfect but must also be unwholesome and avoided. IMO, yours is becoming a pattern of discouragement and nay saying with hardly ever a word of encouragement except for those who express the same negative attitude. I can tell you Jon, it IS very discouraging to me, but, happily, I have the Dhamma and its practice to shore up my spirits. I have seen in my life that it's practice leads to calm, to joy, and to genuine insight, and I am grateful to the Buddha for his empasizing the urgency of practice, especially meditation ("There are roots of trees"). What I will tell you is that until I have grown beyond it, I'll take my Dhamma as a religion of joy, because that is exactly what it provides to me. I am quite content at this point to smile broadly with joy in my heart until and if I gain the lasting serenity that goes beyond. With metta, Howard #67004 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Thanks for the good reply: J: "Yes. Let's distinguish between a dream and dreaming (the same distinction as between a thought and thinking): citta dreams (this is the dreaming, the experiencing of a dream), and its object is a concept (the dream). It is just a kind of thinking." Exactly. And, as you say later, 'thoughts experienced during sleep'. I think, a dream simply being 'thoughts', one need not give it any more or any less credibility than 'thoughts' during the daytime. As an object of clinging the thoughts that are dreams are quite compelling, since they are in such a different form than the thoughts of the day. It is, I think, this vivid, enticing and compelling form the thoughts-that-are-dreams take that is problematic. That, I think, combined with a desire for mystical experience. And this latter is a difficult thing to shake. Just because it talks and moves and is exciting emotionally, doesn't make it the dream an object of veneration. That's what television is for. In fact, one could get all caught up in a feel-good television show for that matter. I know I've been tempted to think mystical experience is desirable, having misunderstood things based on, no doubt, a Western 'spiritual' notion or two. Numinosity seems highly prized, and I suppose one could cite Carl Jung as a source for the 'psychologising about mysticism', or for the ,mysticising of psychology' or whatever. A point I think is very important in all this, and would value your thoughts on, is that the only object of citta worth 'venerating' (and this is only a word since detachment is always a prefered necessity - albeit a difficult one to achieve) would be Nibbaana. And this whether it be just a glimpse, as with magga and phala citta, or the whole Path. I'd say concepts, such as dreams, are like imitation jewelry or perfume or haircuts when compared to Nibbaana. A technical point also, when you say, 'Citta dreams', do you mean this in just an ordinary sense? In other words, we're not talking about a special class of citta, one whose sole function it is to dream, are we. This is just an impersonal dhamma with a dream/concept as object. J: "And furthermore, the quality of a citta as kusala or akusala can be known directly at the time it arises. It does not depend on any subsequent 'consequences', and so cannot be surmised from later analysis of the occasion. But unless it's a moment of dana, sila or bhavana, it must be akusala, this being an exhaustive classification of kusala found in the sutta pitaka." Right. Hard to see a dream as any one of these. I would wonder though whether pa~n~na is capable of arising no matter when - that is, I'm thinking that even during dreaming pa~n~na could arise and know the quality of a citta. I'm not sure about that though. If you have time, maybe you can say more about this. Sincerely, Scott. #67005 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) scottduncan2 Dear Mental-Developers, An observation based on process: Following the train of thought, loosely, in this thread, controversy goes from defending the utility of jhaana 'meditation' to defending the wholesomeness of dreams, (not to mention defending the integrity of dreamers and meditators which, I think, is not being questioned). By association then ('one thing leading to another'), this seems to indicate that what is being defended is the attachment to the experience and the ideas which follow from this. That is to say, again, by association, jhaana experience is equated with dream experience. And it is the so-called utility of said experience that is being defended; that it is being called 'meditation' is a misnomer and a red herring. Arguments in favour of 'meditation' have all the hallmarks, to me, of attachment: Emotional intensity, rhetoric, personal sensitivity, proselytism - the works. I think, therefore, the problem does not lie with the various 'forms of jhaana', nor with dreams. The problem lies with attachment. I think 'meditation', as defended here, is proving to be, simply, a pursuit of experience clothed in Dhamma-talk. I very much appreciate the discussion so far, since it is demonstrating very clearly and clarifying quite distinctly, for me, the whole subject. Sincerely, Scott. #67006 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Howard I won't be continuing this thread, as I see you've taken my comments rather personally. I'm sorry you feel 'jumped on' and discouraged. I readily admit that my comments are drawn mostly from a reading of the texts and are not based on any attainment (samatha or vipassana) on my part. I happen to be someone who very much appreciates hearing aspects of the teachings regardless of the speaker's level of attainment, and I tend to assume that others will appreciate the same kind of thing. Of course, the fact that the discussion arose out of a post describing a personal experience of yours makes it more sensitive than would otherwise be the case. Perhaps we can continue our discussion on kusala and akusala on a later occasion when it is not so close to the bone, so to speak. Jon upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 1/13/07 11:13:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > >> Hi Howard >> >> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >> ... >> >> Actually, I would say the Dhamma is neither opposed to nor in favour >> of joy - it simply tells us how things are. >> >> The mental factor of 'piti' is sometimes translated as 'joy'. It may >> accompany both kusala and akusala cittas. Likewise the mental factor >> of 'sukha', 'pleasant feeling'. > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Wholesome & unwholesome come in degrees, Jon. Serene and perfect > equanimity outshines wholesome joy, and wholesome joy is more perfectly wholesome > than rapturous piti. Are you so close to Buddhic perfection that you thought it > a good idea to jump on my experience of wholesome, but certainly flawed, > rapture & joy with the immediate response of "do you really think it is kusala"? > It seems to me that you adhere to texbook definitions of perfection and dismiss > less-than-perfect actual experiences as unworthy or false or even > unwholesome. If nothing else, Jon, it is an unhelpful approach. > ----------------------------------------------- > #67007 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:03 am Subject: Re: Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Mental-Developers, > Arguments in favour of 'meditation' have all the hallmarks, to me, of > attachment: Emotional intensity, rhetoric, personal sensitivity, > proselytism - the works. To me, the arguments in this group against meditation have all of the same hallmarks. We are all unenlightened beings in this group so we all have attachments. Just because Jon, for example, writes in a dry, unemotional style that doesn't mean he has more wisdom than the rest of us, it just means he has the personality of a calculator ;-)) (just kidding). Hitler also spoke in a dry, unemotional style when discussing the need to exterminate millions of Jews. The old adage is true: you can't judge a book by its cover. That is why I keep telling you Scott, study the suttas for yourself! Read what the Buddha had to say. The Buddha teaches meditation as part of his Noble Eightfold Path. It's there again, and again, and again… Metta, James #67008 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:07 am Subject: Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Sorry to say, but that wasn't it either ;-)) I wanted to discuss > generally kusala and akusla. Baloney. You wanted to discuss the kusala and akusala of Howard's experience, there was nothing "general" about it. Metta, James #67009 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Jon (AKA Mr. Roboto ;-)), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Howard > > I won't be continuing this thread, as I see you've taken my comments > rather personally. Who wouldn't??? They were personal. I'm sorry you feel 'jumped on' and discouraged. > No, you should feel sorry for bringing up this whole line of questioning. I told you it would lead to no good. Examine and know the kusala and akusala of your own mind states before you start to question other people's. Metta, James #67010 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:37 am Subject: Re: What is Meditation? buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Lodewijk raised more on meditation and Vince (with Nancy en route to > Myanmar too!!)were asking K.Sujin why she discourages sitting meditation > or retreats as such....'What is meditation?', she asked several times... Oh Wow, soooo deep....then I would have asked her, "Oh yeah, well, what is the sound of one hand clapping?" LOL! Metta, James #67011 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/14/07 10:42:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard > > I won't be continuing this thread, as I see you've taken my comments > rather personally. I'm sorry you feel 'jumped on' and discouraged. ====================== Yes, let's let this go. With metta, Howard #67012 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > .... > > To my understanding of the texts, crying, like laughing, can only be akusala. ... Hallo Jon I don't belief this. Which texts? Not that of ven. Buddhhaghosa , I hope? The person who states is, is a bad psychologist. Joop #67013 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon (AKA Mr. Roboto ;-)), > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > >> Hi Howard >> >> I won't be continuing this thread, as I see you've taken my >> > comments > >> rather personally. >> > > Who wouldn't??? They were personal. > > I'm sorry you feel 'jumped on' and discouraged. > > > No, you should feel sorry for bringing up this whole line of > questioning. I told you it would lead to no good. Examine and know > the kusala and akusala of your own mind states before you start to > question other people's. > Well that is the counsel of perfection, which is one thing Howard and I agree on is not achievable ;-)). Besides, what is kusala as you understand it? (Don't answer; couldn't resist that one). Jon #67014 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon & James - In a message dated 1/14/07 4:45:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > >No, you should feel sorry for bringing up this whole line of > >questioning. I told you it would lead to no good. Examine and know > >the kusala and akusala of your own mind states before you start to > >question other people's. > > > > Well that is the counsel of perfection, which is one thing Howard and I > agree on is not achievable ;-)). > > Besides, what is kusala as you understand it? (Don't answer; couldn't > resist that one). > ===================== I'm happy for friendship, guys. And I'm very happy for the maintaing of good humor & a good spirit. :-) With metta, Howard P.S. I do believe in perfection, Jon, and working towards it, despite how distant a goal it may be. :-) #67015 From: "Bill" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:29 pm Subject: Just joined bill_zenn Hello everyone, My name is Bill. I am 35 years old and am currently living in Atlanta, Georgia. My interest in Buddhadharma began about 15 years ago, but it wasn't until 2002 that I started to take a more serious look at the teachings. What I mean by a "more serious look" is an attempt to consciously apply (i.e. practice) what I can understand from the teachings. I have mostly been studying Tibetan streams of Dharma, but more recently (within the last few months) have been drawn to Theravada as well. At this time I have no formal training, am not associated with a particular sangha or dharma center, and have no direct relationship to a particular teacher. I would love to cultivate all of these things, but it has not yet worked out that way. I have attended a couple of dharma talks at a local dharma center, but other than that I have been studying what I can from books and resources on the Web. I am grateful for the opportunity to join this list. I feel it will aid me in my growth as a Buddhist. Thank you. Namaste, Bill #67016 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Forget About Satipatthana!" lbidd2 Hi Ken, K: "I am almost speechless." L: Excellent. That's it! Larry #67017 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Joop (Jon and Howard), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" > wrote: > > .... > > > > To my understanding of the texts, crying, like laughing, can only be > akusala. > > ... > > Hallo Jon > > I don't belief this. Which texts? Not that of ven. Buddhhaghosa , I > hope? > The person who states is, is a bad psychologist. Hold onto your seats, but here comes a big shocker- I am going to agree with Jon on this and disagree with both of you, Joop and Howard. Yes, the assimilation is beginning. ;-)) I don't believe that crying can ever be rooted in kusala. Crying is always rooted in akusala. I once had my own Buddhist group and the biggest controversy I ever had was when I wrote that crying was always an unwholesome thing and that the enlightened never cry for any reason. Oh man! I got several angry e-mails about that, several members quit the group, and one woman wrote to me that she couldn't be a Buddhist anymore if Buddhists couldn't see that crying sometimes is healthy and natural! I really didn't expect that kind of reaction! It just seemed to be common sense to me. Crying does not come from wholesome mind states and the enlightened would have no reason to cry. I stuck to my guns though- and I still don't think that crying is wholesome; natural yes, wholesome no. I don't know what the Abhidhamma has to say about this; I have just observed my own mind state whenever I have cried in my life. The mind state is always unwholesome, filled with self-pity and conceit. Even supposed "tears of joy" are not really joyous. True joy does not make a person cry. I believe that "tears of joy" also arise from conceit, mixed in with mundita (sympathetic joy). Again, I have no textual support for this conclusion; only my observations of my own mind states. Metta, James #67018 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Forget About Satipatthana!" lbidd2 Hi Joop, J: "There are two words in this sentence that are very simple english words but still - in paramattha perspective - not easy at all:" L: There are no words in sights, sounds, odours, flavours, textures or temperatures. Bend your mind to that and give your intellect a rest. Larry #67019 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:54 pm Subject: Re: Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Besides, what is kusala as you understand it? (Don't answer; couldn't > resist that one). > > Jon > James: Why not answer that question? I think it is a good question and it doesn't relate to anyone personally- so I am going to answer if you don't mind. Kusala (wholesomeness) as I understand it has two levels of meaning- ultimate and conventional. At the ultimate level, each mind state (citta) is rooted in either non-greed (generosity), non-hate (metta), or non-delusion (panna). This is relatively straight forward and easy to understand. Kusala at the conventional level is not quite so simple, however, because such states of kusala, akusala (or neutral) arise in mixed patterns. Cittas arise and pass away millions if not trillions of times per minute. One citta has an effect on the next citta, so kusala and akusala (or neutral) groupings of cittas arise in patterns. Cittas don't immediately switch from one to the other; it is a gradual change during the course of millions of cittas. So, when the Buddha taught to cultivate the wholesome and discard the unwholesome, I believe that he was teaching about kusala and akusala in the conventional sense. We have no control over individual cittas, they arise and pass away too rapidly; but we can set up the proper conditions so that kusala groupings or patterns arise more frequently than akusala groupings and patterns arise. This is what the Buddha meant when he taught that one should purify the mind; he also taught that this was a gradual process which could not be done quickly (but not so gradual as to necessitate several lifetimes ;-). Jon, it appears to me that you refuse to see the conventional level of kusala and akusala and will only acknowledge the ultimate level. You refuse to see the forest through the trees. I really don't understand why this is because it doesn't make much sense to me. Your approach isn't practical; it's purely philosophical. Metta, James #67020 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) ken_aitch Hi Scott, --------- <. . .> S: > I very much appreciate the discussion so far, since it is demonstrating very clearly and clarifying quite distinctly, for me, the whole subject. -------- I couldn't agree more. And where else can we have discussions like this? The question of meditation is just one inseparable part of the big question: "What did the Buddha really teach?" In my opinion, the answer we get from the general Buddhist community is essentially the same as we get from religion. That is, "Be good, pray (or meditate) and receive your reward." What other answer could there be? It is so hard to see how the Buddha could possibly have offered anything other than just one more variation on the theme. However, there is a unique answer, and - with a lot of help from our friends - we can find it in the ancient texts. Ken H #67021 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:13 pm Subject: The Buddha's Teaching Method buddhatrue Hi Jon and All, Jon: Again, not what I believe or have ever said. The question is whether, when the Buddha spoke of guarding the sense-doors, etc, he was describing intentional actions. That is an inference, but not a necessary one, that some like to draw from the suttas. It's quite possible to read the suttas without making that assumption. James: We have discussed this somewhat in the past, but never in any depth. I would like to discuss this issue with you Jon, in depth, if you don't mind. (I have no classes to teach this week as the students are preparing for finals, so I have lots of time on my hands. ;-)) As I understand it, you see the suttas as describing occurrences, not instructing the doing of intentional activities; while I see the suttas in the exact opposite way- as instructing the doing of intentional activities to create the conditions for those occurrences. This is a major difference and will completely change the meaning of the suttas depending on how one views them! In order to get to the heart of this matter, we have to know what the Buddha's intentions were. When he gave a sermon, did he intend for the listeners to simply know the circumstances of higher awakening, or did he intend for them to emulate the models he described so that they would achieve the same higher awakening he described? So, again, to know, we have to examine the Buddha's intentions. There aren't a lot of suttas which describe the Buddha's thought processes, but I found one on the Internet (and there might be others). It is a teaching that the Buddha gave to his son, Rahula. Contained within the sutta is this description (a standard formula found in other suttas): "Seeing thus, Rahula, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with consciousness at the eye, disenchanted with contact at the eye… With that, too, he grows disenchanted. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html Jon, I think that you would read this and conclude that the Buddha wasn't really telling Rahula to do anything. He was describing what happens when a noble one becomes enlightened. You would point out that the syntax of the teaching isn't directly telling Rahula what to do or not do; the syntax is just describing an occurrence. And I would have to agree with you. The Buddha isn't directly telling Rahula to do anything. However, we have to look at the Buddha's intentions to know the full story. Here is how the sutta begins: "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's Monastery. Then, as he was alone in seclusion, this line of thinking arose in the Blessed One's awareness: "The mental qualities that ripen in release have ripened in Rahula. What if I were to lead Rahula further to the ending of the mental fermentations?" Then the Blessed One, early in the morning, put on his robes and, carrying his bowl & outer robe, went into Savatthi for alms. Having gone for alms in Savatthi, after the meal, returning from his alms round, he said to Ven. Rahula, "Fetch your sitting cloth, Rahula. We will go to the Grove of the Blind to spend the day."… From this description of the Buddha's thought processes and actions, we can see that although the Buddha didn't directly tell Rahula to do anything, he very much intended for Rahula to do something. He wanted Rahula to abandon some of the mental fermentations and become sotapanna, but he didn't directly tell Rahula that. He wasn't even sure if it would work, since the question "What if I were to lead Rahula further to the ending of the mental fermentations?" I think the important word to focus on here is "lead". The Buddha was a wise teacher, he didn't push his students here or there, he led them to the truth. Therefore, he didn't directly tell them to do anything- he taught by example. I think it is clear that the Buddha wanted his listeners to do the things he described to them, but he didn't directly tell them so because that would be too pushy. No one wants to hear, "You should do this... you should do that…." The Buddha taught by example and it was up to his listeners to follow the examples he gave or not. What do you (or anyone) think about this? Metta, James #67022 From: Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:57 pm Subject: Re: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Howard > ===================== > I'm happy for friendship, guys. And I'm very happy for the maintaing > of good humor & a good spirit. :-) Yes, I agree that should never be lost sight of. > P.S. I do believe in perfection, Jon, and working towards it, despite how > distant a goal it may be. :-) Well in the spirit of friendship and good humour I'll agree with you on this too, Howard ;-)) Jon #67023 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just joined sarahprocter... Hi Bill Z*, (Bill J & all), Welcome to DSG! --- Bill wrote: > My name is Bill. I am 35 years old and am currently living in Atlanta, > Georgia. My interest in Buddhadharma began about 15 years ago, but it > wasn't > until 2002 that I started to take a more serious look at the teachings. > What > I mean by a "more serious look" is an attempt to consciously apply (i.e. > practice) what I can understand from the teachings. I have mostly been > studying Tibetan streams of Dharma, but more recently (within the last > few > months) have been drawn to Theravada as well. .... S: Thanks so much for giving us this intro without more prompting. It's always good to hear where people live and a little about their 'Buddhist background'. Can you tell us what has drawn you to Theravada recently? ... >At this time I have no > formal > training, am not associated with a particular sangha or dharma center, > and > have no direct relationship to a particular teacher. I would love to > cultivate all of these things, but it has not yet worked out that way. .... S: This reminds me a little of Scott's questions/comments with regard to looking for a teacher and so on. I think the consensus view was that such a search is likely to be futile in that really the Dhamma is the teacher and we need to question and consider what we hear from any source to really see if it is in conformity with the Dhamma. I don't personally think it matters whether one has a strong association with one person (one teacher), a group of people or none, like many here. The point is to read/listen and consider carefully what we hear and to develop understanding through the 'practice'. In any case, I hope we can be a 'Sangha', a helpful community for you to share your comments/questions and considerations. ..... >I > have attended a couple of dharma talks at a local dharma center, but > other > than that I have been studying what I can from books and resources on > the > Web. I am grateful for the opportunity to join this list. I feel it will > aid > me in my growth as a Buddhist. Thank you. ... S: And we're grateful to have you join us. If you would like any recommendations of any books or resources (Theravada), I know that many friends here will be glad to give their suggestions too. [In 'Useful Posts' in the 'files' of DSG, there are posts saved under 'New to the list and New to Dhamma' with suggestions, but of course, you're not 'New to Dhamma'!] After giving your nice intro, if you want any members you're writing to to let you know their backgrounds, pls ask. It's a bit unfair in a way that we oldies ask for this info from new members, but they know little if anything about anyone else:-). I don't recall Atlanta being represented to date, but Larry or someone else in the States may remember better. Look f/w to talking to you later. Metta Sarah *We have another Bill,(Bill J) who also joined quite recently, who also lives in the States and who also writes very politely and kindly, so I've given you a 'Z' for 'zen' to avoid confusion. You may prefer to change it to your surname initial letter! ==================== #67024 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:17 pm Subject: Cetasikas' study corner 627- Wholesome Deeds(x) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) =============================================== Wholesome Deeds contd The ten “bases of meritorious deeds” are included in generosity, síla and mental development. The Buddha, when he was a Bodhisatta, developed with perseverance all kinds of wholesomeness together with right understanding. He had no selfish purposes but he was truly intent on the happiness of all beings. We read in the Dialogues of the Buddha (III, no. 30, “The Marks of the Superman”) about the good deeds he performed during the lives he was a Bodhisatta, about the results produced by his good deeds, and about the special bodily features which are the “marks” of a Buddha and which are conditioned by these good deeds. I shall quote some passages which deal with his generosity, his purity of conduct and his wisdom: * "… Whereas in whatsoever former birth, former state of becoming, former sojourning, monks, the Tathågata, then being human, took on mighty enterprise in all good things, took on unfaltering enterprise in all good things, took on unfaltering enterprise in seemly course of deed and word and thought:— in dispensing gifts, in virtuous undertakings, in keeping of festivals, in filial duties to mother and father, in pious duties to recluse and brahmin, in honour of the head of the house and in other such things of lofty merit… (145) … Whereas in whatsoever former births… the Tathågata, then being human, lived for the weal of the great multitudes, dispeller of dread and panic, purveyor of just protection and wardenship and giver of supplies… (148) … Whereas in former birth… the Tathågata, then being human, putting away the taking of life, refrained therefrom and laying the scourge and sword aside, dwelt gentle and compassionate, merciful and friendly to all living creatures… (149) … Whereas in whatsoever former birth… the Tathågata, then being human, drew near and questioned recluse or brahmin, saying: What sir, is good? What is bad? What is right, what wrong? What ought I to do, or not to do? What when I have done it will long be for my unhappiness… or for my happiness?… (157) … Whereas in whatsoever former birth… the Tathågata, then being human, lived without wrath, full of serenity, and even when much had been said, fell not foul of anyone, was neither angry, nor malign, nor enraged, manifesting neither anger nor hate nor melancholy, but was a giver of fine and soft coverlets, and cloaks, and fine linen, fine cotton, fine silken, fine woollen stuffs… (159) … Whereas in whatsoever former birth… the Tathågata, then being human, grew desirous for the good of the many, for their welfare, their comfort, their safety, considering how they might increase in confidence, in morality, in education, in charity, in righteousness, and in wisdom, might increase in money and corn, in land, in animals two footed and four footed, in wife and children, in servants and slaves, in kinsfolk and friends and connections… (164) … Whereas in whatsoever former birth… the Tathågata, then being human, put away abusive speech, revolted against abusive speech, what he heard here not repeating elsewhere, to raise a quarrel against people here; and what he heard elsewhere not repeating here, to raise a quarrel against people there:— thus becoming a binder together of those who are divided, or fostering those who are friends, a peacemaker, lover of concord, impassioned for peace, a speaker of words that make for peace… (171, 172)" * This sutta can encourage us to apply the Buddha’s teachings. The Bodhisatta gave us an example to always be eager to listen and to learn, to develop all kinds of good qualities and above all to develop understanding of realities. When we read about all the virtues the Bodhisatta accumulated in his former lives, we can be reminded that the effect of the development of understanding will eventually be to have less defilements, to become less selfish and more generous, to have more genuine concern for other people. Cetasikas - The End!!!! ***** Metta, Sarah ====== #67025 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner 627- Wholesome Deeds(x) sarahprocter... Hi All, As I indicated, that was the last installment of Nina's book 'Cetasikas'. There are a few helpful appendices at the end, which anyone may like to check out, but I don't think I'll post them. (There were no questions at the end of the last chapter, Han, but you may have comments anyway.) I think I may start giving short installments of another text (and of course, anyone else is most welcome to do the same). It's easier of course if one has both the hard text and an on-line version, so one can check, but avoid too much typing. I was thinking of doing another of Nina's books, particularly 'Conditions', but for a change, it might also be interesting to do a Sutta text with commentary. With this in mind, I've also thought of: a)Dhammapada with Narada's summaries of the commentary stories (I forget what else is on-line), b)Udana commentary-much of which a friend has typed out, c)Therigathaa, Psalms of the Sisters w/commentary. Mrs R-D's translation is rather 'old-fashioned' to put it politely, but I think this might work quite well for short installments, whereas the Udana comy gets v.detailed and 'technical' in places. I'd prefer it to be a text which encourages discussion/different viewpoints. I'm reluctant to put it to any kind of vote because I may well chose another option when I look at the logistics and so on:-) However, I'd be happy to hear any suggestions or alternatives. If anyone else is in a postition to give the short installments instead of me, I'd also be very interested to hear that too:-). Thanks to all those who have been reading and participating in the 'Cetasikas' thread. Metta, Sarah ======== #67026 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:22 pm Subject: Re: Must discipline the mind!! sarahprocter... Hi Ramesh, (Ruawachar & all), Unless I'm mistaken, this was your first message here. So, welcome to you as well. Can I encourage you to introduce yourself as well? Do you live in India? I saw both Ken H and Ruawachar had replied. So I'll see if you have anything further to discuss with them before saying more. (Ruawachar, good to see you posting again -- I remember we were have a discussion on the meaning of vipassana. Did any of it make sense?) Metta, Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ramesh Wamanrao Patil" wrote: > > Morality is sufficient for leading a good life. > > > There are several answers to this question. First of all, in > Buddhism there is more than just one goal of the religious life. #67027 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Han, (Melek, Ven Dhammanando & all), --- han tun wrote: > You asked me to give one or many of my reports on any > of the topics that were discussed. > I would very much like to oblige, but I have some > problems. .... S: It is difficult for everyone to hear K.Sujin's voice in particular at times because it's very soft. I left with Nina and Lodewijk and Lodewijk also commented there was much he couldn't hear. Anyway, eventually, you can hear it all again on audio and adjust the volume! .... > So, although I remember the topics we had discussed, > I did not have a correct and complete account of what > others were saying. > I would therefore like to request you to report on my > behalf whatever you think might be useful for other > members. .... S: I'd like to also say that though we may be listening to the same conversations, we all interpret what is said in our own ways and I know you probably didn't agree with everything. Let me start by just briefly mentioning the topics that you and I raised together and just giving a 'one sentence' summary of my understanding of them. You or others present may then be able to help by elaborating, according to your own understanding. 1. The first topic we raised related to a comment you'd made about the way you read suttas. You'd said (if I have it right) that you don't attempt to reconcile suttas which seem to carry a different meaning. So when reading the Anattalakkhana Sutta, for example, you read it as clearly indicating 'no self', nothing to be done or directed. However, when you read a sutta such as the Anapanasati Sutta, for example, you read it as indicating one should bring in sati at will, direct the breath and so on. KS's response was to ask whether realities now could be directed or controlled or made to arise, if I recall. Can we stop seeing from arising? Can we make another reality arise instead? 2. The second topic related to the seeming conflict between the world of conventional truths and paramattha truths. In #65049 and #65070, for example, you'd given the example of how we have our own houses and bank accounts. KS's first response was to ask where our houses are when we are asleep. In other words, if there is no thought about 'my house' at this moment or at the moment we're asleep, does it 'exist'? 3. More discussion on sakkaya-ditthi vs atta-ditthi or attavadupadana(atavaadupaadaana). We looked at the box of biscuits on the table. Are they taken for oneself? No, so when they are taken for really being a box of biscuits (as opposed to visible object, concepts about v.o. and so on), there's wrong view, but it's not sakkaya-ditthi. Still there is atta-ditthi, the opposite of an understanding of anatta. So, atta-ditthi is broader than sakkaya-ditthi. (More under 'attavaupadana' in U.P.) (Like topics 1) and 2), you were very polite, but I think still beg to differ:-)). 4. We brought up the question of yoniso manasikara as discussed before in 'The Debate of King Milinda' #45166, #64828, #64950 etc. This is the passage on wisdom which James originally quoted. When it says that attention is one thing and wisdom another as seen by the fact that certain animals have attention, but not wisdom, does it refer to yoniso manasikara in context? It was discussed how there is yoniso manasikara when any kusala cittas arise. Do certain animals such as goats have kusala? I think the consensus was yes, of a certain level. In other suttas, where yoniso manasikara is referred to, high levels of kusala are being referred to, accompanied by wisdom. So it depends on the context. Again, I think you still have doubts about this topic:-). 5.We raised a technical question about vipaka conditioning vipaka and there was a discussion about how one moment of vipaka, such as seeing consciousness could condition the next moment of vipaka, sampaticchana citta by anantarupanissaya paccaya (proximate decisive-support condition) as I recall. This was given in contrast to when vipaka is a condition for later vipaka to arise by pakatupanissaya paccaya (decisive-support condition)for which there may be a very small interval or a very long interval. I'd like to listen to this part of the discussion again, as I'm a bit vague on the details given. Ven Dhammanando or someone else may be able to add a further comment on this. This topic arose from yr messages #65145,#65146, #65186 and I was also thinking of Melek's good Patthana quote in #? (26th Dec). [Btw, Melek, did you see my reply on 'vedana'? Any comments?) 6. Finally, I think, the question about whether any kind of akusala can arise in the vithi (process) immediately preceding the one in which magga cittas arise. This followed a discussion you'd had with Nina, eg. #66021 in which she'd stressed that lobha or dosa can arise immediately before magga citta. This is correct because any dhamma, any reality can be the object of insight at any time. (We're not here talking about anagamis and arahants). This is why the path is all about understanding and detachment towards what has been conditioned, even if it's strong kilesa. This is why the only real obstacle to the development of vipassana is wrong view. Pls let me know if I've made any mistakes and I'd be glad if you'd elaborate on your own understandings and/or perhaps give your own impression of the occasion. It was rather a long afternoon as we arrived early. I apologise for this and hope you got home safely. Metta, Sarah =========== #67028 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: >>S:....'What is meditation?', she asked several >> times... > >J: Oh Wow, soooo deep....then I would have asked her, "Oh yeah, well, what > is the sound of one hand clapping?" LOL! .... S: LOL! I said you'd better join us, remember:-). Could have been an interesting discussion between you. But if that had been it, what would we have done for the rest of the 3 hrs? Sat in silence? Joop would have approved, more lols.... Loved your post quoting the Abhidhamma to Ken H....wow! Hope you find a way to sleep without harming the mosquitoes. Bill suggested a net. You could also look into putting wire screening on the windows. Also, when we travel south in Thailand, they seem to have some gadget now which plugs into the socket and keeps mosquitoes away. Not sure what it is. I personally don't like mosquito coils much, but use them outside if need be. At Kaeng Krajan, sitting in the garden in the evening having discussion, there were many mosquitoes. I think we mostly wore long sleeves, long pants and socks and used different kinds of mosquito sprays and lotions. I've also found my Japanese cream that I've been using for my shingles is also great for mosquito bites:-). As a general comment, I think that when killing insects is one's habit (or the breaking of any of the other precepts), one follows the habit automatically. In the same way, if non-harming is one's habit, it doesn't even occur to one to harm insects and they really become a lot less trouble, a lot less disturbing to one. That might be a little controversial and I may not have used the right words. Metta, Sarah ===== #67029 From: Date: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:57 pm Subject: Dhammapada sihalene60 Wisdom springs from meditation; without meditation wisdom wanes. Having known these two paths of progress and decline, let a man so conduct himself that his wisdom may increase. Dhammapada 282 #67030 From: han tun Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 1 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for leading me the way to further elaborate on our discussions at the Foundation. Your note has been very useful. I will give my comments one topic at a time. -------------------- Sarah: 1. The first topic we raised related to a comment you'd made about the way you read suttas. You'd said (if I have it right) that you don't attempt to reconcile suttas which seem to carry a different meaning. So when reading the Anattalakkhana Sutta, for example, you read it as clearly indicating 'no self', nothing to be done or directed. However, when you read a sutta such as the Anapanasati Sutta, for example, you read it as indicating one should bring in sati at will, direct the breath and so on. KS's response was to ask whether realities now could be directed or controlled or made to arise, if I recall. Can we stop seeing from arising? Can we make another reality arise instead? Han: Your summary of my points is correct. I did not hear properly what KS said. I think she said something like what you wrote. As a matter of fact, I did not expect any response to how I study suttas which have different connotations. When I study Anattalakkhana Sutta I accept the Buddha’s teaching that the five aggregates are anatta and we cannot do anything about them. We cannot control them or command them. But when I study Anapanasati Sutta, I also accept the Buddha’s exhortation that we should direct our sati to in-breath and out-breath, which means we should be able to raise sati at will. The two suttas seem to carry a different meaning, as you put it. But I did not try to reconcile the two. I just study and accept each sutta in its own context. The reason is that one of the Buddha’s attributes is “sugato”. The Buddha never said anything that is not truth. It must only be my short-coming that I find the two suttas different. In this way, I accept both suttas in their own context. I have no problem in studying the suttas in this way. Other topics to be continued. Respectfully, Han #67031 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:12 am Subject: Lachen und Weinen (Was: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Joop (Jon and Howard), > Hold onto your seats, but here comes a big shocker- I am going to > agree with Jon on this and disagree with both of you, Joop and > Howard. Yes, the assimilation is beginning. ;-)) I don't believe > that crying can ever be rooted in kusala. Crying is always rooted in akusala. > Hallo James, Jon, Howard It's a long time ago I thought systematically about what is crying and what is laughing But it's clear (to me) that there are different ways of doing it (Doing? It is done, it happens!). So it is useless (and wrong) to make general remarks about it. The same to taking together crying and laughing: there are ressemblances but also there are differences. James for some reasons you only talked about 'crying'. I don't know why. There are many kinds of crying, perhaps most, that are akusala, I don't doubt. (In fact better not use the therm 'akusala', better to say: 'egocentric'). But there are also moments of crying in one life that are not akusala: moments of SURRENDER. Most laughing is egocentric too, or hatred (making ridicule somebody), or based in being attached. But again: some moments of laughing are moment of DETACHEMENT. Another point, laughing, using humor, is also a way of communicating. Some budhhist teachers use it in teaching the Dhamma; for example in Zen, but also the Dalai Lama does, but it's true that it does not belong to the Theravada-culture (but there are exceptions). I'm afraid Abhidhamma-texts are not a good source for detecting what laughing is and what crying is. By far the best book (philosophy, James!) about it, is: Lachen und Weinen; eine Untersuchung nach den Grenzen Menschlichen Verhaltens by Helmuth Plessner (Amazon says "Laughing and Crying: A Study of the Limits of Human Behavior": not available). Metta Joop #67032 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Must discipline the mind!! rameshat27 Hi, I am living in India, city is Mumbai... I worked as S/W Engg as Profession... I am very much engaged here with Vippasana International Academy,Dhammagiri Igatpuri. Some Brief Introduction about it:-> "This is the international Academy which offer courses in Vipassana Meditation as taught by S.N. Goenkaand his assistant teachers in the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin" Dhammagiri Igatpuri :->"The first meditation center in this tradition established outside of Burma was begun by Mr. Goenka in 1975 at Igatpuri, a small village 100km northeast of Bombay, in the State of Maharashtra. As the technique has florished and spread throughout India and the rest of the world, there are now numerous Centers within India itself. While some of these Centers are in various states of development, many offer the same 10 Day courses in all languages, including the regional Indian language where the Center is located." If anybody can find out the centres all over the world, please visit this link:- www.dhamma.org The technique of Vipassana Meditation is taught at ten-day residential courses during which participants learn the basics of the method, and practice sufficiently to experience its beneficial results. ------------------------------ There are no charges for the courses - not even to cover the cost of food and accommodation. All expenses are met by donations from people who, having completed a course and experienced the benefits of Vipassana, wish to give others the opportunity to also benefit. ------------------------------ There are numerous Centers in India and elsewhere in Asia ; eight Centers in North America ; three Centers in Latin America; seven Centers in Europe ; seven Centers in Australia/New Zealand ; one Center in the Far East; one Center in the Middle East and one Center in Africa . Each Center maintains its own schedule of regular ten day Vipassana courses. In addition, ten day courses are frequently held at other locationsoutside of Centers as they are arranged by local students of Vipassana in those areas. An alphabetical list of worldwide course locations is available as well as a graphical interface of course locations worldwide and in India and Nepal . With Metta Ramesh Patil On 1/15/07, sarahprocterabbott wrote: > > Hi Ramesh, (Ruawachar & all), > > Unless I'm mistaken, this was your first message here. So, welcome to > you as well. Can I encourage you to introduce yourself as well? Do > you live in India? <....> #67033 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, > > .... > S: LOL! I said you'd better join us, remember:-). Could have been an > interesting discussion between you. But if that had been it, what would we > have done for the rest of the 3 hrs? Sat in silence? Joop would have > approved, more lols.... > Hallo Sarah Maybe, but I repeat my question: has anybody of your group tried to explain to mrs. Sujin what meditation is? Metta Joop #67034 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:37 am Subject: Excellant Progress Of Dhamma In India!!! rameshat27 Hi, I am living in India, city is Mumbai... <...> With Metta Ramesh Patil, *Selected for Young Bodhisatva Programme In Thailand, In 2005* *Mumbai, India,S/W Engg.* #67035 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Joop, (Phil & all), --- Joop wrote: > Maybe, but I repeat my question: has anybody of your group tried to > explain to mrs. Sujin what meditation is? .... S: Usually, in her questions such as 'What is Meditation' or her comments such as 'Forget Satipatthana!', she is trying to help those present really consider what the realities are at this very moment, rather than just clinging to terms and labels we use so freely without questioning what they really mean and what the Buddha really meant when he used them. For example, someone might say that meditation refers to sitting quietly and focussing on the breath for a starter. Sujin would perhaps ask how we know that such focussing is kusala. And what about this moment? Now we're sitting in our computer chairs discussing dhamma. What are the realities appearing now? Is there seeing? Is there hearing? Is there visible object? Is there sound? Did the Buddha not encourage us to develop an understanding of such realities appearing right now? Is there a clear understanding of the distinction between seeing and visible object appearing now? If not, there's not much use in talking about the development of satipatthana. Clearly understanding the distinction between namas and rupas is the foundation. And the clear intellectual understanding of this is the foundation for the direct understnading of such dhammas. Many people do not warm to her 'being put on the spot' approach to explaining dhamma or answering questions. For myself, I find the approach really helps me to consider and reflect on the understanding I might take for granted and really helps me to see all the teachings as applying to this very moment. So, how would you answer her question, 'What is Meditation?', Joop? I could have just asked you this at the beginning of this note, but written discussions are a little different from live discussions in which it's easier to have a quick 'to and fro'.... Metta, Sarah p.s Phil, if you're reading this, I brought up one or two of your points of comments which 'sound unlike her' - let me know if you're reading (on or off-list) before I mention them. She agreed with you (and I) that one needs a small correction. ======= #67036 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: vedana sarahprocter... Hi Bill J, Larry, Howard & all, You've been having a good discussion on the meaning of 'internal' and 'external' in the Satipatthana Sutta while we've been away. --- bjones6513 wrote: >I don't see how contemplating anything about > someone else's body leads to anything but desire, craving, hatred, and > aversion. Plus any contemplation of this sort involves conjecture. The > only reality that can truly seen is within one's own body and mind. ... S: I agree that by contemplating another's cittas or body, it is conjecture and not the understanding of reality. I think Ken H made some good comments before in the 'squirrel consciousness' thread. As he said, by directly understanding what eye consciousness is, it is known as not 'mine' or anybody else's. All kinds of eye consciousness (whether 'yours' or 'the squirrel's')share the same characteristics. Citta is citta, eye consciousness is eye consciousness. The truths are the same for all. As understanding develops, there is less idea of 'here' and 'there', 'internal' and 'external' or 'mine' and 'yours' in this ultimate sense. How does this sound to you? I think it's an important and difficult point. ..... > > Here is B. ~Nanamoli or B. Bodhi's (?) summation of the commentary > on > > internal and external in the MN Satipatthana: > > > > "MA: "Internally": contemplating the breathing in his own body. > > "Externally": contemplating the breathing occurring in the body of > > another. "Internally and externally": contemplating the breathing in > his > > own body and in the body of another alternately, with uninterrupted > > attention. A similar explanation applies to the refrain that follows > > each of the other sections, except that under the contemplation of > > feeling, mind, and mind-objects, the contemplation externally, apart > > from those possessing telepathic powers, must be inferential." .... S: I understand it to refer to the understanding and awareness of feeling, mind etc as conditioned by another's too. For example, we see a child crying and we feel sad too. The reality at that moment is sadness, conditioned by the child's crying. There can be awareness of sadness if it appears or of any other dhamma at the time. .... > > > > Nyanaponika Thera says mindfulness of internal and external is meant > to > > lead to a comprehensive understanding of the dhamma in the sense > that it > > is this way not just for me but for everyone. ... S: I think this is similar to what KenH and I said above about citta. It's not by thinking but by directly knowing the characteristic of that dhamma. Metta, Sarah p.s I haven't read all the posts yet, so many of my comments may be redundant. ======= #67037 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Joop, (Phil & all), >... > > So, how would you answer her question, 'What is Meditation?', Joop? > ... Dear Sarah, all There are different ways to get awakenened, I think. This is called upaya (skilful means) in Sankrit. The Zen-like method of mrs. Sujin is perhaps one of them. Part of it is not answering questions to the teacher but asking back another question. I will try to answer to your question, but first your answer to my question (although you did not say this) is: nobody of us tried to give answer to mrs. Sujin's question 'what is meditation' because all knew it was a rethorical question, a means to start a Sujin-treatment to who tried to respond. I know this technique, but I prefer a horizontal (equal) relation in a Dhamma-discussion. About the way mrs. Sujin possibly responded: see the short exchange between Larry and me this week. I try to answer but only if you promise not to give me the Sujin- treatment "is there seeing now" etcetera, that only annoys me. I do meditation (vipassana a la Mahasi, metta-meditation and some concentration exercises) for three reasons: (1) The Buddha told us to do the Noble Eightfold Path and right mindfulness and right concentration are two of the aspects of them; I try to do them all, again and again. (2) I have good experiences in being mindful in my meditation (there is hearing now, there is smelling now, there is thinking now etc) because it helps me in being mindful in daily life. (3) I have some good experiences in doing metta-meditation because it softens me. Sarah, I have another question, to you (so no Sujin-treatment): The Buddha made many disticntions in his Teachings. One of them (although I don't know this words occur in the Suttas) is between kusala and akusala. I discover in myself this dichotomy is not really my dichotomy. I prefer to think about behavior being rooted in hate, desire and delusion and the opposite roots; I prefer to talk about attachment and not the abstract 'akusala' My question: why of all the lists the Buddha used to explain the Dhamma exactly this one 'kusala versus akusala' is so popular in Abhidhamma? Metta Joop #67038 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" > wrote: > >> .... >> >> To my understanding of the texts, crying, like laughing, can only be >> > akusala. > > ... > > Hallo Jon > > I don't belief this. Which texts? Not that of ven. Buddhhaghosa , I > hope? > I have no idea off-hand which text or where I should look to find it, but I'm sure I'll come cross it some time, and I'll let you know then. (The text I have in mind is the one that describes the various kinds of laughter (from the giggle to the hearty belly-laugh). If anyone knows the text, please share.) > The person who states is, is a bad psychologist. > I wouldn't know about that. But I'm inclined to think the study of dhamma and the proper practice of psychology can be pursued simultaneously. Jon #67039 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just joined jonoabb Hi Bill Welcome to the list from me, too. Thanks for the detailed intro. I hope you find that time spent with us does indeed aid you in your growth as a Buddhist. Jon Bill wrote: > Hello everyone, > > My name is Bill. I am 35 years old and am currently living in Atlanta, > Georgia. My interest in Buddhadharma began about 15 years ago, but it wasn't > until 2002 that I started to take a more serious look at the teachings. What > I mean by a "more serious look" is an attempt to consciously apply (i.e. > practice) what I can understand from the teachings. > ... > I am grateful for the opportunity to join this list. I feel it will aid > me in my growth as a Buddhist. Thank you. > > Namaste, > Bill > #67040 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >> .... >> S: LOL! I said you'd better join us, remember:-). Could have been an >> interesting discussion between you. But if that had been it, what >> > would we > >> have done for the rest of the 3 hrs? Sat in silence? Joop would have >> approved, more lols.... >> >> > Hallo Sarah > > Maybe, but I repeat my question: has anybody of your group tried to > explain to mrs. Sujin what meditation is? > In addition to the comments given by Sarah, I'd like to point out that the question is not seeking an *explanation* so much as a *definition*. For example, is it being used as a synonym for samatha bhavana and/or vipassana bhavana, or does it refer to particular ways in which samatha/vipassana is developed, and so on. Only when this is known can the discussion proceed meaningfully. Aj. Sujin may need to ask the question more than once if, for example, meditation is being used in different ways within the same discussion. Some people who use the term do so without any clear idea of exactly what they mean by it (this would not apply to dsg members, I know ;-)). Jon #67041 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Scott Scott Duncan wrote: > Dear Jon, > ... > I think, a dream simply being 'thoughts', one need not give it any > more or any less credibility than 'thoughts' during the daytime. > Exactly. > ... > As an object of clinging the thoughts that are dreams are quite > compelling, since they are in such a different form than the thoughts > of the day. It is, I think, this vivid, enticing and compelling form > the thoughts-that-are-dreams take that is problematic. That, I think, > combined with a desire for mystical experience. And this latter is a > difficult thing to shake. > Yes. The language of dreams and the language of waking thinking is concepts in both cases, but in dreams the concepts tend to be more in the form of images than words/sounds. > ... > A point I think is very important in all this, and would value your > thoughts on, is that the only object of citta worth 'venerating' (and > this is only a word since detachment is always a prefered necessity - > albeit a difficult one to achieve) would be Nibbaana. And this > whether it be just a glimpse, as with magga and phala citta, or the > whole Path. > Well I hesitate to talk about nibbana as being worth venerating. Perhaps 'aspiring to' might be closer. But then we don't really have any proper conception of what nibbana is anyway, so it's all rather academic. > ... > A technical point also, when you say, 'Citta dreams', do you mean this > in just an ordinary sense? In other words, we're not talking about a > special class of citta, one whose sole function it is to dream, are > we. This is just an impersonal dhamma with a dream/concept as object. > Yes. In none of the classifications of cittas that I know of are 'dreaming' cittas classified separately. > ... > Right. Hard to see a dream as any one of these. I would wonder > though whether pa~n~na is capable of arising no matter when - that is, > I'm thinking that even during dreaming pa~n~na could arise and know > the quality of a citta. I'm not sure about that though. If you have > time, maybe you can say more about this. > Sorry, but I have no idea about this. But I somehow doubt it. There are those who believe in so-called 'lucid dreaming' which they claim to be panna or some kind of kusala awareness, but it has no basis in the texts as far as I know. Jon #67042 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Joop (Jon and Howard), > > > I still don't think that crying is wholesome; natural > yes, wholesome no. > This is well put. When we point out that a state of consciousness is likely to be akusala, we are not saying it is 'bad' or not natural. Nor are we in any way 'judging' the person in whom that state of consciousness arises, since we understand that aksuala is the 'normal' state of our own consciousness. Jon #67043 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:35 am Subject: Re: Meditation (again) scottduncan2 Dear Bill, Sorry for the delay on the below, I've been a bit busy (plus I was waiting for the heat to subside, although here, I think, that will only be when one of the hells freezes over). B: "That's fine but it does not seem to be the case much of the time especially on DSG." S: "The good friend in the Dhamma, I think, is the one who is able to speak of the Dhamma such that 'he' or 'she' disappears and such that there is only Dhamma." An opinion: I've been reading here for, I don't know, maybe a year, so can't claim much expertise. This meditation debate is older than us, man. And there are different 'styles' of discourse here. I think its very fair to say that there is much faith in evidence. I personally find myself experiencing aversion or frustration from time to time. Here's a devastating secret: Despite the lofty topics (no joke, I mean that), this is a group of people subject to the same mundane dynamics of any group of people. As such, and you can watch it like a train wreck, you'll have a clearly stated objective which will be constantly derailed by ordinary, group-level stuff. If you review the past couple of weeks, for example, the aim of Dhamma discussion becomes subverted by a sort of primitive fight-flight vibe causing primitive fights or flights from fights to happen. And, not to mention, 'When the cat's away, the mice will play.' Or how one or the other individual becomes some sort of temporary pariah to suit the emotional needs of a given moment. It no big deal. Its natural. It happens anywhere. We could be met to discuss hockey and even that would go by the boards in favour of dropping the gloves and 'going'. It'll keep happening, off and on. What are you going to do? I've learned a lot on this thread, but have a different goal in this thread than perhaps you do. I've only known of the Dhamma for a couple of years and really hadn't become all caught up in 'meditation'. I could tell that it was supposed to be the 'thing to do, man' but, and this was just how I saw it, I don't like to do things for no good reason. I've not been convinced and so am trying to get a sense of why some people see 'meditation' as they do, when I can't - even when reading the same texts. But as far as Dhamma goes, I meant in the above to suggest that sometimes a guy has to just ignore the people - I don't mean in a rude way - while looking into the message to see if Dhamma has been expressed. And even if it doesn't seem like it has, one can then seek the Dhamma on a particular subject and express it one's self. I think I wrote the kalaayanamitta thing to suggest that, when it comes to Dhamma, the person 'disappears' (and I'm speaking conventionally here but we could always wait for this to rekindle the next cataclysmic debate). It's like what was said in SN 22,87(5): "Enough, Vakkali! Why do you want to see this foul body? One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma. For in seeing the Dhamma, Vakkali, one sees me; and in seeing me, one sees the Dhamma." And then (SN 1,20(10): "I have not abandoned what is directly visible, friend, in order to pursue what takes time. I have abandoned what takes time in order to pursue what is directly visible. For the Blessed One, friend, has stated that sensual pleasures are time-consuming, full of suffering, full of despair, and the danger in them is still greater, while this Dhamma is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise." Anyway, somewhere amongst all the rhetoric is Dhamma. I learn a lot here. And sometimes that is in spite of annoyance (and I'm pretty sure that I, too, am highly annoying at times). Gotta go. What do you think? Sincerely, Scott. #67044 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon and All, > > Jon: Again, not what I believe or have ever said. The question is > whether, when the Buddha spoke of guarding the sense-doors, etc, he > was describing intentional actions. That is an inference, but not a > necessary one, that some like to draw from the suttas. It's quite > possible to read the suttas without making that assumption. > > James: We have discussed this somewhat in the past, but never in any > depth. I would like to discuss this issue with you Jon, in depth, if > you don't mind. (I have no classes to teach this week as the > students are preparing for finals, so I have lots of time on my > hands. ;-)) > Very happy to discuss with you ;-)) > As I understand it, you see the suttas as describing occurrences, not > instructing the doing of intentional activities; while I see the > suttas in the exact opposite way- as instructing the doing of > intentional activities to create the conditions for those > occurrences. This is a major difference and will completely change > the meaning of the suttas depending on how one views them! > Agreed! > In order to get to the heart of this matter, we have to know what the > Buddha's intentions were. When he gave a sermon, did he intend for > the listeners to simply know the circumstances of higher awakening, > or did he intend for them to emulate the models he described so that > they would achieve the same higher awakening he described? So, > again, to know, we have to examine the Buddha's intentions. > > There aren't a lot of suttas which describe the Buddha's thought > processes, but I found one on the Internet (and there might be > others). It is a teaching that the Buddha gave to his son, Rahula. > ... > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html > > ... > > I think it is clear that the Buddha wanted his listeners to do the > things he described to them, but he didn't directly tell them so > because that would be too pushy. No one wants to hear, "You should > do this... you should do that…." The Buddha taught by example and it > was up to his listeners to follow the examples he gave or not. > > What do you (or anyone) think about this? > I have no major disagreement with what you say, but I'd point out that the Buddha knew the extent to which a person was capable of comprehending and immediately applying the teachings and so was able to pitch his sutta at that level. In the present case the listener (Ven Rahula) was ready for enlightenment (the sutta ends with his enlightenment), so he must have already had very highly developed panna, I think. The same teaching may not be at all appropriate for someone with much less-developed panna. Thanks for bringing up the matter. Jon #67045 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:50 am Subject: the stuart davis show rjkjp1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juElohSYUiM #67046 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Andrew Nice to see you here again ;-)) Andrew wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" > wrote: > the so-called jhana factors include both piti (joy) and > >> sukha (pleasant feeling), and these must each be abandoned if the >> next higher stage of jhana is to be attained. >> >> So the jhana practitioner sees danger in even kusala joy and pleasant >> feeling. >> > > Hello Jon > > Was thinking about this the other day and how jhana is (sometimes) > referred to as "dukkha patipada" (a distressful path). > > Nyanatiloka's Dictionary lists 4 modes of progress to deliverance: > 1. painful progress with slow comprehension > 2. painful progress with quick comprehension > 3. pleasant progress with slow comprehension > 4. pleasant progress with quick comprehension > [see "patipada"] > > Does this mean that jhana does not necessarily involve sukha? > Thanks for mentioning this interesting point. As I understand it, these 4 'modes of progress' refer to the rate of progress and the amount of effort required, rather than to the jhana factors present. I believe the jhana factors are the same in all cases. Jon #67047 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:25 am Subject: Re: the stuart davis show scottduncan2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juElohSYUiM > "Hinayana form whore" ...Too much, man! Hilarious. S. #67048 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Dear Sarah, all Perhaps I forgot something in my answer to 'what is meditation': "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " (DN 22) Metta Joop #67049 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the stuart davis show upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/15/07 8:54:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juElohSYUiM > ======================== Well, Robert, I have now learned a lot about you that I didn't know before! LOLOL!!! (Apologies for laughing, Jon - I was overcome by akusala!) Hey, the surrogate sitters program is interesting! Any DSG takers? ;-)) With metta, Howard #67050 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop >> I have no idea off-hand which text or where I should look to find it, > but I'm sure I'll come cross it some time, and I'll let you know then. > Jon, That's a promise! (of you) See also my mail 'Lachen und Weinen" Joop #67051 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:49 pm Subject: Re: What is Meditation? buddhatrue Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > > > > Hi James, > > > > .... > > S: LOL! I said you'd better join us, remember:-). Could have been an > > interesting discussion between you. But if that had been it, what > would we > > have done for the rest of the 3 hrs? Sat in silence? Joop would have > > approved, more lols.... > > > Hallo Sarah > > Maybe, but I repeat my question: has anybody of your group tried to > explain to mrs. Sujin what meditation is? The thing is that KS knows full well what meditation is; no one needs to explain it to her. She lives in Thailand (a Buddhist country), she has her own radio show discussing Buddhism, she speaks on Buddhism at public gatherings quite frequently- she would have to be a complete idiot to not know what meditation is! I believe that by answering the question "Why do you discourage sitting meditation?" by repeating the counter-question "What is meditation?" – she was attempting to stupefy her audience: stu•pe•fy 1.to put into a state of little or no sensibility; benumb the faculties of; put into a stupor. 2.to stun, as with a narcotic, a shock, or a strong emotion. 3.to overwhelm with amazement; astound; astonish. In other words, she wanted to leave her audience speechless and then she wouldn't really have to explain herself; yet her audience would be left with the uneasy feeling that somehow they were at fault. It is a trick, a gimmick, a game, a way to avoid directly answering. The Buddha called it "eel-wriggling'. So, if I had been there, I would have seen through her little rouse and would have turned it back on her. If she would ask me such an outlandish question, I would ask her another one in return! ;-)) (And nothing can stupefy quite like a koan can! ;-)) Really, it's utter nonsense. I don't know exactly why the intelligent members of this group don't see readily through her sham. I think it's because they are too willing to give her the benefit of the doubt (???). Metta, James #67052 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:57 pm Subject: Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo James So be it Metta Joop #67053 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I have no major disagreement with what you say, but I'd point out that > the Buddha knew the extent to which a person was capable of > comprehending and immediately applying the teachings and so was able to > pitch his sutta at that level. James: Okay. This isn't directly related to the point I brought up; it is a different matter. > > In the present case the listener (Ven Rahula) was ready for > enlightenment (the sutta ends with his enlightenment), so he must have > already had very highly developed panna, I think. James: Yes, that's true. (I mistakenly wrote that Rahula reaches sotapanna, but on closer inspection I see that it was some of the devas in attendance who achieved sotappana. I missed the word 'devas' when I was reading.) But, again, this doesn't directly clash with what I wrote. > > The same teaching may not be at all appropriate for someone with much > less-developed panna. James: Okay, it's like we are two ships that passed in the night. ;- )) I will assume it is my fault and I didn't make myself clear enough. > > Thanks for bringing up the matter. James: Sure, anytime. I love talking to myself. ;-)) > > Jon > Metta, James #67054 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:50 am Subject: TYPO Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/14/07 8:00:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka writes: > In general, what is unwholesome is not to be pursued though it may easily > be somewhat tolerated in its less innocuous forms. > ==================== In the foregoing, either 'less' should have been 'more', or 'innocuous' should have been 'noxious'. With metta, Howard #67055 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop > That's a promise! (of you) > OK then! Please feel free to remind me later. > See also my mail 'Lachen und Weinen" > Yes, but it just puts up a theory ;-)). How should we evaluate it? Jon #67056 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > >> I have no major disagreement with what you say, but I'd point out >> that the Buddha knew the extent to which a person was capable of >> comprehending and immediately applying the teachings and so was >> able to pitch his sutta at that level. >> > > James: Okay. This isn't directly related to the point I brought up; > it is a different matter. > I think it is related. Your point if I've understood is that when the Buddha described the development of the path he was intending his listeners (and those of us reading the suttas now) to do something at the time. What I'm saying is that Rahula didn't have to 'do' anything because he was already 'there'. He needed only to have something pointed out to him. It's like learning any additional knowledge about a complex subject: if you're ready for the incremental piece of information, it 'fits' exactly with what you already know and is immediately obvious, otherwise it does' really make sense even if you can kind of see how it might be related. >> In the present case the listener (Ven Rahula) was ready for >> enlightenment (the sutta ends with his enlightenment), so >> he must have already had very highly developed panna, I think. >> > > James: Yes, that's true. (I mistakenly wrote that Rahula reaches > sotapanna, but on closer inspection I see that it was some of the > devas in attendance who achieved sotappana. I missed the > word 'devas' when I was reading.) But, again, this doesn't directly > clash with what I wrote. > Agreed. >> The same teaching may not be at all appropriate for someone >> with much less-developed panna. >> > > James: Okay, it's like we are two ships that passed in the night. ;- > )) I will assume it is my fault and I didn't make myself clear > enough. > > >> Thanks for bringing up the matter. >> > > James: Sure, anytime. I love talking to myself. ;-)) > ;-)) ;-)) So we agree on the general reading of the sutta. Perhaps you could explain again the conclusions you draw from it, and how you apply those conclusion to your reading of other suttas. Thanks. Jon #67057 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the stuart davis show jonoabb Hi Howard (and James) >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juElohSYUiM >> ======================== >> > Well, Robert, I have now learned a lot about you that I didn't know > before! LOLOL!!! (Apologies for laughing, Jon - I was overcome by akusala!) > ;-)) ;-)) Let me quote James: akusala but natural. And akusala citta can also be the object of awareness, eh James? Jon #67058 From: "Bill" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:45 am Subject: Re: Just joined bill_zenn Hi Sarah and list. Thank you for your reply, and your welcome. > The point is to > read/listen and consider carefully what we hear and to develop > understanding through the 'practice'. This is a great point, and I concur. I try to stay balanced in this regard, meaning while I do feel a teacher would be helpful - someone with experience of the path, someone who has cultivated compassion, loving-kindness, and who is knowledgeable about the dharma, and willing to act as a sort of mentor or guide - I will still need to come to my own understanding, and put into practice what I learn. Nobody else can do that for me. It's just helpful, I feel, to have others around with more experience in doing the work. Kind of like if I wanted to learn how to be a mechanic, I would start reading manuals, and talking to other mechanics, perhaps even go to a trade school, but ultimately it comes down to popping open the hood, rolling up my sleeves, and getting some hands on experience. :) > In any case, I hope we can be a 'Sangha', a helpful community for you to > share your comments/questions and considerations. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to have this interaction. The Internet can be a wonderful tool sometimes. > If you would like any > recommendations of any books or resources (Theravada), I know that many > friends here will be glad to give their suggestions too. That would be awesome. Any recommendations people feel moved to share will be appreciated. I am currently reading "Eight Mindful Steps to Happiness" by Bhante Henepola Gunaratana. I'm really getting a lot out of this book. It's opening me up to putting the Noble Eightfold Path into practice. I like how Bhante Gunaratana uses examples from everyday life, and his emphasis on mindfulness. > [In 'Useful Posts' in the 'files' of DSG, there are posts saved under 'New > to the list and New to Dhamma' with suggestions, but of course, you're not > 'New to Dhamma'!] I will browse the files. Thanks for the pointer. Well...I still consider myself new to dharma - especially Theravada. :) > *We have another Bill,(Bill J) who also joined quite recently... Duly noted. I will probably be somewhat quiet here at first. I plan on reading through some of the files, and past archives to get a feel for the type of discussions the have occurred already. I don't want to be a burden asking questions that have already be covered or interrupt the flow of current discussions. I just thought it would be rude of me to join and not say hello. :) Namaste, Bill Zenn #67059 From: "Bill Zenn" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just joined bill_zenn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Bill > > Welcome to the list from me, too. Thanks for the detailed intro. > > I hope you find that time spent with us does indeed aid you in your > growth as a Buddhist. Thank you Jon. I'm looking forward to interaction in the forum. Bill Zenn #67060 From: han tun Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 2 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, This is the continuation of the topics that you and I raised together at the Foundation. Sarah: 2. The second topic related to the seeming conflict between the world of conventional truths and paramattha truths. In #65049 and #65070, for example, you'd given the example of how we have our own houses and bank accounts. KS's first response was to ask where our houses are when we are asleep. In other words, if there is no thought about 'my house' at this moment or at the moment we're asleep, does it 'exist'? Han: Again, your short summary is correct and right to the point. From the point of view of paramattha truths (paramattha sacca), it is true that, in reality, it is not my house or my bank account, because there is no ‘I’. I understand that I must abandon, to the extent possible, the notion of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ (atta, attaniya). If I were to talk about this to other people, I would have said the same thing that the participants at the meeting said to me. I might even add a verse or two from Dhammapada. Dhammapada verse 62: puttaa matthi dhana matthi iti baalo viha~n~nati attaa hi aatano natthi kuto puttaa kuto dhanam “I have sons, I have wealth”; with this, the fool is afflicted. Indeed, he himself is not his own, how can sons and wealth be his? This kind of consideration is very useful for me, because it helps me in reducing attachment and promoting detachment to loved ones and material possessions. However, in conventional truths (sammuti sacca) my house is my house and my bank account is my bank account. They may not exist when I am asleep, as KS put it, but when I wake up they will still be there. If I accept both the paramattha truths and conventional truths, the two truths can go along hand-in-hand. But if I try to force the paramattha truths upon the conventional truths, then there is, at least for me, the ‘conflict.’ For those who can do this without any conflict, I have only my admiration and respect. Other topics to be continued. Respectfully, Han #67061 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:27 pm Subject: Re: What is Meditation? buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > >>S:....'What is meditation?', she asked several > >> times... > > > >J: Oh Wow, soooo deep....then I would have asked her, "Oh yeah, well, > what > > is the sound of one hand clapping?" LOL! > .... > S: LOL! I said you'd better join us, remember:-). Could have been an > interesting discussion between you. But if that had been it, what would we > have done for the rest of the 3 hrs? Sat in silence? Joop would have > approved, more lols.... James: Who knows, maybe I will join you all one day. But, funny, I had a dream that I met the whole group in Denver, Colorado, USA (of all places) and that it didn't go very well. There was mingling of the guests before the talk, around some buffet style food, and everyone was giving me the cold shoulder- except one woman. She was very nice and very beautiful; we sat down at a table and had some small talk. I looked at everyone giving me dirty looks and told her that I thought the people there didn't like me very much, but I was glad that she at least liked me. She replied, "Oh, I hated you! I really hated you!! But now I'm not so sure anymore...." I was surprised and asked her who she was. She laughed and answered, "You don't know who I am? I'm Christine." Don't know what that dream meant, if anything. ;-)) > > Loved your post quoting the Abhidhamma to Ken H....wow! Hope you find a > way to sleep without harming the mosquitoes. Bill suggested a net. You > could also look into putting wire screening on the windows. Also, when we > travel south in Thailand, they seem to have some gadget now which plugs > into the socket and keeps mosquitoes away. Not sure what it is. I > personally don't like mosquito coils much, but use them outside if need > be. Actually, since I have read that article and decided not to kill the mosquitoes anymore, they have stopped biting me. I send them thoughts of goodwill, mentally tell them that if they bite me it is okay because it must be my kamma, and I don't violently try to hit them away- I just gently wave them away if they come close to my face. I still have a lot of mosquitoes in my apartment (there are screens on the windows but they come into the building and get in), but they have stopped biting me during the day or at night. No kidding!!…:-) Metta, James #67062 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the stuart davis show buddhatrue Hi Jon (and Howard), > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juElohSYUiM > >> ======================== > >> > > Well, Robert, I have now learned a lot about you that I didn't know > > before! LOLOL!!! (Apologies for laughing, Jon - I was overcome by akusala!) > > > > ;-)) ;-)) > > Let me quote James: akusala but natural. > > And akusala citta can also be the object of awareness, eh James? I suppose so- unless it is too deeply rooted in delusion. > > Jon > Metta, James #67063 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method buddhatrue Hi Jon, Thank you for your further post. Now we have some definite clash and the discussion could be worthwhile. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi James > > buddhatrue wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > > wrote: > > > > > >> I have no major disagreement with what you say, but I'd point out > >> that the Buddha knew the extent to which a person was capable of > >> comprehending and immediately applying the teachings and so was > >> able to pitch his sutta at that level. > >> > > > > James: Okay. This isn't directly related to the point I brought up; > > it is a different matter. > > > > I think it is related. Your point if I've understood is that when the > Buddha described the development of the path he was intending his > listeners (and those of us reading the suttas now) to do something at > the time. What I'm saying is that Rahula didn't have to 'do' anything > because he was already 'there'. James: I really don't see how you can come to this conclusion. Yes, Rahula had a high degree of panna (wisdom) but he wasn't "there" yet- he wasn't enlightened. The Buddha tells him exactly what he needs to "do" to become enlightened (and "doing" isn't always physical, usually it's mental): "Seeing thus, Rahula, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with consciousness at the eye, disenchanted with contact at the eye. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye as a mode of feeling, a mode of perception, a mode of fabrication, or a mode of consciousness: With that, too, he grows disenchanted. "He grows disenchanted with the ear... "He grows disenchanted with the nose... "He grows disenchanted with the tongue... "He grows disenchanted with the body... "He grows disenchanted with the intellect, disenchanted with ideas, disenchanted with consciousness at the intellect, disenchanted with contact at the intellect. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect as a mode of feeling, a mode of perception, a mode of fabrication, or a mode of consciousness: With that, too, he grows disenchanted. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" So, the Buddha tells Rahula that in order for him to become enlightened he must become disenchanted with the six sense spheres and their objects. At the beginning of the sutta, he was still enchanted with the six sense spheres, so he has to become disenchanted. This is doing something. How else could you see it? He needed only to have something > pointed out to him. > James: What he had to have pointed out to him is what he had to mentally "do" in order to become enlightened. I am getting the impression that you don't think any type of mental action is a "doing". Is that corrrect? > It's like learning any additional knowledge about a complex subject: if > you're ready for the incremental piece of information, it 'fits' exactly > with what you already know and is immediately obvious, otherwise it > does' really make sense even if you can kind of see how it might be related. James: Well, here is where we are really far apart. I don't view the function of wisdom as like the function of knowledge (intellect). In short, I see knowledge as adding things and I see wisdom as taking away things (defilements). Adding things, such as in learning a foreign language, is much easier because you build on previous information. Wisdom doesn't have the function of adding things and it is much harder to come by. Also, the result isn't like one thing "fitting" into something else, as you describe, but something being taken away (defilements) to reveal something entirely new (insight). > > So we agree on the general reading of the sutta. Perhaps you could > explain again the conclusions you draw from it, and how you apply those > conclusion to your reading of other suttas. James: I think I have explained enough but perhaps I need to offer more explanation? I view all of the suttas in pretty much this fashion: The Buddha is teaching the doing of something and that doing is the removal of defilements by building non-attachment. Thanks. James: No, thank you for not dropping this thread.:-) > > Jon > Metta, James #67064 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > As I understand it, these 4 'modes of progress' refer to the rate of > progress and the amount of effort required, rather than to the jhana > factors present. I believe the jhana factors are the same in all cases. Hi Jon Thanks for this point of clarification - certainly makes sense to me. Best wishes Andrew #67065 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > So, the Buddha tells Rahula that in order for him to become > enlightened he must become disenchanted with the six sense spheres > and their objects. At the beginning of the sutta, he was still > enchanted with the six sense spheres, so he has to become > disenchanted. This is doing something. How else could you see it? [snip] I view all of the suttas in pretty much this > fashion: The Buddha is teaching the doing of something and that doing > is the removal of defilements by building non-attachment. Hi Jon & James My copy of the sutta you are discussing doesn't expressly state that Rahula was sotapanna at the beginning of the sutta, however it is clear that he had achieved some form of high attainment. In the case of a sotapanna, of course, the suttas say that there is a finite number of rebirths left before enlightenment necessarily occurs. Using James's theory, the Buddha's teaching to Ariyans will necessarily be of a fundamentally different character from his teachings to non-Ariyans. After all, what's the point in telling Ariyans to "do" anything when whatever they thereafter do will still end in enlightenment (even if the Buddha didn't utter a word to them)? I don't view this thought as "disproving" James's theory, but I raise it to see if anyone has any thoughts on the following questions. Is there any support for the view that the Buddha taught prescriptively for non-Ariyans and descriptively for Ariyans? Are the laws of reality in 2 volumes - one for non-Ariyans and one for Ariyans? Why did the Buddha teach Ariyans at all? Suggestions anyone? Best wishes Andrew #67066 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the stuart davis show rjkjp1 Glad you liked it, Howard The surrogate sitters might solve a few debates on dsg. Depending on cost the non formal mediators could hire one and yet still do what we always do... The quote from Leonard cohen about the "crack in everything" is one I cited a on dsg about 6 years ago.. Robert #67067 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? philofillet Hi Sarah Sure, go for it. Probably I would now disagree with what I said then, but no matter. It's neat to be reminded of anicca, dukkha and anatta when I see how my thoughts on Dhamma have gone through changes. BTW, thanks for having posted the Cetasika passages so faithfully. Metta, Phil > p.s Phil, if you're reading this, I brought up one or two of your points > of comments which 'sound unlike her' - let me know if you're reading (on > or off-list) before I mention them. She agreed with you (and I) that one > needs a small correction. > ======= > #67068 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:01 pm Subject: The Stream (AN iv,5) philofillet Hi everyone Happy New Year. Predictably I'm back sooner than I said I would be. I won't have time to join in discussions for the time being, but I'd like to share some thoughts from my study of Anguttara Nikaya and other suttas. (The past two years I studied Samyutta NIkaya, especially SN 35. Fascinating stuff, but I think the obsesive interest came from a desire to have the penetrative wisdom that is necessary to really understand suttas dealing with the aggregates, ayatanas etc. I have come to call it SOWS - Sexiness of Wisdom Syndrome. I think we have to be careful with Abhidhamma for the same reason. Often there is the desire to have too much wisdom too soon. Acharn Sujin is helpful in steering her students away from this, at times, but at other times plants the seeds of SOWS by saying there "should be awarness of the characteristics of present realities" and things like that, "start by understanding present realities now - forget about satipatthana" that kind of thing. I think it plants the seeds of SOWS, at least it did for me. For others, there may be conditions for that kind of wisdom to arise, I have no doubt that is the case.) I think Anguttara Nikaya is very good for me now. Wanting to have too much penetrative wisdom too soon is natural enough but dangerous, especially for those of us who are prone to being swept off our feet by gross defilements. (There is of course discretionary wisdom from the beginninng, which is more akin to common sense illuminated for us by Buddha) And yes, no matter what some people may say, we *can* compare ourselves to others, and should compare ourselves to others. The Buddha often urges us to take stock of our tendencies, often in the context of ourselves and other people. He does not encourage us to reduce oursleves to nama and rupa tout de suite - all in due course. Basic intellectual understanding and aceptance that all is nama and rupa is necessary of course. But if we make this the basis of our practice we will go wrong, I think - unless there are already conditions for consistent deep understanding. (sotapanna?) So that brings me to the sutta I'd like to share today. AN IV 5, The Stream. I'm sure you know it - there are 4 kinds of people. WHat is the nature of the person who does not go against the stream. He indulges himself in sensual pleasures. And what is the nature of the person who goes against the stream, she does not indulge herself in sensual pleasures, though it is painful not to do so, though it is a struggle, though there is sighing, though there are tears. Often enough I have heard students of Acharn Sujin say that there is to be not struggle, there is to be no trying too hard one becomes less concerned about whether there is akusala and kusala because of a growing appreciation of the conditionality of every moment, because of the anattaness of every moment, every moment becomes "perfectly instructive" (to use a phrase Robert used, which is a very good phrase - it inspired me a lot, but in the end turned out to be a bit harmful, I think, for me. I may come back to seeing it in a more helpful way, who knows.) Personally, I think this approach, while suitable for those who have outgrown gross unwholesomeness, is very dangerous for those who haven't, and goes against the Buddha's firm guidance. The commentary to the sutta says that it is only sotapannas and "virtuous persons who are still unliberated worldlings" who go against the stream. If one thinks that there is not to be struggle, not to be a certain gritting of the teeth in the development of the virtue that is the necessary precondition for further development of the path, one risks fooling oneself, I think. (Acharn Sujin laughed, literally, at the notion that "gritting of teeth" can be done in a wholesome way, as in that removal of distracting thoughts sutta. She was wrong there. THe Buddha told us that we should do it, at times, to dispel evil thoughts. Thus, it is wholesome.) If one thinks that, for example, it is all right to enjoy pornographic images, or ogling women (just to choose forms of unwholesomeness that I have laways struggled with) because it is an accumulated tendency but can be seen as anatta which is more liberating than being concerned about the akusala involved, one is heading off into dangerous territory. This "what good is it to know akusala from kusala if we do not know realities as not-self" teaching of Acharn Sujin - very wrong, very dangerous for vulnerable beginners. And yes, there are beginners on the path. The path is not a moment until there are supra-mundane level attainments. That ain't yet, folks, not for this walking wound. (I love the AN sutta that says there are three kinds of mentality - the first is the mind like a wound. It needs to be protected. The next is the mind like lightining, who sees into the noble turths. The commentary says that this is the sotapanna. In other words, the Buddha said that unless we are sotapanna, we all have minds like wounds. I think there are *very* important implications there.) Sorry I don't have time to join in any discussions. I know I would be *very* opinionated now, and would end up dodging threads and feeling harassed by discussion obligation pressures again. I know it's kind of....sneaky?...but it's the only way I can participate for the time being. For the time being, I'll share some thoughts on AN once a week. Perhaps others would like to discuss. Thanks for your understanding and support as I battle an internet addiction. Metta, Phil #67069 From: Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:12 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Digest Number 3849 sihalene60 Dear Sarah,Han and all, I also show Han is back. I see your mails (digest) when ever time permits and thanks for all them. can I ask a question, what is most beneficial between maithree (compassion) and anapanasathi (breath) meditation. I see maithree meditation while helping myself, helping others, by chanting goodness for all. (altruistic) Anapanasathi is for my-self alone ! I remember an interesting religious saying " Hands are holier than lips that pray" it means those serve others are true spiritualists than those pray for them-selves. have a good day with blesses of triple gems ! dinesh #67070 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:55 pm Subject: Re: Arousing of Energy! bhikkhu5 Friends: Know that the purpose is lasting happiness. Know that a perfected priority is the key. Know that no worldly buzz is relevant… Know that there is only this way out! Know that this life is a rare chance… Dare you use it? Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <....> #67071 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, (& Han) PHIL, NO NEED TO REPLY!! I'll take yr thx for granted:-) --- Phil wrote: > Sure, go for it. Probably I would now disagree with what I said > then, but no matter. It's neat to be reminded of anicca, dukkha and > anatta when I see how my thoughts on Dhamma have gone through > changes. > > BTW, thanks for having posted the Cetasika passages so faithfully. ... S: Thx for both your initial encouragement and also this note. And yes, all our thoughts on Dhamma go through changes.....:-) ... > > p.s Phil, if you're reading this, I brought up one or two of your > points > > of comments which 'sound unlike her' - .....She agreed with you (and I) > that one > > needs a small correction. ... S: I should stress that I brought up the points because I thought they were good ones, so they always became my points too (like with Han's). .... 1. S: I brought up the point you raised here as I had felt the same as you: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/64889 Phil: Re: Deeds of Merit, Chapter One (Generosity) Thinking some more about this. > > Sujin : Each time we give something away we should know whether, as > a > > consequence, few kusala cittas and many akusala cittas arise, or > > whether there are more kusala cittas arising than akusala cittas This doesn't sound like the sort of thing Acharn Sujin would say in the recorded talks - there is usually a discouragement of one's attempts to try to assess how much kusala there is, how much akusala - but I think it demonstrates that right understanding operates at different levels. .... Sarah: I think you made a good comment. She couldn't remember what the Thai was, but suggested when I read it back that it might read '.....we should know whether, few kusala cittas.....etc' (without the 'as a consequence'). In other words, it's referring to the understanding at the time when kusala and akusal cittas are arising. Like now - few kusala cittas and many akusala cittas arising or the reverse....??? .... 2. S: I also quoted the reminder you gave of the Buddha's advice to Rahula (#64942) to 'reflect on the implications of deeds before, during and after them' in this context. KS emphasised 'with panna' in this regard, again always relating to the present moment panna. If I recall, I also mentioned in this regard that some friends find the 'it's gone' unhelpful with regard to gross akusala committed. She reminded us that thinking with sorrow is so very useless, but understanding can appreciate and know how bad and serious such gross akusala is, instead of just crying or being disturbed by it. Just understand kusala and akusala for what they are, otherwise it's always 'my' or 'someone's' akusala. (I'd have to listen to the recording for a quote or more detail). .... 3. You suggested (#65177)that it's contradictory to say 'know the characteristics of realities', yet 'only nimitta can be known'. A good point. KS asked: 'without nimitta, can anyone know reality?' 'We don't have to think about nimitta to be known first.' I think this may have gone on to a discussion about levels of understanding, levels of nimitta and realities to be known directly. (Again, I may have more to add when I listen and indeed you'll be able to listen eventually. There was lots of good discussion following on from Lodewijk's comments about 'too much stress on anatta' etc which I think many people will find interesting) Here's a good quote I happened to scribble down in my note-book on the same page in response to another point: "If it [just] conditions curiosity, forget it!" 4. Phil, you had also asked a good question about the 4 right efforts and why 'evil is always mentioned before good'. KS's reply was along the lines of there being more akusala, or akusala most the time now. By rt understanding with rt effort, kusala is developed and akusala abandoned etc at such moments. [I also brought up the sutta Swee Boon had mentioned in a 'luminous' thread here if I recall, on the cleaning of the mirror (purifying of gold and so on). By the development of understanding, the mirror is cleaned, the gold is purified, but it would be wrong to take this analogy further to suggest that kusala is there already under the surface of grime, if only we could see it. Citta is dirt, understand the akusala, so that kusala can develop!] ***** Ham, I remember you also brought up a question about the seeming "One-fold Path of Rt Understanding". I think the response was along the lines of 'if there's understanding now, do we have to be concerned about the other factors such as concentration, effort and so on...' You may like to elaborate on your point. Metta, Sarah ======== #67072 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Sarah (Nina & Swee Boon), Sarah: Han, I remember you also brought up a question about the seeming "One-fold Path of Rt Understanding". I think the response was along the lines of 'if there's understanding now, do we have to be concerned about the other factors such as concentration, effort and so on...' You may like to elaborate on your point. -------------------- Han: Actually, it was not my original idea. I was referring to Swee Boon’s message (# 66790) in response to Nina’s post on Letters on Vipassana V, 4 (# 55789), where Nina wrote: “When right understanding arises of a paramattha dhamma which appears there is already right concentration which arises naturally, because of conditions.” Swee Boon responded by “I don't think this is what the Buddha taught. Such a conditioning is never taught in Dependent Origination. It is tantamount to a Noble Onefold Path. This is not the Dhamma.” I also have the opinion that although Right Understanding is very important, it seems to be given more attention than other Path factors to the extent that it is tantamount to Noble One-fold Path, instead of Noble Eight-fold Path. You know the discussions that followed. Some I heard, but some I did not, due to my hearing problems. Respectfully, Han #67073 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 2 (Was What is Meditation?) jwromeijn Dear Han, (Sarah, all) H: "If I accept both the paramattha truths and conventional truths, the two truths can go along hand-in-hand. But if I try to force the paramattha truths upon the conventional truths, then there is, at least for me, the `conflict.' For those who can do this without any conflict, I have only my admiration and respect." J: A good topic, I think. Han, I know you always have respect, for all sentient beings. But why for those who can do without experiencing the tension of looking with an ultimate view (or: an ultimate spectacle) and looking with a conventional one? I reformulated it a little bit because I think we better don't use the term 'truth', and especially not with a capital: 'Truth'. The Buddha didn't talk about Truth but about suffering and the ending of suffering. In other words: His intention was to our understanding His words soteriological: to awaken us. He didn't give an ontological theory, (It were scholastic monks who did that in later time) And even Abhidhamma is not about two truths but about two kind of realities. So when you try to get at the Railway Station in Bangkok: use a conventional theory of reality. But when you ask yourself: why am I so afraid to get too late and miss the train? Then perhaps an ultimate look at yourself will work. Metta Joop #67074 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Hi Phil (& Han), A follow-up- PHIL, NO NEED TO REPLY!! I'll take yr thx for granted:-) --- sarah abbott wrote: > 1. > S: I brought up the point you raised here as I had felt the same as you: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/64889 <...> S: I had meant to also include your own good explanation, so will give it here by way of a reply to my post: "At other times we can benefit from appreciating that before there can be a true understanding of whether there is kusala or akusala at any moment, there must be a real understanding that dhammas are anatta, and in the long run, even a few moments of this latter understanding will benefit us more. It is this kind of understandig, and only this kind of understanding, that can eradicate the defilements rather than dilute them. This is the message I get from Acharn Sujin in the recorded talks." .... 5. Another topic of yours relates to all the 'shoulds' as in the quotes from the perfection of energy in KS's book and so on. I mentioned that people may get the wrong understanding or see it as contradictory. "It depends on the understanding" was her reply and I think it's the same answer to Han's question about the seeming conflict when reading different suttas. In this regard on the 'shoulding', you SHOULD read Andrew T's post (if you haven't) on 'should' - #66950. Also 'shoulding' in U.P.... **** Han, thx a lot for your replies and elaborations .....I have a lot of catching up to do but look forward to reflecting on your comments further. I'll also bring these to Nina's attention as she mentioned she and Lodewijk like 'Han' with early morning tea in Holland! (Also, your long post, Phil, which I look f/w to reading later as well). I think you also responded kindly before your trip to giving us extracts from 'Daana, The Practice of Giving', possibly with any of your own comments. Just in your own good time if you still feel inclined to do so. Also, I'm sure friends here would be very interested to hear anything about your impressions in Myanmar, perhaps related to our brief discussion on 'feeling sorry for people, reflections on kamma and so on'. If you feel it's too personal, never mind. Metta, Sarah ======== #67075 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 2 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Joop, Thank you very much for your kind response. But I am sorry I do not quite understand what you are driving at. My English is not very good, and I must admit that I do not understand what is ‘soteriological’ or ‘ontological theory.’ I agree with you that the Buddha talks about suffering and the ending of suffering. But in Abhidhamma (if you believe that Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha) the two truths are mentioned – paramattha sacca and sammuti sacca. Respectfully, Han #67076 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Sarah (Nina & Lodewijk), I am glad that you appreciate my replies and elaborations on the topics we had jointly raised at the Foundation. I sincerely thank Nina and Lodewijk very much for their kind words about my posts which they used to read with their morning tea. I will write about Dana: The Practice of Giving, edited by Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi, in installments. But I will have to study it myself first. So please give me some time. I would rather not write about my trip to Yangon. Respectfully, Han #67077 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:04 am Subject: What is kusala? (was, [dsg] Re: Meditation (again)) jonoabb Hi James Thanks for this detailed and well-expressed post. I'm very glad you answered the question, which I posed half in jest. Putting aside your final conclusion for the moment, I think I see things much as you do here: kusala can be spoken of at either the conventional or the absolute level. At the conventional level we talk about 'kusala deeds' such as helping others, being respectful, which in fact involve mixed kusala and akusala. Despite the presence of akusala, they are still (conventional) kusala actions. I have no problem with this. In the absolute sense, kusala means, as you say, a moment of consciousness accompanied by the sobhana (kusala) roots of alobha and adosa (and amoha). So I do not deny the conventional. The crucial question, however, is whether, when the Buddha spoke of aspects of the development of the path such as guarding the sense-doors, he was (a) using conventional language to describe conventional kusala actions, i.e., mixed kusala and akusala, or (b) using conventional language to refer to kusala in the absolute sense, i.e. kusala only. I add a few comments to particular parts of your post. buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > >> Besides, what is kusala as you understand it? (Don't >> answer; couldn't resist that one). >> >> Jon >> > > James: Why not answer that question? I think it is a good question > and it doesn't relate to anyone personally- so I am going to answer > if you don't mind. > > Kusala (wholesomeness) as I understand it has two levels of meaning- > ultimate and conventional. > You may think this a quibble, but I would prefer to say that the term 'kusala' has only one level of meaning, although it can be used in a conventional or an absolute context. > At the ultimate level, each mind state > (citta) is rooted in either non-greed (generosity), non-hate (metta), > or non-delusion (panna). This is relatively straight forward and > easy to understand. > Agreed. > Kusala at the conventional level is not quite so simple, however, > because such states of kusala, akusala (or neutral) arise in mixed > patterns. Cittas arise and pass away millions if not trillions of > times per minute. One citta has an effect on the next citta, so > kusala and akusala (or neutral) groupings of cittas arise in > patterns. Cittas don't immediately switch from one to the other; it > is a gradual change during the course of millions of cittas. > Right. Except that, as I understand it, the so-called javana cittas (those cittas in a process that 'think about' the object experienced at the beginning of the process) must be either kusala or akusala, and can never be 'neutral'. > So, when the Buddha taught to cultivate the wholesome and discard the > unwholesome, I believe that he was teaching about kusala and akusala > in the conventional sense. We have no control over individual > cittas, they arise and pass away too rapidly; but we can set up the > proper conditions so that kusala groupings or patterns arise more > frequently than akusala groupings and patterns arise. This is what > the Buddha meant when he taught that one should purify the mind; he > also taught that this was a gradual process which could not be done > quickly (but not so gradual as to necessitate several lifetimes ;-). > Well here we come to the nub of the matter. I think the question is whether the teaching to cultivate the wholesome and abandon the unwholesome can be understood (i.e., has meaning) only at a conventional level, or whether it can also be understood (i.e., also has meaning) at an absolute level. I may be wrong, but I think most people don't even fairly consider the latter possibility. They are very strongly drawn to the former, as it fits with their existing ideas of what spiritual development should involve. But I think a careful study and consideration of the texts will show that the latter is not only feasible but indeed fully in accordance with the anatta flavour of the teachings. > Jon, it appears to me that you refuse to see the conventional level > of kusala and akusala and will only acknowledge the ultimate level. > You refuse to see the forest through the trees. I really don't > understand why this is because it doesn't make much sense to me. > Your approach isn't practical; it's purely philosophical. > The second of the 2 approaches I mention above is actually a very practical one. Under this approach, the development of insight is something that may occur regardless of time, occasion or circumstances, and regardless also of the present state of mind. Does this sound not practical? Difficult, perhaps, but very practical ;-)) It may *sound* philosophical or intellectual, but that would be because it cannot be reduced to a formula of something to do. Jon #67078 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 3 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, This is the continuation of the topics that you and I raised together at the Foundation. Sarah: 3. More discussion on sakkaya-ditthi vs atta-ditthi or attavadupadana( atavaadupaadaana ). We looked at the box of biscuits on the table. Are they taken for oneself? No, so when they are taken for really being a box of biscuits (as opposed to visible object, concepts about v.o. and so on), there's wrong view, but it's not sakkaya-ditthi. Still there is atta-ditthi, the opposite of an understanding of anatta. So, atta-ditthi is broader than sakkaya-ditthi. (More under 'attavaupadana' in U.P.) (Like topics 1) and 2), you were very polite, but I think still beg to differ:-)). Han: I still do not understand how a box of biscuits could be cited as an example of attavaadupaadaana. I thank KS and other members who kindly explained to me about this topic. But I still maintain that attavaadupaadaana and sakkaaya-ditthi are the same. Other topics to be continued. Respectfully, Han #67079 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Stream (AN iv,5) upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - Nice reading you again! :-) In a message dated 1/15/07 11:54:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > Acharn Sujin laughed, literally, at the notion ... > ======================= Uh, oh!!!!! With upturned mouth-corner metta, Howard #67080 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) sarahprocter... Hi Joop (& Jon), --- Joop wrote: > That's a promise! (of you) > See also my mail 'Lachen und Weinen" .... S: For more smiles and laughs, see under 'Smiles, Smiling' in U.P. Metta, Sarah p.s I'm having technical probs accessing the files right now, otherwise I'd give you the quote. ======= #67081 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Stream (AN iv,5) scottduncan2 H: "With upturned mouth-corner metta" Oh yeah, man. Beautiful. S. #67082 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments jonoabb Hi James I gave a quick answer to this post of yours soon after arriving back in Hong Kong. I'd like to add a few further comments (mainly agreeing with you ;-)) on some of the passages I skipped over last time, because there's a lot in it. buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon and All, > > Jon: Again, not what I believe or have ever said. The question is > whether, when the Buddha spoke of guarding the sense-doors, etc, he > was describing intentional actions. That is an inference, but not a > necessary one, that some like to draw from the suttas. It's quite > possible to read the suttas without making that assumption. > > James: We have discussed this somewhat in the past, but never in any > depth. I would like to discuss this issue with you Jon, in depth, if > you don't mind. (I have no classes to teach this week as the > students are preparing for finals, so I have lots of time on my > hands. ;-)) > > As I understand it, you see the suttas as describing occurrences, not > instructing the doing of intentional activities; while I see the > suttas in the exact opposite way- as instructing the doing of > intentional activities to create the conditions for those > occurrences. This is a major difference and will completely change > the meaning of the suttas depending on how one views them! A good summary of our respective 'approaches', and I agree that it is a major issue (and thus not to be decided upon lightly, nor held to tightly for that matter). > In order to get to the heart of this matter, we have to know what the > Buddha's intentions were. When he gave a sermon, did he intend for > the listeners to simply know the circumstances of higher awakening, > or did he intend for them to emulate the models he described so that > they would achieve the same higher awakening he described? So, > again, to know, we have to examine the Buddha's intentions. This could also be put another way: Was the Buddha imparting knowledge to be reflected upon and related to the present moment (to the best of the listener's ability), or was he imparting information for each listener to take and put into practice on a later occasion? In considering this we need to keep in mind that the hearing of a sutta was on many, many occasions a sufficient condition for enlightenment on the part of the listeners. > There aren't a lot of suttas which describe the Buddha's thought > processes, but I found one on the Internet (and there might be > others). It is a teaching that the Buddha gave to his son, Rahula. > > Contained within the sutta is this description (a standard formula > found in other suttas): > > "Seeing thus, Rahula, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows > disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with > consciousness at the eye, disenchanted with contact at the eye… With > that, too, he grows disenchanted. Disenchanted, he becomes > dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full > release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns > that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. > There is nothing further for this world.'" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html > > Jon, I think that you would read this and conclude that the Buddha > wasn't really telling Rahula to do anything. He was describing what > happens when a noble one becomes enlightened. You would point out > that the syntax of the teaching isn't directly telling Rahula what to > do or not do; the syntax is just describing an occurrence. And I > would have to agree with you. The Buddha isn't directly telling > Rahula to do anything. However, we have to look at the Buddha's > intentions to know the full story. > You are right that I would not read this as telling Rahula to *do* something. I would read it as imparting to Rahula the information he needed in order to develop insight further, in this particular instance, to the point of enlightenment. > Here is how the sutta begins: > > "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at > Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's Monastery. Then, as he was > alone in seclusion, this line of thinking arose in the Blessed One's > awareness: "The mental qualities that ripen in release have ripened > in Rahula. What if I were to lead Rahula further to the ending of the > mental fermentations?" > > Then the Blessed One, early in the morning, put on his robes and, > carrying his bowl & outer robe, went into Savatthi for alms. Having > gone for alms in Savatthi, after the meal, returning from his alms > round, he said to Ven. Rahula, "Fetch your sitting cloth, Rahula. We > will go to the Grove of the Blind to spend the day."… > > >From this description of the Buddha's thought processes and actions, > we can see that although the Buddha didn't directly tell Rahula to do > anything, he very much intended for Rahula to do something. He > wanted Rahula to abandon some of the mental fermentations and become > sotapanna, > He saw that Rahula's mental qualities were developed to the point that enlightenment was possible given the right prompting. > but he didn't directly tell Rahula that. He wasn't even > sure if it would work, since the question "What if I were to lead > Rahula further to the ending of the mental fermentations?" > I wouldn't say this indicates uncertainty on the part of the Buddha, but rather is a manner of speech indicating intention to act, much as we might say "Why don't I ..." instead of "I'm going to ...". > I think the important word to focus on here is "lead". The Buddha > was a wise teacher, he didn't push his students here or there, he led > them to the truth. Therefore, he didn't directly tell them to do > anything- he taught by example. > I agree that "lead" is significant here. One of the epithets of the Buddha is 'incomparable teacher of teachable persons'. He taught, and lead, by giving the right incremental knowledge necessary to bring the listener to the next stage of development. > I think it is clear that the Buddha wanted his listeners to do the > things he described to them, but he didn't directly tell them so > because that would be too pushy. No one wants to hear, "You should > do this... you should do that…." The Buddha taught by example and it > was up to his listeners to follow the examples he gave or not. > Remember that we are talking about understanding or wisdom of the presently arising dhammas. Because the 'target object' (presently arising dhammas) are always present, the knowledge received can from the Buddha can be immediately 'applied' if the skill of awareness of presently arising dhammas has been sufficiently developed. > What do you (or anyone) think about this? > I think it's a good analysis of the question, although I personally come to a different conclusion to you ;-)). I hope we can continue to discuss. Jon #67083 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > .... > S: For more smiles and laughs, see under 'Smiles, Smiling' in U.P. > > Metta, > > Sarah Dear Sarah (Jon, James)] I have looked at this UP, most about smiling of arahats, so off- topic: the topic was the crying and laughing of wordlings. Jon and James (bien etonné de se trouver ensemble) do have a theory that all kinds of laughing and all kind of crying are akusala. In fact they say generalizing that laughing and crying is akusala. Do you have that theory too? And do you think that 'smiling' is a kind of laughing? How do we know that? Perhaps laughing and smiling are two total different things. I have the theory that some kinds of laughing are rooted in greed, hatred and delusion and some in the opposite. I have the theory that some kinds of crying are rooted in greed, hatred and delusion and some in the opposite. I now add the theory that some kinds of smiling are rooted in greed, hatred and delusion and some in the opposite (personally I think most) Metta Joop #67084 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - If you're starting a Kusala Laugh & Cry Club, Joop, please sign me up as a charter member. ;-)) Er, guess I should have signed :-(( instead, dour (... uh, dear) ones. Gosh, gotta watch those Freudian slips! LOLOL! With metta, Howard #67085 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 4 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, This is the continuation of the topics that you and I raised together at the Foundation. Sarah: 4. We brought up the question of yoniso manasikara as discussed before in 'The Debate of King Milinda' #45166, #64828, #64950 etc. This is the passage on wisdom which James originally quoted. When it says that attention is one thing and wisdom another as seen by the fact that certain animals have attention, but not wisdom, does it refer to yoniso manasikara in context? It was discussed how there is yoniso manasikara when any kusala cittas arise. Do certain animals such as goats have kusala? I think the consensus was yes, of a certain level. In other suttas, where yoniso manasikara is referred to, high levels of kusala are being referred to, accompanied by wisdom. So it depends on the context. Again, I think you still have doubts about this topic:-). Han: You are right. I still maintain that the animals do not have yonisomanasikaara. They have manasikaara but not yonisomanasikaara. The reasons are as I had stated before: (1) In Yonisomanasikaara panha (Milindapanha) King Milinda asked Venerable Naagasena, “Revered sir, is proper attention the same as wisdom? (nanu bhante yonisomanasikaaro yeva pa~n~naa ti?)” Venerable Naagasena replied, “No, sire, attention is one thing, wisdom is another (na hi mahaaraaja a~n~no manasikaaro a~n~naa pa~n~naa). Goats, sheep, cows, buffaloes, camels and donkeys have attention (manasikaaro atthi) but they do not have wisdom. (pa~n~naa pana tesam natthiiti)” Han: Venerable Naagasena said that the animals have manasikaara, but he did not say that the animals have yonisomanasikaara. Besides, he said that the animals do not have pa~n~naa. So, I cannot accept that the animals have yonisomanasikaara. (2) In SN 45.55, SN 45.62, SN 45.69, SN 45.76, SN 45.83, SN 45.90 Yonisomanasikaara-sampadaa Suttas, it is mentioned that “when a bhikkhu is accomplished in careful attention (yonisomanasikaara-sampadaa), it is to be expected that he will develop and cultivate this Noble Eightfold Path.” (3) In SN 46.2 Kaaya Sutta, it is stated that “And what bhikkhus, is the nutriment for the arising of the unarisen enlightenment factor of mindfulness and for the fulfillment by development of the arisen enlightenment factor of mindfulness? There are, bhikkhus, things that are the basis for the enlightenment factor of mindfulness: frequently giving careful attention (yoniso-manasikaara-bahuliikaaro) to them is the nutriment for the arising of the unarisen enlightenment factor of mindfulness and for the fulfillment by development of the arisen enlightenment factor of mindfulness. [To repeat the same for other enlightenment factors.] Han: I cannot imagine that the animals have yonisomanasikaara which is the basis for development and cultivation of Noble Eightfold Path, and which is the nutriment for seven enlightenment factors. However, I do not intend to pursue this matter further. One participant at the Foundation asked me what benefit I would get by knowing whether or not the animals have yonisomanasikaara. She was right. I will not gain anything by knowing whether the animals have yonisomanasikaara or not. So for me, this matter is closed. Respectfully, Han #67086 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) sarahprocter... Dear Joop, --- Joop wrote: > I have looked at this UP, most about smiling of arahats, so off- > topic: the topic was the crying and laughing of wordlings. .... S: Here's a quote from the first message there (Christine's): "The Compendium of Philosophy states: "There are six classes of laughter recognized in Buddhist works: (1) sita: - a smile manifesting itself in expression and countenance; (2) hasita: - a smile consisting in the slight movements of the lips just enough to reveal the tips of the teeth; (3) vihasita: - laughter giving out a light sound; (4) upahasita: - laughter accompanied by the movement of the head, shoulders, and arms; (5) apahasita: - laughter accompanied by the shedding of tears; and (6) atihasita: - an outburst of laughter accompanied by the forward and backward movements of the entire body from head to foot. Laughter is thus a form of bodily expression (kaya-viññatti), which may or may not be accompanied by vocal expression (vaci-viññatti). Of these, the first two classes are indulged in by cultured persons, the next two by the average man, and the last two by the lower classes of being. " http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/abhisgho/abhis01.htm ... > Jon and James (bien etonné de se trouver ensemble) do have a theory > that all kinds of laughing and all kind of crying are akusala. In > fact they say generalizing that laughing and crying is akusala. > > Do you have that theory too? .... S: I'll go with the akusala and very natural for most of what arises in a day theory:-) I'm also in the better to smile than to cry camp (if you have one of those!) Smiles and Laughs, ....and a little metta in between, Sarah ======= #67087 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:45 pm Subject: Re: Just joined buddhatrue Hi Bill Zenn, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bill" wrote: > That would be awesome. Any recommendations people feel moved to share will > be appreciated. I am currently reading "Eight Mindful Steps to Happiness" by > Bhante Henepola Gunaratana. I'm really getting a lot out of this book. It's > opening me up to putting the Noble Eightfold Path into practice. I like how > Bhante Gunaratana uses examples from everyday life, and his emphasis on > mindfulness. I would recommend bookmarking this website: http://what-buddha-taught.net/ It has links to additional articles by Bhante Gunaranta and several other Theravada monks of the forest tradition. Most importantly, I would recommend reading the original discourses of the Buddha. More than 1000 can be found online at this link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ However, the translations are by Thanissaro Bhikkhu whose translations are not as smooth/competent as Bhikkhu Bodhi. However, those must be purchased. If you want to make the financial investment, I would recommend starting with the Majjhima Nikaya: http://www.amazon.com/Middle-Length-Discourses-Buddha- Translation/dp/086171072X Hope this helps! Metta, James #67088 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Jon and James (bien etonné de se trouver ensemble) do have a theory > that all kinds of laughing and all kind of crying are akusala. In > fact they say generalizing that laughing and crying is akusala. Actually, I have not weighed in on the laughing issue. Laughing is such a complex mechanism that I am unable to analyze my own laughter or the root causes of it. Additionally, I figure, if arahants can smile why can't they laugh also? What's the difference? I guess I could read the UP articles about the smiling Buddha....later. This type of information is just a curiosity factor, not an enlightenment factor. ;- )) And, again, I know from experience that this is a touchy subject. I want to emphasize that I am not judging crying as being bad or unnatural, and that people shouldn't cry. I just don't think that Buddhas or arahants have any motivations (root factors) to cry. Metta, James #67089 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) buddhatrue Hi Joop, I wanted to add a sutta to what I have written below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: I just don't think that > Buddhas or arahants have any motivations (root factors) to cry. Upatissa Sutta At Savatthi. There Ven. Sariputta addressed the monks: "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Sariputta said, "Friends, just now as I was withdrawn in seclusion, this train of thought arose to my awareness: 'Is there anything in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.'" When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to Ven. Sariputta, "Sariputta my friend, even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher would there arise within you no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair?" "Even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher, my friend, there would arise within me no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Still, I would have this thought: 'What a great being, of great might, of great prowess, has disappeared! For if the Blessed One were to remain for a long time, that would be for the benefit of many people, for the happiness of many people, out of sympathy for the world; for the welfare, benefit, & happiness of human & divine beings.'" "Surely," [said Ven. Ananda,] "it's because Ven. Sariputta's I-making & mine-making and obsessions with conceit have long been well uprooted that even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher, there would arise within him no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.002.than.html Metta, James #67090 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:14 pm Subject: What is kusala? (was, [dsg] Re: Meditation (again)) buddhatrue Hi Jon, Jon: The crucial question, however, is whether, when the Buddha spoke of aspects of the development of the path such as guarding the sense- doors, he was (a) using conventional language to describe conventional kusala actions, i.e., mixed kusala and akusala, or (b) using conventional language to refer to kusala in the absolute sense, i.e. kusala only. James: Yes, that is the crucial question. At first glance, it seems to make more sense that the Buddha would use conventional language to refer to conventional actions; after all, to use conventional language to refer to absolute realities would be very confusing to his audience. But, I am glad that you have summarized our positions in such a succinct manner. Jon: You may think this a quibble, but I would prefer to say that the term 'kusala' has only one level of meaning, although it can be used in a conventional or an absolute context. James: No, I don't really think that is a quibble. This difference in language points back to our fundamental difference in understanding. I would say that kusala has two entirely different meanings: one conventional and one absolute. Jon: Right. Except that, as I understand it, the so-called javana cittas (those cittas in a process that 'think about' the object experienced at the beginning of the process) must be either kusala or akusala, and can never be 'neutral'. James: Since I was describing the entire citta process, I had in mind bhavanga-cittas as well- which are neutral. Sorry I didn't clarify that: "There are moments when there are no sense-impressions, when one does not think, when there are no akusala cittas or kusala cittas. Is there at those moments still citta? Even when there are no sense- impressions and no thinking, there must be citta; otherwise there would be no life. The type of citta which arises and falls away at those moments is called bhavanga-citta." http://www.dhammastudy.com/abhid12.html Jon: I may be wrong, but I think most people don't even fairly consider the latter possibility. They are very strongly drawn to the former, as it fits with their existing ideas of what spiritual development should involve. James: This is a very broad generalization about all sorts of different types of people. Such generalizations should be avoided, I think. Jon: It may *sound* philosophical or intellectual, but that would be because it cannot be reduced to a formula of something to do. James: That doesn't make it just "sound" philosophical, that would make the Buddha's teaching completely philosophical. If the Buddha didn't teach a course of action to be taken, he was simply a philosopher: "philosophy: A study that attempts to discover the fundamental principles of the sciences, the arts, and the world that the sciences and arts deal with; the word philosophy is from the Greek for "love of wisdom." I don't believe the Buddha should be viewed as a philosopher. As the Buddha said, "I teach only suffering and the way to end suffering…" The Buddha should be viewed as a pragmatist: "pragmatist: noun. a person who takes a practical approach to problems and is concerned primarily with the success or failure of her actions." Metta, James #67091 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments buddhatrue Hi Jon, Jon: This could also be put another way: Was the Buddha imparting knowledge to be reflected upon and related to the present moment (to the best of the listener's ability), or was he imparting information for each listener to take and put into practice on a later occasion? James: Why does it have to be either/or? I think it is both. Jon: In considering this we need to keep in mind that the hearing of a sutta was on many, many occasions a sufficient condition for enlightenment on the part of the listeners. James: Yes, this did often happen; however, Jon, if we are to accept your way of viewing things, this would have to be the case every single time! No one could achieve enlightenment independently because that would necessitate a "practice"- every single person would have to achieve enlightenment while listening to (or reading) the Buddha's teaching. Jon: I agree that "lead" is significant here. One of the epithets of the Buddha is 'incomparable teacher of teachable persons'. He taught, and lead, by giving the right incremental knowledge necessary to bring the listener to the next stage of development. James: This makes it sound like the Buddha was present during every single instance of enlightenment- coaching and giving lessons. But there were several people, the majority I would say, who achieved enlightenment quite on their own- simply by following the Noble Eightfold Path. Metta, James #67092 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Joop) - > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.002.than.html > > Metta, > James > ============================ The thing is: To my mind, not all shedding of tears expresses "sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair." IMO, there can truly be tears of joy in which the emotion expressed is a joy that is unadulterated by the slightest attendant element of aversion, and, though this is far more rare, even without the slightest element of clinging. Certainly, however, no change in anything would produce in an arahant any "sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair" and certainly no clinging either. That I would never dispute. It might also be so that an arahant might never shed a tear even of joy, because an arahant's pristine state is one of continuous, joyful equanimity. Nibbana, after all, is already the supreme happiness, and all other joy pales beside it. With metta, Howard #67093 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? philofillet Hi Sarah and Han and all > PHIL, NO NEED TO REPLY!! I'll take yr thx for granted:-) No stopping me now! Unless there is stoppping me now. We shall see I just wanted to add a word of thanks to Han. It was a post of his a couple of months ago that added to other factors to set me thinking more about the place of sila. He said "I have a feeling some of my friends here don't appreciate the importance of sila enough" or words to that effect. An undramatic statement, but one which had a very dramatic effect on me. (I think about a week before I had posted to Han something like "if sila arises, it arises" - something in that vein, which is a very wrong approach to Dhamma) I think it's interesting that of all the strident posts that I had read that urged me away from a wrong approach, it was Han's very gentle, soft-spoken post that really hit home. Just timing, probably, or maybe not. Maybe we should always make a point to speak as gently as possible if we want the other person to hear. Harmlessness at work. One sutta that I am really inspired by these days is the one with the acrobat simile. I think it is very profound for getting at a beneficial balance of paramattha and conventional truth. As you know, it says that we practice harmlessness and patience (along with metta and mudita) to protect others, and by doing so protect ourselves. I have found recently that it is easier to practice harmlessness in an intentional way than it is to practice metta which still, for me, arises, or doesn't. Harmlessness, as far as I know, is not a paramttha dhamma. It becomes central to our conceptual approach to Dhamma, which must be in balance with the paramattha approach that is found in satipatthana, through which we protect others by protecting ourselves. For me, that's what the acrobat simile gets at - it is premature to appreciate paramattha truth all the time - we need to understand skillfully at the conventional level to create conditions for paramattha understanding to deepen. Or something like that. I'll post about that next time. Or maybe I just said enough. Yeah, I think I did. But it's an amazing sutta, so I'm sure I'll be coming back to it :) Metta, Phil #67094 From: han tun Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Phil (and Sarah), Your very warm post really touched my heart. I most sincerely appreciate it. Yes, it is very important to practice harmlessness to others. It can be expected that no harm will come to a person who practices harmlessness to others. It is the Law of Kamma. I also fully agree with you that there should be a beneficial balance of paramattha and conventional truth. I am also interested in the sutta with the acrobat simile, which you mentioned. Could you kindly tell me more about it? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #67095 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Han, Phil & James, --- han tun wrote: > Yes, it is very important to practice harmlessness to > others. It can be expected that no harm will come to a > person who practices harmlessness to others. It is the > Law of Kamma. .... S: The gift of harmlessness is I believe included in Abhaya dana (often translated as 'the gift of life'). Bhikkhu Samahita wrote a post on 3 kinds of dana (366132): Amisa dana (the gift of material things), abhaya dana (the gift of life) and dhamma dana (the gift of Truth). I'm sure they will all be referred to in the essays and your up-coming series on 'Daana'. Whenever there is a 'non-harming' of others, through speech or deeds, I believe this is abhayadana. In the commentary to the Cariya Pitaka, Bodhi translates it as 'the giving of fearlessness'. A lot more detail is given in this text. James, thank you for telling us about your change of attitude and behaviour with regard to the mosquitoes and of the good effect. You pointed out what I was trying to suggest - that with less strong dosa and harmful intentions, one is less bothered by the insects. I believe this is an example of the sila of non-harming conditioned by the understanding of the strong akusala involved. If you had never heard or considered that the killing of mosquitoes was motivated by hatred and a complete lack of metta, there may not have been any change in the behaviour. Understanding the dhammas involved does 'work its way'! Metta, Sarah ======= #67096 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:03 pm Subject: Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Dear All, Here's a more complete extract of the one I re-quoted earlier. This is from: Shwe Zan Aung, The Compendium of Philosophy, a translation of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/chapter_1.htm "26. Hasituppāda is a citta peculiar to Arahats. Smiling is caused by a pleasurable feeling. There are thirteen classes of consciousness by which one may smile according to the type of the person. An ordinary worldling (puthujjana) may laugh with either one of the four types of cittas rooted in attachment, accompanied by pleasure, or one of the four kusala cittas, accompanied by pleasure." [See also, CMA (Bodhi note),VI #11 and chart 6.2] to the same effect] "Sotāpannas, Sakadāgāmīs, and Anāgāmīs may smile with one of the two akusala cittas, disconnected with false view, accompanied by pleasure, or with one of the four kusala cittas. Arahats and Pacceka Buddhas may smile with one of the four sobhana kiriya cittas or hasituppāda. Sammā Sambuddhas smile with one of the two sobhana kiriya cittas, accompanied by wisdom and pleasure. There is nothing but mere mirth in the hasituppāda consciousness." "The Compendium of Philosophy states: "There are six classes of laughter recognized in Buddhist works: (1) sita: - a smile manifesting itself in expression and countenance; (2) hasita: - a smile consisting in the slight movements of the lips just enough to reveal the tips of the teeth; (3) vihasita: - laughter giving out a light sound; (4) upahasita: - laughter accompanied by the movement of the head, shoulders, and arms; (5) apahasita: - laughter accompanied by the shedding of tears; and (6) atihasita: - an outburst of laughter accompanied by the forward and backward movements of the entire body from head to foot. Laughter is thus a form of bodily expression (kāya-viññatti), which may or may not be accompanied by vocal expression (vacī-viññatti). Of these, the first two classes are indulged in by cultured persons, the next two by the average man, and the last two by the lower classes of being." ***** S: I can't find this in the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, so I believe this note of Aung's has been compiled from different sources. However, by way of a useful reminder that it's really a question in the end of understanding the cittas when they arise, rather than just speculating about different situations, under the section on 'killing' in the commentary, it says: "even when a laughing king orders an execution it is with a hateful consciousness." Metta, Sarah =========== #67097 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:50 pm Subject: 4 kinds of Progress (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Hi Andrew, Good to see your thoughtful posts while we were away! --- Andrew wrote: > Nyanatiloka's Dictionary lists 4 modes of progress to deliverance: > 1. painful progress with slow comprehension > 2. painful progress with quick comprehension > 3. pleasant progress with slow comprehension > 4. pleasant progress with quick comprehension > [see "patipada"] ..... S: This caught my attention because K.Sujin often refers to the Pali terms for these 4 kinds of progress and I'm always lost, so you've prompted me to check them out and give the full extract and add the missing Pali terms: "There are 4 modes of progress to deliverance: (1) painful progress with slow comprehension (dukkhā patipadā dandhābhiññā), (2) painful progress with quick comprehension (dukkhā patipadā khippaabhi~n~naa) (3) pleasant progress with slow comprehension (sukhaa patipadā dandhābhiññā)(4) pleasant progress with quick comprehension (sukhaa patipadā khippaabhi~n~naa). In A. IV, 162 it is said: (1) "Some person possesses by nature excessive greed, excessive hate, excessive delusion, and thereby he often feels pain and sorrow; and also the 5 mental faculties, as faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom (s. indriya 15-19) are dull in him; and by reason thereof he reaches only slowly the immediacy (ānantariya, q.v) to the cessation of all cankers. (2) Some person possesses by nature excessive greed, etc., but the 5 mental faculties are sharp in him and by reason thereof he reaches quickly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... (3) "Some person possesses by nature no excessive greed, etc., but the 5 mental faculties are dull in him, and by reason thereof he reaches slowly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... (4) 'Some person possessess by nature no excessive greed, etc., and the mental faculties are sharp in him, and by reason thereof he reaches quickly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... See A. IV, 162, 163, 166-169; Dhs. 176ff; Atthasālini Tr. I, 243; 11, 291, 317." ***** S: Your questions are interesting ones which I'll leave to you and Jon to discuss further. Metta, Sarah ======= #67098 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs jonoabb Sarah and All Thanks for the passage and link. According to this, sotapannas and above do not laugh, but the laugh of a worldling may be with kusala citta. My apologies to all for the incorrect recollection earlier. Jon sarah abbott wrote: > Dear All, > > Here's a more complete extract of the one I re-quoted earlier. This is > from: Shwe Zan Aung, The Compendium of Philosophy, a translation of the > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha > http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/chapter_1.htm > > "26. Hasituppāda is a citta peculiar to Arahats. Smiling is caused by > a pleasurable feeling. There are thirteen classes of consciousness by > which one may smile according to the type of the person. An ordinary > worldling (puthujjana) may laugh with either one of the four types of > cittas rooted in attachment, accompanied by pleasure, or one of the four > kusala cittas, accompanied by pleasure." > #67099 From: "Sebastien Billard" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:05 pm Subject: French translation of ADL chapter 3 completed sbillard2000 Greetings all, I just finished to translate in french the third chapter of Abhidhamma in daily life. The document can be downloaded in PDF format here : As always, all suggestions or corrections are welcome :) Sebastien #67100 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:24 pm Subject: Laughing and crying Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Joop - > If you're starting a Kusala Laugh & Cry Club, Joop, please sign me up as a charter member. ;-)) Hallo Howard, all Yes, Howard; now there are not only the Smiling Arahats but also the Laughing (and crying) Lays But you will understand this is not really my topic. That is the - in my view - wrong understanding of equanimity leading to the idea that it's better not laughing and crying (real men don't cry and laughing is superficial) Equanamity does not mean: don't show how you feel; that is more suppression; I think there is nothing against expression. And that is a symptom that in the emphasis in Abhidhamma put on the dichotomy kusala - akusala somewhere the Middle Way, teached by the Buddha, is lost. "There are these two extremes that are not to be indulged in by one who has gone forth. Which two? That which is devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; and that which is devoted to self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable. Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding." (SN LVI.11 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta - Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion; translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) That the extreme of sensual pleasure had to be avoided, is stressed enough but the self-affliction (Bhikkhu Bodho translates "self-mortification" ) had to be avoided too. I'm afraid this aspect is a little bit forgotten in this 'protestant buddhism' as Theravada sometimes is called. Metta Joop #67101 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Joy and It's Fruits: From DN 21 sarahprocter... Hi Howard. --- upasaka@... wrote: > The proof of the pudding is in the tasting, and the value of an event is > in > its consequences." In the matter of evaluating phenomena, whether > laughter, > crying, dreaming, or whatever, the specific conditions involved need to > be looked > at, and not just a general categorization, and it is very important to > see > what fruits follow. .... S: This important point also touches on one of the topics of Phil's which I mentioned - whether the evaluation of kusala and akusala refers to the wisdom when such states arise or to some speculation about the consequences. .... In that regard, i.e., evaluating a phenomenon by its > > consequences, and with regard to joy, in particular, I draw your > attention to the > following material from the Sakka-Pa~nha Sutta: > > 'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be > pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When > one knows of > a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities > increase, > and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be > pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, > unskillful mental > qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > joy > is to be pursued. .... S: This also reminds me of the definitions of right effort. Do you think that the decline of unskillful mental qualities and the increase of skillful mental qualities may refer to the very present moment when right understanding arises and knows such states for what they are? Metta, Sarah ======== #67102 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, A good digression here, I think: --- ken_aitch wrote: > Just to digress a little: I notice the terms "internal" and "external" > appear. Bill and others have been discussing those terms as found in > the Satipatthana Sutta. I think their meaning (or one of their > meanings) is made clearer here (or in the Mahaanidaana Sutta) by their > being grouped with "past, future, gross or subtle, inferior or > superior, far or near." Past and future (for example) are not directly > known, are they? (Except by an omniscient Tathagata.) But when a monk > practises direct knowing he knows the present conditioned arammana to > be the same as all other conditioned dhammas (anicca dukkha and > anatta, not mine, not I, not self). He knows they are the same as the > feelings that have arisen in the past and those that will arise in the > future. He knows they are the same as the (external) feeling that some > other person is experiencing. > ..... S: I think this is very good and that this is the meaning of khandha as you express it. Metta, Sarah ======= #67103 From: "Michael Kalyaano" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Re: What is Meditation? kalyaano Dear Sarah It was intersting to meet you, John, Nina, Lodewijk, Han, Knowing, Azita, Shakti and others on Saturday. The respectful deference (for Ajahn Sujin) and enthusiasm of the DSG group in Bangkok reminds me of the Baptist bible study classes I attended as a teenager. I don't recall us discussing the meaning of quiet and peace on Saturday. I think you raised a few questions on my behalf that I would not have phrased the way you did. As I said before the Saturday meeting, I don't feel comfortable in the DSG discussions. The emphases of Ajahn Sujin and her inspired followers is not right, with many inaccurate assumptions and misunderstandings about meditation (vipassana and samadhi). The phrasing below is an example. > > Who else familiar to DSG? Ven Dhammanando, Nina, Lodewijk, Sukin, Betty, > Matt(Ivan), Azita, Michael Kalyanno (was Michael Jackson)...I was > particularly glad to meet Michael for the first time. (Hopefully a pic > will be loaded by someone...). Michael is just back from a long meditation > retreat in Myanmar and we discussed the meaning of quiet and peace. Is > there more mindfulness in a 'quiet' environment without books and talk? > (Michael, pls add more of your thoughts with us sometime - i know you > weren't quite satisfied with the answers:-))....) > > Lodewijk raised more on meditation and Vince (with Nancy en route to > Myanmar too!!)were asking K.Sujin why she discourages sitting meditation > or retreats as such....'What is meditation?', she asked several times... As I said on Saturday, I have no wish to represent a "meditators' faction" or any group of people. It is burden enough to represent "myself" in daily life. I will not participate further in DSG and doubt I'll attend the Bangkok centre again either. Both forums are controversial and not conducive to understanding. Please do not consider me to be a DSG member from now on. May you be happy and peaceful, may you realise cessation of dukkha in this lifetime. Michael Kalyaano #67104 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... p.s --- ken_aitch wrote: > Yes, the common soil - the five khandhas - gives rise to rocket > science, the theory of evolution and lots of other useful pannatti. > But only satipatthana - direct knowledge of the five khandhas - leads > to the end of suffering. .... S: I meant to include this too. Exactly so. Sarah ====== #67105 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:54 am Subject: Re: What is Meditation? kelvin_lwin Hi James, > Actually, since I have read that article and decided not to kill the > mosquitoes anymore, they have stopped biting me. I send them > thoughts of goodwill, mentally tell them that if they bite me Wow, amazing. It never worked for me in asia, it's always harder to keep sila there :) Your metta must be pure or something. Although I'm wondering if blowing ants/insects away might be like being in an earthquake or hurricane for them and still unsettling. Flies are probably the worst although they all need to sustain themselves somehow. - Kel #67106 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:16 am Subject: Re: Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear All, > > Here's a more complete extract of the one I re-quoted earlier. This is > from: Shwe Zan Aung, The Compendium of Philosophy, a translation of the > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha ... Dear Sarah Thanks for this information. But a quote ending with "Of these, the first two classes [of laughter] are indulged in by cultured persons, the next two by the average man, and the last two by the lower classes of being." cannot be taken serious. S (some hours ago): I'll go with the akusala and very natural for most of what arises in a day theory:-) " J: Between all the joking it's good to explain this serious one: do you mean that most what is very natural=akusala. That akusala arising realities (for a wordling) is the rule and kusala the exception? Do you mean that the human nature is akusala? In that case I prefer no longer calling myself a theravadin but prefer to be a mahayanist. Metta Joop #67107 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Joop, >... > Actually, I have not weighed in on the laughing issue. Laughing is > such a complex mechanism that I am unable to analyze my own laughter or > the root causes of it. Additionally, I figure, if arahants can smile > why can't they laugh also? What's the difference? I guess I could > read the UP articles about the smiling Buddha....later. This type of > information is just a curiosity factor, not an enlightenment factor. ;- > )) > > And, again, I know from experience that this is a touchy subject. I > want to emphasize that I am not judging crying as being bad or > unnatural, and that people shouldn't cry. I just don't think that > Buddhas or arahants have any motivations (root factors) to cry. > > Metta, > James > Hallo James To me the touchy character of this topic is not the being or not- being natural of crying, but I understand your being careful after the experience in another discussion-group. To me the touchy character of this topic is the emphasis that is given more and more on the dichotomy kusala - akusala (little in the Suttas, more in the Abhidhamma and still more in the commentaries of monks). Nearly natural = akusala in this culture and I don't think that's correct. Thanks for the Upatissa Sutta you quoted. Reading (Sariputta saying): 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.' gives me the question: I'm no so far, there 'are things in the world' that 'arise in me sorrow … etc.' But do I want to be somebody who can say 'There is nothing …' ? Because in this way there is also nothing that arise in me COMPASSION. Metta Joop #67108 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Thx for your good quotes. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > I read in the Commentary to The Great Discourse on Causation, where > Aananda's comment about how the dependent origination appears 'clear' > to him is being discussed: > > "Dependent arising, though deep, appeared clear to the Elder Aananda > for four reasons: (1)because he was endowed with decisive supporting > conditions from the past; (2)because of his diligence in study; > (3)because he was a steam-enterer; and (4)because he was highly > learned." .... Sarah: Just to add the Pali terms (as given in a foot-note): 1)Pubb'uupanissayasampatti 2)titthavaasa 3)sotaapannataa 4)bahussutabhaava ..... > In clarifying the fourth point: > > "...For those who are highly learned, the delimitation of > materialiy-mentality becomes as evident as a bed and chair in a small > room illuminated by a lamp, and Venerable Aananda was the chief of > those who are highly learned. Because of his great learning dependent > arising, though deep, appeared clear to him." ... Sarah: In othere words, 'bahussuta', (having heard much or highly learned) refers to having developed insight directly, not just to theoretical learning. .... > And the Sub-Commentary: > > "...The 'delimitation of mentality-materiality' is comprehension by > delimiting mentality-materiality together with its conditions." > > Is naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na, in fact, an artifact of learning? > I see how a complex set of other factors are noted, and the > significant one being the effect on the subsequent flow of > consciousness of magga and phala cittaa. .... S: As long as we see the learning as being direct understanding with wisdom on account of hearing and considering much, on account of firm understanding of the 4NT. Without the insight of naama-ruupa pariccheda, higher insights and stream-entry cannot be obtained. "The principal of conditionality appears clear to streamenterers because, with the dispelling of delusion, the principal 'whatever is subject to arising is all subject to ceasing' presents itself to them by way of personal direct cognition." This is impossible without 'bahussutabhaava', without hearing about and directly understanding namas and rupas repeatedly. Please keep quoting from the Mahanidana and comys - a great text. Metta, Sarah ======== #67109 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott Hallo Jon I'm glad to hear Joop #67110 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:27 am Subject: Re: Lachen und Weinen (Was: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > Hallo James, Jon, Howard > > It's a long time ago I thought systematically about what is crying > and what is laughing > But it's clear (to me) that there are different ways of doing it > (Doing? It is done, it happens!). > I agree with this observation. Laughing is a spontaneous reaction (so-called 'forced laughter' though has an element of the intended). > So it is useless (and wrong) to make general remarks about it. The > same to taking together crying and laughing: there are ressemblances > but also there are differences. > > James for some reasons you only talked about 'crying'. I don't know > why. > There are many kinds of crying, perhaps most, that are akusala, I > don't doubt. (In fact better not use the therm 'akusala', better to > say: 'egocentric'). But there are also moments of crying in one life > that are not akusala: moments of SURRENDER. > Well, if there are moments of crying that are kusala, I don't think they would include 'surrender' (although I suppose it depends what you mean by this). What kind of kusala do you have in mind here: dana or sila or bhavana? > Most laughing is egocentric too, or hatred (making ridicule > somebody), or based in being attached. > But again: some moments of laughing are moment of DETACHEMENT. > It seems from Sarah's post that you might be closer to the Abhidhamma that I was ;-)) > Another point, laughing, using humor, is also a way of communicating. > Some budhhist teachers use it in teaching the Dhamma; for example in > Zen, but also the Dalai Lama does, but it's true that it does not > belong to the Theravada-culture (but there are exceptions). > I'm certainly not denying the useful conventional role of laughing (or crying, for that matter). But conventional 'value' and 'value' in terms of the dhamma often do not coincide. Jon #67111 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:39 am Subject: Re: TYPO Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 1/14/07 8:00:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka writes: > > >> In general, what is unwholesome is not to be pursued though it may easily >> be somewhat tolerated in its less innocuous forms. >> >> > ==================== > In the foregoing, either 'less' should have been 'more', or > 'innocuous' should have been 'noxious'. > I thought your original comment was well put: the unwholesome is not to be pursued (whereas the wholesome is). As regards the unwholesome that has already arisen, there is no choice but to 'tolerate' it in a certain sense, in that there's no point lamenting over what can't be undone. But I think you are referring to the 'all day, everyday' kind of akusala. This can be tolerated because it is not going to condition rebirth in one of lower planes (where there is no chance of hearing the teachings). Jon #67112 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the stuart davis show jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon (and Howard), > > >> And akusala citta can also be the object of awareness, eh James? >> > > I suppose so- unless it is too deeply rooted in delusion. > Right, but then when awareness has been further developed it will take even ignorance/delusion and wrong view as it's object. Jon #67113 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Michael, I apologise for any topics I raised last Saturday or for any comments I've made here to cause you any distress, Michael. Juat a couple of small clarifications: --- Michael Kalyaano wrote: > I don't recall us discussing the meaning of quiet and peace on > Saturday. I think you raised a few questions on my behalf that I would > not have phrased the way you did. .... S: I believe the topic was a general one of interest to everyone present. It actually followed on from discussions we'd been having on the previous few days (when you hadn't been present). So it wasn't intended in anyway as being directed to you in particular at all. Having said that, I do think it's very important to consider what the real meaning of 'quiet and peace' are, no matter where we find ourselves. I find this very useful to consider and this is why I raised it. .... > As I said before the Saturday > meeting, I don't feel comfortable in the DSG discussions. The emphases > of Ajahn Sujin and her inspired followers is not right, with many > inaccurate assumptions and misunderstandings about meditation > (vipassana and samadhi). .... S: There are many people here who don't agree with A.Sujin's emphasis (or that of others of us). DSG is made up of friends with a wide-range of understandings of the (Theravada) teachings and that is what we discuss. Personally I'm not quite happy when people suggest there is a 'DSG-line' for this reason. We'd welcome any of your elaborations on any of the 'inaccurate assumptions...etc'. I remember you have read widely, so pls help to point these out, Michael. Many people would be glad to hear from you with your honest comments. .... >The phrasing below is an example. >.....Michael is just back from a long > meditation > > retreat in Myanmar and we discussed the meaning of quiet and > peace. Is > > there more mindfulness in a 'quiet' environment without books and > talk? > > (Michael, pls add more of your thoughts with us sometime - i know > you > > weren't quite satisfied with the answers:-))....) > > > > Lodewijk raised more on meditation and Vince (with Nancy en route to > > Myanmar too!!)were asking K.Sujin why she discourages sitting > meditation > > or retreats as such....'What is meditation?', she asked several > times... > > As I said on Saturday, I have no wish to represent a "meditators' > faction" or any group of people. It is burden enough to > represent "myself" in daily life. .... S: And I certainly don't recall you being asked to represent any faction or group at all. I don't think anyone thought of you in this way. For example, none of the later discussion on 'meditation' was directed at you as I recall and the comments about the meaning of 'quiet and peace' lasted for just a few minutes near the start of the almost 3 hr session. It may have been my mistake to try to include you in the discussion at all. I thought you'd find it more useful or interesting if part of it was related to issues we'd discussed, rather than just bringing up Han's and my more technical points. I had good intentions but pls accept my apologies again for any misjudgement. .... > I will not participate further in DSG and doubt I'll attend the Bangkok > centre again either. Both forums are controversial and not conducive to > understanding. Please do not consider me to be a DSG member from > now on. .... S: I'm very sorry you see it this way, Michael. In any case I'm glad you've explained why you're disturbed. I would like to hear more about your views and understanding of the teachings, however, if you'll give us another chance and show a little patience with my fumbling efforts to include you .... > May you be happy and peaceful, may you realise cessation of dukkha in > this lifetime. .... S: Best wishes for your practice/development too, Michael. As I said, I was very glad to meet you and would like to get to know you better. Metta, Sarah ======= #67114 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& KenH), --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Bh. Bodhi, Note 19: "The commentaries divide full understanding > (pari~n~na) into three consecutive stages. In the first, 'full > understanding of the known' (~naatapari~n~na), mental and material > phenomena are delimited by the defining of their particular > characteristics and their conditioned origination is ascertained by > the discernment of their conditions. In the second, 'full > understanding by scrutinisation' (tiira.napari~n~na), those same > phenomena are surveyed by way of the three general characteristics: > impermanence, suffering, and non-self. In the third, 'full > understanding by abandoning' (pahaanapari~n~na), erroneous conceptions > are abandoned by the arising of successive insights leading up to the > supramundane path. The insight knowledges proper begin at this third > stage, with the first two stages serving as their foundation." .... S: More on this is given in the commentary to the Mulapariya Sutta and commentaries, also transl. by B.Bodhi (BPS): Cy: "...Therein, what is the full understanding of the known? He fully understands the earth element thus: "This is the internal earth element [S:pathavi dhatu], this the external. This is its characteristic, this its function, manifestation, and proximate cause." This is the full understanding of the known. What is the fully understanding by scrutinization? Having known it in this way, he scrutinizes the earth element in forty-two modes as impermanent, suffering, a sickness, etc. This is full understanding by scrutinization. What is the fully understanding by abandoning? Having scrutinized it in this way, he abandons desire and lust for the earth element through the supreme path (aggamagga). This is full understanding by abandoning. Or, alternatively, the defining of mentality-materiality (naamaruupavavatthaana)[S: 1st stage of insight] is the full understanding of the known; from insight-comprehension of the groups (kalaapasammasana)[S:3rd stage of insight]as far as conformity-knowledge (anuloma)[S;just preceding enlightenment]is the full understanding of scrutinization; and the knowledge of the ariyan path is the full understanding by abandoning [S: at enlightenment]. He who fully understands earth understands it by these three full understandings. But for the worldling there is no such full understanding. Therefore, due to his lack of full understanding, he conceives earth and delights in it. Hence the Exalted One said: "Herein, bhibbhus, an uninstructed worldling...conceives (himself as) earth....What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare." ..... Sub Cy: "Therein, the 'full understanding of the known' is the wisdom of full understanding by which one fully understands, delimits (paricchindati), the plane of insight (vipassanaaabhuumi)......The 'full understanding of scrutinization' understands the five clinging aggregates in their true nature as impermanent, (suffering, and non-self), by delimiting them through insight-comprehension and scrutinizing their modes of impermanence, etc, together with their accompaniments. The 'supreme path' is the path of arahatship, for this abandons desire and lust without remainder; or it is the supramundane path (in general). Either is the full understanding of abandoning, which in the abstract sense is the wisdom which abandons (defilements) by eradicating them (samucchedapahaanakaarii pa~n~naa)." ***** Metta, Sarah ========= #67115 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:49 am Subject: A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? philofillet Hello Han I think the sutta in question is not explicitly about the parammatha/conventional (I forget the Pali word) balance but it feels like that to me, and has helpful to me in that way. It's in the Satipatthana Samyutta, 47:19. I think it is very interesting to reflect on, and I will do so when I am back on my days off next week. Sorry I don't have time right now. Please keep posting. I think I read once that you feel aversion to debates, but I hope that doesn't lead you away because I really do find that the tone of your posts is wonderful and a good example for all of us. Metta, Phil > I am also interested in the sutta with the acrobat > simile, which you mentioned. Could you kindly tell me > more about it? > Thank you very much. > > Respectfully, > Han #67116 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Thank you for your further post. Now we have some definite clash and > the discussion could be worthwhile. Uh-oh. Sounds like a storm brewing ;-)) >> Your point if I've understood >> is that when the Buddha described the development of >> the path he was intending his listeners (and those >> of us reading the suttas now) to do something at the >> time. What I'm saying is that Rahula didn't have >> to 'do' anything because he was already 'there'. > > James: I really don't see how you can come to this conclusion. Yes, > Rahula had a high degree of panna (wisdom) but he wasn't "there" yet- > he wasn't enlightened. By 'there' I meant on the very verge of enlightenment. I didn't mean to suggest he was already enlightened. > The Buddha tells him exactly what he needs > to "do" to become enlightened (and "doing" isn't always physical, > usually it's mental): > > "Seeing thus, Rahula, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows > disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, ... > > ... > So, the Buddha tells Rahula that in order for him to become > enlightened he must become disenchanted with the six sense spheres > and their objects. At the beginning of the sutta, he was still > enchanted with the six sense spheres, so he has to become > disenchanted. This is doing something. How else could you see it? Well certainly things were happening, conditioned by the fact that what the Buddha was saying made perfect sense to Rahula. If you want to call that a 'doing' that's OK, but it's not a doing of the kind that is sometimes discussed here as intentional activities leading to the arising of kusala. >> He needed only to have something pointed out to him. > > James: What he had to have pointed out to him is what he had to > mentally "do" in order to become enlightened. I am getting the > impression that you don't think any type of mental action is > a "doing". Is that corrrect? > Well I think here we are getting down to fine points of difference. Whether what was pointed out to him is best described as something to be done, or to be understood, or to be realised I don't think really matters. I think we both see it as different in nature to the kind of intentional activity that occurs when 'formal practice' is undertaken. >> It's like learning any additional knowledge about a complex >> subject: if you're ready for the incremental piece of >> information, it 'fits' exactly with what you already know >> and is immediately obvious, otherwise it does' really make >> sense even if you can kind of see how it might be related. > > > James: Well, here is where we are really far apart. I don't view the > function of wisdom as like the function of knowledge (intellect). In > short, I see knowledge as adding things and I see wisdom as taking > away things (defilements). Adding things, such as in learning a > foreign language, is much easier because you build on previous > information. Wisdom doesn't have the function of adding things and > it is much harder to come by. Also, the result isn't like one > thing "fitting" into something else, as you describe, but something > being taken away (defilements) to reveal something entirely new > (insight). Yes, we seem to be some distance apart here. To my understanding, wisdom (panna cetasika) is developed until the stage of enlightenment (magga citta) at which point it permanently eradicates the appropriate level of kilesa. The lessening of the defilements is a function of the increase in panna. >> So we agree on the general reading of the sutta. Perhaps you could >> explain again the conclusions you draw from it, and how you apply >> those conclusion to your reading of other suttas. > > James: I think I have explained enough but perhaps I need to offer > more explanation? I view all of the suttas in pretty much this > fashion: The Buddha is teaching the doing of something and that doing > is the removal of defilements by building non-attachment. Thanks for the further explanation. I think we'll have to agree to differ on the last point. Of course, there is then the question of how non-attachment is built, whether that is by a doing also. But perhaps we should leave it there for the time being. > Thanks. > > James: No, thank you for not dropping this thread.:-) > Wouldn't dream of it! Thanks for the useful discussion. Jon #67117 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:00 am Subject: Lachen und Weinen (Was: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn Hallo Jon Jon: Well, if there are moments of crying that are kusala, I don't think they would include 'surrender' (although I suppose it depends what you mean by this). What kind of kusala do you have in mind here: dana or sila or bhavana? Joop: I will not try to explain what 'surrender' (as a psychological phenomena) means; better look it up And I didn't use the term 'kusala', what I'm thinking about is: compassion (karuna). Jon: I'm certainly not denying the useful conventional role of laughing (or crying, for that matter). But conventional 'value' and 'value' in terms of the dhamma often do not coincide Joop: Because you say 'dhamma' and not 'Dhamma' you must mean here with 'dhamma': utimate phenomena. That was not what I was talking about: I talked about laughter as means to teach the Dhamma (with a capital D) But perhaps you wanted to say something else, why for example did you use the term 'value' ? (a check-question: is 'value' an ultimate or a conventional description of reality?) And for the rest: I think there is said enough about 'Lachen und Weinen' now. Metta Joop #67118 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Sarah, Sarah: The gift of harmlessness is I believe included in Abhaya dana (often translated as 'the gift of life'). Bhikkhu Samahita wrote a post on 3 kinds of dana (366132): Amisa dana (the gift of material things), abhaya dana (the gift of life) and dhamma dana (the gift of Truth). I'm sure they will all be referred to in the essays and your up-coming series on 'Daana'. Han: There are many kinds of daana. In the Burmese book that I have there are classifications of daanas in twos, threes, fours, fives, sixes, sevens, eights, nines and tens. Some examples of twos: vatthu daana and abhaya daana; aamisa daana and dhamma daana, and so on. I am extremely sorry that I will have to disappoint you once again. I will have to go back to Yangon after a few days time. I do not know how long I will be there. I will have no access to internet during that period. If you can, please wait for me. If cannot, someone can start the presentation of Daana compiled by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Respectfully, Han #67119 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Phil, (and Sarah and others), Thank you very much for giving me the sutta reference. I have downloaded the sutta and studied it. I like it very much. For those who are interested I print below the name of the sutta and the link to click on. SN 47.19 Sedaka Sutta: At Sedaka: The Acrobat Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.019.than.html Respectfully, Han #67120 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 5 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, This is the continuation of the topics that you and I raised together at the Foundation. Sarah: 5.We raised a technical question about vipaka conditioning vipaka and there was a discussion about how one moment of vipaka, such as seeing consciousness could condition the next moment of vipaka, sampaticchana citta by anantarupanissaya paccaya (proximate decisive-support condition) as I recall. This was given in contrast to when vipaka is a condition for later vipaka to arise by pakatupanissaya paccaya (decisive-support condition)for which there may be a very small interval or a very long interval. I'd like to listen to this part of the discussion again, as I'm a bit vague on the details given. Ven Dhammanando or someone else may be able to add a further comment on this. This topic arose from yr messages #65145,#65146, #65186 and I was also thinking of Melek's good Patthana quote in #? (26th Dec). [Btw, Melek, did you see my reply on 'vedana'? Any comments?) Han: It concerns with the natural decisive support-condition (pakatupanissaya-paccaya) of Patthaana. There are many relations mentioned under this condition, out of which the following three were difficult for me. (1) Preceding indeterminate states (abyaakataa dhamma) are related to subsequent indeterminate states (abyaakataa dhamma) by decisive support condition. (2) Preceding indeterminate states (abyaakataa dhamma) are related to subsequent faultless states (kusalaa dhamma) by decisive support condition. (3) Preceding indeterminate states (abyaakataa dhamma) are related to subsequent faulty states (akusalaa dhamma) by decisive support condition. [Abyaakataa dhammas are 36 resultant (vipaaka) cittas, and 20 functional (kiriya) cittas.] The difficulty is to show examples. Nina in her book on Patthaana gives the following examples. “The natural decisive support-condition is very wide. It comprises also vipaka which conditions akusala citta or kusala citta, or vipaka which conditions vipaka. Vipaka conditions kusala citta when one, for example, suffers bodily pain and is reminded by it that life is short and that one therefore should not delay the development of right understanding. Vipaka conditions akusala citta when one has aversion towards pain. Body-consciousness which is kusala vipaka can condition body-consciousness which is akusala vipaka by natural decisive support-condition. When it is hot outside one may use air-conditioning and this may cause bodily well-being. But then the temperature inside may become too cold and one suffers bodily discomfort or catches a cold. Akusala vipaka can condition kusala vipaka by natural decisive support-condition. When we are sick we may have to follow a painful therapy in order to get cured and then there is akusala vipaka through the bodysense, but as a result there will be bodily well-being again.” The most difficult part is to give examples on how one vipaaka conditions another vipaaka. When it is hot, the hot body-consciousness is one vipaaka. If one then uses air-conditioning this may cause bodily well-being, another vipaaka. In such a case can one assume that one vipaaka conditions another vipaaka despite the intervention of using air-conditioning? Nina later gave another example: a painful massage or a painful injection can condition later on bodily wellbeing. In most of the conditions such as Proximity condition (anantara-paccaya) and Contiguity condition (samanantara-paccaya), there is no time interval between conditioning dhamma and conditioned dhamma. But the natural decisive support-condition (pakatupanissaya-paccaya) is different. It is very, very wide. There can be time interval between conditioning dhamma and conditioned dhamma. The conditioning dhamma could even be the dhamma in past lives. I found this out in a Burmese book after I had posted the above messages. This fact was confirmed by KS and Nina at the meeting at the Foundation. Now, I have no more difficulty with this condition. If it is not clear to you please let me know. Respectfully, Han #67121 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Joy and It's Fruits: From DN 21 upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 1/17/07 3:28:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > Hi Howard. > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > >The proof of the pudding is in the tasting, and the value of an event is > >in > >its consequences." In the matter of evaluating phenomena, whether > >laughter, > >crying, dreaming, or whatever, the specific conditions involved need to > >be looked > >at, and not just a general categorization, and it is very important to > >see > >what fruits follow. > .... > S: This important point also touches on one of the topics of Phil's which > I mentioned - whether the evaluation of kusala and akusala refers to the > wisdom when such states arise or to some speculation about the > consequences. > .... > > In that regard, i.e., evaluating a phenomenon by its > > > >consequences, and with regard to joy, in particular, I draw your > >attention to the > >following material from the Sakka-Pa~nha Sutta: > > > >'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued ¬ to be > >pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When > >one knows of > >a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities > >increase, > >and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be > >pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, > >unskillful mental > >qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > >joy > >is to be pursued. > .... > S: This also reminds me of the definitions of right effort. Do you think > that the decline of unskillful mental qualities and the increase of > skillful mental qualities may refer to the very present moment when right > understanding arises and knows such states for what they are? ------------------------------------------ Howard: It can be read in both ways, and I do read it in both ways. There are other places in which the Buddha spoke of actions and phenomena that are conducive to good & so on, and I do NOT think that he was referring only to the instant of the arising of phenomena. ------------------------------------------- > > > Metta, > > Sarah ===================== With metta, Howard #67122 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) upasaka_howard Hi, Joop (and James, and all) - In a message dated 1/17/07 4:17:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > To me the touchy character of this topic is the emphasis that is > given more and more on the dichotomy kusala - akusala (little in the > Suttas, more in the Abhidhamma and still more in the commentaries of > monks). Nearly natural = akusala in this culture and I don't think > that's correct. > ======================= Joop, you know where I stand on this matter of emotion. [The "same" emotion can arise from varying conditions, and, in fact, to speak of the *same* emotion, when differently based is actually a trivialization of the facts. Not all laughter is the same. Not all crying is the same. Not all "generosity" is the same. Not all "strictness" is the same.] I am strongly opposed to a dour, negative, and puritanical approach to life. Life without perception of natural beauty and joy is a perversion, as I see it. Such an approach, to my mind, is one of several errors possible for us, and is one of the worst, IMO. That all being said, I would add one disclaimer to this business about naturality and unwholesomeness (or, better, imperfection). The Buddha did say that the Dhamma goes against the stream, which, to my mind, means that following the Dhamma is "unnatural" in the sense that going along with our ordinary inclinations is "natural". There is a "natural" (or at least common) tendency on the part of humans to be led by desire and then bring in reason to attempt to justify their desire-led actions after the fact. In that sense, what is "natural" often is unwholesome or, at least, imperfect. Hearing (or reading) that we are typically led by desire can help make us aware of the fact. But only looking inwards with a steadied mind and examining how our mentality actually works will make the matter crystal clear. And intentionally looking within for the facts, and going against the stream in general, requires intentional effort, something that some are reluctant to consider. ;-) With metta, Howard #67123 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 2 (Was What is Meditation?) jonoabb Hi Han I'm enjoying your series of points from the discussion in Bangkok. Just a comment on the second topic regarding the apparent conflict between paramattha and conventional notions, I think you have put your finger on it when you say: > If I accept both the paramattha truths and > conventional truths, the two truths can go along > hand-in-hand. But if I try to force the paramattha > truths upon the conventional truths, then there is, at > least for me, the ‘conflict.’ I think it's the same for all of us. If we were to try to live our lives as if our direct understanding of the way things are was greater than it really is, then it would introduce tension, if not conflict, into our lives. Is this perhaps what you mean by trying to force the paramattha truths upon the conventional truths? But if we accept our level of understanding as it is, then as you say the two truths can exist without conflict. Thanks for summarising the point so succinctly. Jon #67124 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method jonoabb Hi Andrew Andrew wrote: > Hi Jon & James > > My copy of the sutta you are discussing doesn't expressly state that > Rahula was sotapanna at the beginning of the sutta, however it is clear > that he had achieved some form of high attainment. > > In the case of a sotapanna, of course, the suttas say that there is a > finite number of rebirths left before enlightenment necessarily > occurs. Using James's theory, the Buddha's teaching to Ariyans will > necessarily be of a fundamentally different character from his > teachings to non-Ariyans. After all, what's the point in telling > Ariyans to "do" anything when whatever they thereafter do will still > end in enlightenment (even if the Buddha didn't utter a word to them)? > Yes, the sotapanna is bound for final enlightenment (that is the significance of his having 'entered the stream'). > I don't view this thought as "disproving" James's theory, but I raise > it to see if anyone has any thoughts on the following questions. Is > there any support for the view that the Buddha taught prescriptively > for non-Ariyans and descriptively for Ariyans? Are the laws of reality > in 2 volumes - one for non-Ariyans and one for Ariyans? Why did the > Buddha teach Ariyans at all? > As regards the last question, there's a sutta where the Buddha explains that for all persons except the arahant there is still 'work to be done', so in this respect the worldling and the non-arahant ariyan are in the same boat. As for arahants, there's also a sutta (it may be the same one) that explains that even arahants benefit from continuing to listen to and discuss the Dhamma. I suppose that in any event it has become their nature by then. Jon #67125 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 6 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Sarah, This is the continuation of the topics that you and I raised together at the Foundation. Sarah: 6. Finally, I think, the question about whether any kind of akusala can arise in the vithi (process) immediately preceding the one in which magga cittas arise. This followed a discussion you'd had with Nina, eg. #66021 in which she'd stressed that lobha or dosa can arise immediately before magga citta. This is correct because any dhamma, any reality can be the object of insight at any time. (We're not here talking about anagamis and arahants). This is why the path is all about understanding and detachment towards what has been conditioned, even if it's strong kilesa. This is why the only real obstacle to the development of vipassana is wrong view. Han: It started with my answer to the questions on The Stages of Insight (Cetasika corner, # 65949). Question (vi) Can aversion be the object of insight in the process of cittas during which enlightenment is attained? Answer: Aversion can be an object of “mindfulness” in the gradual process of development of understanding, but aversion cannot be the object of “insight” in the process of cittas during which enlightenment is attained. Only one of the three characteristics of realities (naama and ruupa) can be the object of insight, to be penetrated by paññå accompanying the mahå-kusala cittas before the “change of lineage” (gotrabhu citta) arises in magga viithi. Then, the object becomes Nibbana for gotrabhu citta, magga citta and phala citta in the same viithi process. -------------------- Nina disagreed with my answer. She said (# 65953): “Yes, aversion can be the object of the maha-kusala cittas arising in the process of cittas during which enlightenment is attained. Why? Because it can be seen as impermanent, dukkha, anatta. When we speak about the three characteristics, these are always the characteristic *of* a dhamma that presents itself, any dhamma, even lobha or dosa. Enlightenment occurs in daily life. Thus, the characteristic of anatta, etc. is never separated from a dhamma that naturally presents itself because of the appropriate conditions. When we consider this, we understand the whole development of insight, up to enlightenment, occurs in daily life. We are angry and attached, but these are cetasikas, realities and their characteristics can be penetrated deeper and deeper. -------------------- Nina’s views were confirmed by KS at the meeting. I accepted the explanation, and the case was closed. This is the END of our discussions. Respectfully, Han P.S. Yes, it was rather a long afternoon as we arrived early. I got home safely. I thank you and Jon once again for taking me along to the Foundation. #67126 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Joy and It's Fruits: From DN 21 ken_aitch Hi Sarah, Welcome back. I look forward to hearing the recorded talks. Having said that, I must admit to not finishing the previous lot yet. At this time of year I don't get quite enough time to myself. I was sorry to see that not everyone enjoyed the meetings. Meditation is a touchy subject with Buddhists. However, everyone must eventually see that the Dhamma is telling us something new - not something we already know. I think your comments to Howard are an excellent illustration: ------------------- > > DN 21: 'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be > pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When > one knows of > a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities > increase, > and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be > pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, > unskillful mental > qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > joy > is to be pursued. .... S: > This also reminds me of the definitions of right effort. Do you think that the decline of unskillful mental qualities and the increase of skillful mental qualities may refer to the very present moment when right understanding arises and knows such states for what they are? ---------------------- Yes! Otherwise it is just more of the same (conventional) wisdom, which really is of very limited use. It reminds me of the old question, "Should I encourage my child to play sport?" "Yes," we are solemnly told, "if it leads to strength and courage: No, if it leads to cowardice and aggression." I see, thanks a lot; that really tells me something I didn't already know! :-) Ken H #67127 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 2 (Was What is Meditation?) hantun1 Dear Jon, Jon: I think it's the same for all of us. If we were to try to live our lives as if our direct understanding of the way things are was greater than it really is, then it would introduce tension, if not conflict, into our lives. Is this perhaps what you mean by trying to force the paramattha truths upon the conventional truths? Han: Yes, it is. I like your comment, “But if we accept our level of understanding as it is, then as you say the two truths can exist without conflict.” Respectfully, Han #67128 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs upasaka_howard Hi, Joop (and Jon, Sarah, and all) - =========================== I'm also certainly pleased to hear it accepted that worldlings can laugh wholesomely, but I don't believe for one second that sotapannas cannot laugh at all. There are a good number of well known teacher-monks who I believe are very likely stream entrants and who can and do laugh with loving joy in their hearts. I do not believe that none of these joyful and loving people are ariyans. And I also can't for the world fathom why some here actually seem to *want* it to be the case that there be no laughter among ariyans. I raise another matter here - about the kusala business: There seems to be a fixed belief that kusala and akusala are, not only distinguishable, but separate characteristics, and that while there are degrees of wholesomeness and degrees of unwholesomeness, one has nothing to do with the other. This strikes me as utterly false. The extent that a mindstate is wholesome in some respect (with regard to wisdom, or to not craving, or to not exhibiting aversion, or to being free of clinging) is the extent to which that state fails to exhibit unwholesomeness in that respect. Should just a bit of insight/wisdom be present, that makes that state mildly wholesome and largely unwholesome (with regard to wisdom), but should a great deal of insight/wisdom be present, that makes the state strongly wholesome and mildly unwholesome. The point is that wholesomeness-unwholesomeness is a range, not two separate features. That range is not a matter of only black and white, but of shades of gray as well. It is not a matter of only 0 and 1, but of an infinity of intermediate values as well. The closer to 1 the more wholesome and less unwholesome, and the closer to zero the more unwholesome and less wholesome. The either-or, black or white, zero or one perspective on wholesomeness and unwholesomeness is, as I see it, a doctrinaire approach to the Dhamma that is not oriented to the way things are. It is, to coin a term, an "Ayn Rand Buddhism". With metta, Howard #67129 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:14 pm Subject: Re: What is Meditation? buddhatrue Hi Kel, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > Wow, amazing. It never worked for me in asia, it's always harder to > keep sila there :) Your metta must be pure or something. LOL! No way! My metta is very weak- like a refrigerator light bulb. It only shows when I open up; otherwise it's locked up in the cold! ;-)) I think that my metta combined with the metta of the members of this group (who read my post and sympathized with me) was strong enough to keep the mosquitoes and biting flies away. The Buddha taught that combined metta is much stronger than individual metta. However, after I posted that message, the strength must have diminished somewhat because that very night I got bit six times on my right wrist! lol Maybe my post irritated some people- made it seem like I was bragging somehow (???). But, really, I was just trying to encourage the development of metta in others and how useful it can be. Now, when I see the bites on my wrist as I type this message, I smile to myself. They are a lesson to keep my big mouth shut! ;-)) Glad to see you pop back in, Kel. Hope school and your meditation practice are going well. With Refrigerator Light Bulb Metta ;-)), James #67130 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > James: No, thank you for not dropping this thread.:-) > > > > Wouldn't dream of it! Thanks for the useful discussion. Yeah, it was useful I believe. Now, I really don't have much else to say except one thing: Formal sitting meditation is not the entirety of the Buddha's practice. Actually, I believe it is a very small part. Most of what occurs in the Buddha's path occurs in the mind and is not visible to anyone else. Sitting practice is just to concentrate the mind so that it will be concentrated when one is not sitting- in daily life. Sitting practice is really very natural and there is nothing ritualistic about it. We all spend most of the day sitting! We don't stand around like cows. ;-)) Some are lucky enought to have a very concentrated mind without sitting practice, but I think those types of people are in the minority. Though I emphasise sitting practice in this group quite often, I really believe that the development of satipatthana is much more important than the development of jhana. As the Buddha said, jhana leads to a pleasant abiding in the here and now, but satipatthana is useful in every situation. The Buddha's path is not restricted to the meditation cushion. Okay, enough of my diatribe. ;-)) Take care and thanks for the discussion. > > Jon > Metta, James #67131 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs buddhatrue Hi Howard (and Sarah), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I'm also certainly pleased to hear it accepted that worldlings can > laugh wholesomely, but I don't believe for one second that sotapannas cannot > laugh at all. James: I also don't buy that for one second! First, I couldn't quite read the information that Sarah posted because it was filled with a lot of strange symbols. I'm not sure that Jon interpreted it correctly. Does it only appear that way on my computer? Second, where is that information from and how credible is it? There are a good number of well known teacher-monks who I believe > are very likely stream entrants and who can and do laugh with loving joy in > their hearts. I do not believe that none of these joyful and loving people are > ariyans. James: Right. For example, the Dali Lama laughs and giggles constantly! And if he isn't at least a sotapanna, I don't know who could be! > And I also can't for the world fathom why some here actually seem to > *want* it to be the case that there be no laughter among ariyans. James: This is an assumption. I didn't see it that way. Jon was just reporting the information as he saw it. > I raise another matter here - about the kusala business: There seems > to be a fixed belief that kusala and akusala are, not only distinguishable, but > separate characteristics, and that while there are degrees of wholesomeness > and degrees of unwholesomeness, one has nothing to do with the other. This > strikes me as utterly false. The extent that a mindstate is wholesome in some > respect (with regard to wisdom, or to not craving, or to not exhibiting aversion, > or to being free of clinging) is the extent to which that state fails to > exhibit unwholesomeness in that respect. Should just a bit of insight/wisdom be > present, that makes that state mildly wholesome and largely unwholesome (with > regard to wisdom), but should a great deal of insight/wisdom be present, that > makes the state strongly wholesome and mildly unwholesome. > The point is that wholesomeness-unwholesomeness is a range, not two > separate features. That range is not a matter of only black and white, but of > shades of gray as well. It is not a matter of only 0 and 1, but of an infinity > of intermediate values as well. The closer to 1 the more wholesome and less > unwholesome, and the closer to zero the more unwholesome and less wholesome. The > either-or, black or white, zero or one perspective on wholesomeness and > unwholesomeness is, as I see it, a doctrinaire approach to the Dhamma that is not > oriented to the way things are. It is, to coin a term, an "Ayn Rand Buddhism". James: True, but in the bigger scheme of things this doesn't really matter. If a mindstate is only 1% unwholesome or 99% unwholesome, it still must be abandoned. Any degree of unwholesomeness will result in rebirth and a continuation of samsara. This may seem rather strict, but that's the way I see it. What do you think? > > With metta, > Howard Metta, James #67132 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs renmercer To become so overly concerned with laughter and smiles is not the most real and true reason why we are all out here. It is indeed a very precious achievement to born in the human form. One day we were simply not here and one day, it is for sure will not be here. Cultivate, practise and clear your minds for the time when the very gross mind will disolve with the likes of this body that you see, hear and smell with. death of the body is coming! what are we engaging ourselves with here? Be the watcher, watch the watcher. start with the body,more to the mind, then the feelings and then see the dhamma. Breath..... or is this just "Buddhist" entertainment for us alll? death is around the corner for all of you and me. we are all dhamma. "be silent, sit and watch your mind, if you can find it. What is mind???? buddhatrue wrote: Hi Howard (and Sarah), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I'm also certainly pleased to hear it accepted that worldlings can > laugh wholesomely, but I don't believe for one second that sotapannas cannot > laugh at all. James: I also don't buy that for one second! First, I couldn't quite read the information that Sarah posted because it was filled with a lot of strange symbols. I'm not sure that Jon interpreted it correctly. Does it only appear that way on my computer? Second, where is that information from and how credible is it? <....> #67133 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 1/17/07 8:00:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > James: True, but in the bigger scheme of things this doesn't really > matter. If a mindstate is only 1% unwholesome or 99% unwholesome, it > still must be abandoned. Any degree of unwholesomeness will result > in rebirth and a continuation of samsara. This may seem rather > strict, but that's the way I see it. What do you think? > > ======================== I agree! Ultimately all unwholesomeness needs to be rooted out. But we proceed in steps, and we must take care not to confuse less-than-perfect with terrible. We cannot start at the finish line, but we can and must move towards it, never being satisfied until the goal is won. With metta, Howard P.S. I've been meditating regularly two 45-minute sittings a day, every day, since "that dream" ;-)), and the meditation quality - the ease, the pleasantness, and the clarity - is dramatically on the upswing. After 10 minutes into a meditation, there is a "locking in" after which no effort is required. And I also find along with this a growing ease (and easygoingness) of mind all the rest of the time. So, however "that dream" is to be evaluated, I'm glad I had it and grateful for whatever conditions led to it. #67134 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method corvus121 Hi Jon Thanks for your reply. You wrote: > As regards the last question, there's a sutta where the Buddha explains > that for all persons except the arahant there is still 'work to be > done', so in this respect the worldling and the non-arahant ariyan are > in the same boat. I must confess that I am having difficulty seeing that the worldling and non-arahant ariyans *are* in the same boat. Due to the "maximum remaining lifetimes before enlightenment" principle, non-arahant ariyans *will* do the work whereas worldlings *might*. That's a pretty significant difference, wouldn't you say??? > As for arahants, there's also a sutta (it may be the same one) that > explains that even arahants benefit from continuing to listen to and > discuss the Dhamma. I suppose that in any event it has become their > nature by then. I think what you're saying here is that Buddhas teach non-arahant ariyans because it is their nature to do so (and even though these ariyans are already assured of the goal). I think there might be a more practical reason - i.e. ariyans weren't the sole audience (indeed, you and I can read these teachings today!) so the Buddha was *not* teaching for the benefit of the ariyans, but the "eavesdroppers" like you and me. ;-)) Not sure what the benefit is that arahants derive from discussing Dhamma. Can't be anything to do with kusala because all their cittas are kiriya, no? Do you have any other ideas on this? Is it too remote for us worldlings IYO? Best wishes Andrew #67135 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Han (& Phil), --- han tun wrote: > Han: > There are many kinds of daana. In the Burmese book > that I have there are classifications of daanas in > twos, threes, fours, fives, sixes, sevens, eights, > nines and tens. > > Some examples of twos: vatthu daana and abhaya daana; > aamisa daana and dhamma daana, and so on. .... S: I'll look forward to hearing more about these after your next return. Also of course, pattaanuppadaana (sharing of merit), anumodaana (rejoicing in others' kusala)... .... > > I am extremely sorry that I will have to disappoint > you once again. I will have to go back to Yangon after > a few days time. I do not know how long I will be > there. I will have no access to internet during that > period. If you can, please wait for me. If cannot, > someone can start the presentation of Daana compiled > by Bhikkhu Bodhi. .... S: Of course we will wait - no hurry at all. I hope there is nothing serious, Han - I believe it's an unexpected trip back. In any case, best wishes for while you are there and we'll look forward to hearing more from you on return. Thank you for giving the link to the sutta Phil was reminding us of. SN 47.19 Sedaka Sutta: At Sedaka: The Acrobat Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ sn/sn47/sn47. 019.than. html When I checked B.Bodhi's notes, I saw that 'harmlessness' was a translation of avihi.msaaya. I'm not sure you have the BB translation, so let me add a note: "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, lovingkindness, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself." BB Note: "The four terms are khantiyaa avihi.msaaya mettataaya anudayataaya. Spk takes the last three as respectively compassion, lovingkindness, and altruistic joy, and explains this maxim from a narrowly monastic perspective thus: 'The bhikkhu develops the jhaanas based on the brahmavihaara, then uses the jhaana as a basis for insight and attains arahantship. This one protects himself by protecting others.'..." Metta, Sarah ======== #67136 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Joy and It's Fruits: From DN 21 sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, Thx for your encouragement. --- ken_aitch wrote: > I was sorry to see that not everyone enjoyed the meetings. Meditation > is a touchy subject with Buddhists. ..... S: It is a sensitive topic. [At least others were happy this time who had not been happy a year ago(not that 'happiness' is the aim)! I forget the exact words (but can check), but in fact at one point at the very end, Vince asked KS directly why she goes out of her way to say things which she knows will be unpopular on this topic!] As it happens, when we were in Kaeng Krajan, there was some discussion about praise and blame and also about the meaning of gentle vs harsh speech and so on. K.Sujin hears a LOT of praise and blame in a day and on being reminded of some of the blame, her response was that when there is understanding and metta, we don't mind at all. 'Nothing can touch right understanding'. When there is true metta too, there are no expectations or concerns about the result. Of course, like most people, I like the praise and dislike the blame. Why? Because of clinging to 'Me'! However, I find it very helpful to have confidence in kusala and to know that this is all that matters. We just do our best and leave the rest to conditions. Sometimes we mean well or act with kindness, but the result seems like a bad one -- maybe someone gets angry, for example. Another time, we may act with little kindness, but the result seems like a good one if someone finds the word or deed helpful. So we cannot be misled by the seeming 'effect' as to determining the kusala/akusala involved. We had some discussion about the point concerning an 'over-stress on anatta' and so on, previously discussed on DSG with Lodewijk and others. K.Sujin emphasised again 'the truth' and when we speak with kusala, it's 'gentle', regardless of the effect. The reverse is true for speaking with akusala, even if someone likes it. ...... > ------------------- > > > DN 21: 'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued > & not to be > > pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When > > one knows of > > a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities > > increase, > > and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be > > pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, > > unskillful mental > > qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort > of > > joy > > is to be pursued. > .... > S: > This also reminds me of the definitions of right effort. Do you > think that the decline of unskillful mental qualities and the increase > of skillful mental qualities may refer to the very present moment when > right understanding arises and knows such states for what they are? > ---------------------- > > Yes! Otherwise it is just more of the same (conventional) wisdom, > which really is of very limited use. .... S: Of course, we can do our best to consider what is appropriate action or speech for the occasion, but in the ultimate sense to which I believe the Buddha is referring, I agree that it is to the development of kusala and decline and abandonment of akusala at that or this present moment which is always being referred to. Usually, of course, no one ever knows and it doesn't matter at all. The development of the path is for the growth of understanding and the decline/eradication of all attachment, starting with wrong view of self. Metta, Sarah ======= #67137 From: "Bill" Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:51 pm Subject: Thanks for the recommendations... bill_zenn James, Thanks for the resource shares. I am familiar with "Access to Insight" - I've been browsing that site for the last few months - but "What the Buddha Taught" is new to me. I ordered Bhikkhu Nanamoli's translation of the Majjhima Nikaya you recommended. I'm looking forward to studying it when it arrives. I'm sure this isn't news to most on the list, but just in case...I also found a handy app called "Pali Lookup" here: http://www.metta.lk/pali-utils/ I am going to start familiarizing myself with Pali to enhance my studies. Thanks again. Namaste, Bill Zenn #67138 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Stream (AN iv,5) sarahprocter... Hi All n' Phil, [Phil - NO NEED TO RESPOND!] Just a brief note (if conditions will allow, as you'd say:-) --- Phil wrote: > Happy New Year. Predictably I'm back sooner than I said I would > be. ... S: Well Nina repeated to Jon & I that you'd be back this Jan (not next Jan), so she was right:-). ... >(The past two years I studied Samyutta NIkaya, > especially SN 35. Fascinating stuff, but I think the obsesive > interest came from a desire to have the penetrative wisdom that is > necessary to really understand suttas dealing with the aggregates, > ayatanas etc. I have come to call it SOWS - Sexiness of Wisdom > Syndrome. I think we have to be careful with Abhidhamma for the same > reason. .... S: Another classic Phil-acronym:-)) .... >If one thinks that, > for example, it is all right to enjoy pornographic images, or ogling > women (just to choose forms of unwholesomeness that I have laways > struggled with) because it is an accumulated tendency but can be > seen as anatta which is more liberating than being concerned about > the akusala involved, one is heading off into dangerous territory. .... S: It would be very wrong to think 'it is all right to enjoy porn.....'. I truly believe that understanding p.d.s more and more directly leads to appreciating more an more the akusala involved at such times. Like the mosquito example James gave - without understanding anything about p.ds, it's easy to justify why the harming isn't really OK if not good. Only those who have eradicated wrong view of dhammas keep the precepts without fail, by really understanding the danger of akusala *when it arises*. .... > Sorry I don't have time to join in any discussions. I know I would > be *very* opinionated now, and would end up dodging threads and > feeling harassed by discussion obligation pressures again. I know > it's kind of....sneaky?...but it's the only way I can participate > for the time being. ... S: Cool! .... >For the time being, I'll share some thoughts on > AN once a week. Perhaps others would like to discuss. .... S: Look forward to your reflections. Metta, Sarah ====== #67139 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Our Discussions: 3 (Was What is Meditation?) sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thx for your further comment on the 'One-fold Path' thread and seeming over-emphasis on rt understanding. I'll leave it for now. Nina may add more as your post was also addressed to her. --- han tun wrote: > Han: > I still do not understand how a box of biscuits could > be cited as an example of attavaadupaadaana. I thank > KS and other members who kindly explained to me about > this topic. But I still maintain that > attavaadupaadaana and sakkaaya-ditthi are the same. .... S: Just briefly (because I know you're too busy and not inclined to follow this up), if we forget about all the terms above, when we look at or think about the box of biscuits, is there an idea of 'something' experienced through the eyes and touch, other than merely visible object which is seen and tangible object which is touched? In other words, don't we take the idea about 'box of biscuits' to be actually existing? Can we say this idea of 'some thing' existing is an aspect of atta? (As I said to Phil, no need to respond now or later unless you'd like to). Again, it was a real pleasure to work together and raise the various topics for further consideration. Thank you, Han! Metta, Sarah ========= #67140 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Joop & all, --- Joop wrote: > I will try to answer to your question, but first your answer to my > question (although you did not say this) is: nobody of us tried to > give answer to mrs. Sujin's question 'what is meditation' because all > knew it was a rethorical question, a means to start a Sujin-treatment > to who tried to respond. .... S: Actually, a friend directly asked her back why she was asking when she knew the answer and so on. Quite an interesting discussion followed if I recall. I didn't reply to you because you and I had an agreement from sometime ago that 'Sujin' was off-topic between us, so I tend to ignore any questions you ask me such as this one:-)). However, If you would like me to summarise/transcribe this part of the discussion, I'm happy to try. .... > I try to answer but only if you promise not to give me the Sujin- > treatment "is there seeing now" etcetera, that only annoys me. .... S: Understood! .... > I do meditation (vipassana a la Mahasi, metta-meditation and some > concentration exercises) for three reasons: > (1) The Buddha told us to do the Noble Eightfold Path and right > mindfulness and right concentration are two of the aspects of them; I > try to do them all, again and again. > (2) I have good experiences in being mindful in my meditation (there > is hearing now, there is smelling now, there is thinking now etc) > because it helps me in being mindful in daily life. > (3) I have some good experiences in doing metta-meditation because it > softens me. .... S: Understood! .... > Sarah, I have another question, to you (so no Sujin-treatment): ... S: OK, OK! ... > The Buddha made many disticntions in his Teachings. One of them > (although I don't know this words occur in the Suttas) is between > kusala and akusala. > I discover in myself this dichotomy is not really my dichotomy. I > prefer to think about behavior being rooted in hate, desire and > delusion and the opposite roots; I prefer to talk about attachment > and not the abstract 'akusala' > My question: why of all the lists the Buddha used to explain the > Dhamma exactly this one 'kusala versus akusala' is so popular in > Abhidhamma? .... S: Rather than 'behavior', if we say 'cittas' rooted in hate, desire and delusion and the opposite roots, then this is the same as saying 'akusala', 'kusala'. If you wanted to give the longer sentences each time, no problem. The meaning is the same, although 'cittas rooted in hate etc' is a little broader. To be technical, kusala and akusala just refer to the javana cittas which are always one or the other (except in the case of the arahant who has kiriya cittas, of course). These are emphasised because these javana cittas are the 'active' part of the process when more 'good' and 'bad' is accumulated and also when kamma patha is produced. Other cittas (such as some vipaka cittas) are rooted in 'good' and 'bad' but are not kusala or akusala. Actually, this is a very good question. Pls let me know if it needs more elaboration. Metta, Sarah ======== #67141 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > Jon and James (bien etonné de se trouver ensemble) > My French is terrible, so I have to ask, is that the equivalent of the English 'Necessity makes strange bedfellows'? > do have a theory > that all kinds of laughing and all kind of crying are akusala. In > fact they say generalizing that laughing and crying is akusala. > Just to clarify, that was my recollection of the texts on the subject, rather than a personal theory (but as you know my recollection proved wrong). > Do you have that theory too? And do you think that 'smiling' is a > kind of laughing? How do we know that? Perhaps laughing and smiling > are two total different things. > > I have the theory that some kinds of laughing are rooted in greed, > hatred and delusion and some in the opposite. > I have the theory that some kinds of crying are rooted in greed, > hatred and delusion and some in the opposite. > I now add the theory that some kinds of smiling are rooted in greed, > hatred and delusion and some in the opposite (personally I think most) > In some other posts you have been questioning the usefulness or relevance of the terms kusala and akusala. To my understanding, those terms are simply a convenient way of denoting the 2 classes of consciousness you mention here: consciousness rooted in greed, hatred and delusion and consciousness rooted in the opposite. Jon #67142 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:24 pm Subject: Re: What is kusala? (was, [dsg] Re: Meditation (again)) jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > James: Yes, that is the crucial question. At first glance, it seems > to make more sense that the Buddha would use conventional language to > refer to conventional actions; after all, to use conventional > language to refer to absolute realities would be very confusing to > his audience. But, I am glad that you have summarized our positions > in such a succinct manner. > It's good that we each understand correctly the other's position. That gives us a better chance of having further useful discussion (later). > James: No, I don't really think that is a quibble. This difference > in language points back to our fundamental difference in > understanding. I would say that kusala has two entirely different > meanings: one conventional and one absolute. > Understood. > James: Since I was describing the entire citta process, I had in mind > bhavanga-cittas as well- which are neutral. Sorry I didn't clarify > that: > "There are moments when there are no sense-impressions, when one does > not think, when there are no akusala cittas or kusala cittas. Is > there at those moments still citta? Even when there are no sense- > impressions and no thinking, there must be citta; otherwise there > would be no life. The type of citta which arises and falls away at > those moments is called bhavanga-citta." > http://www.dhammastudy.com/abhid12.html > Well it did cross my mind, and I should have given you the benefit of the doubt! Next time I'll make sure I don't underestimate your grasp of (Abhidhammic) detail! > Jon: It may *sound* philosophical or intellectual, but that would be > because it cannot be reduced to a formula of something to do. > > James: That doesn't make it just "sound" philosophical, that would > make the Buddha's teaching completely philosophical. If the Buddha > didn't teach a course of action to be taken, he was simply a > philosopher: > "philosophy: A study that attempts to discover the fundamental > principles of the sciences, the arts, and the world that the sciences > and arts deal with; the word philosophy is from the Greek for "love > of wisdom." > > I don't believe the Buddha should be viewed as a philosopher. As the > Buddha said, "I teach only suffering and the way to end suffering…" > The Buddha should be viewed as a pragmatist: > "pragmatist: noun. a person who takes a practical approach to > problems and is concerned primarily with the success or failure of > her actions." > Well I'm going to avoid commenting on any labels such as a philosopher or pragmatist because I think they mean different things to different people (despite the dictionary definitions). I'd just like to say that a path the development of which cannot be reduced to a formula of something to do may make the teachings more subtle and complex, but does not make them any less practical, than if there were such a formula. Nice talking to you, James. Last say to you. Jon #67143 From: han tun Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A word of thanks to Han and something on the acrobats (waRe: What is Meditation? hantun1 Dear Sarah, My forthcoming trip to Yangon is indeed an unexpected one. But nothing serious. Thank you very much for your concern. You are right. The 'harmlessness' was a translation of avihi.msaaya. I have BB’s translation and Notes on SN 47.19. But I do not have an electronic version. So I posted Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s translation. Of course, BB is my favourite author. With due respect to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, you can see the difference in translation. kathanca bhikkhave param rakkhanto attanam rakkhati? khantiyaa avihimsaaya metta-cittataaya anudayataaya. Thanissaro Bhikkhu: “And how does one, when watching after others, watch after oneself? Through endurance, through harmlessness, and through a mind of kindness & sympathy. This is how one, when watching after others, watches after oneself.” Bhikkhu Bodhi: “And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, lovingkindness, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself." Respectfully, Han #67144 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Jon: This could also be put another way: Was the Buddha imparting > knowledge to be reflected upon and related to the present moment (to > the best of the listener's ability), or was he imparting information > for each listener to take and put into practice on a later occasion? > > James: Why does it have to be either/or? I think it is both. > Well I would see markedly different results coming from these different, and probably incompatible, interpretations. We can take this up another time, perhaps. > Jon: In considering this we need to keep in mind that the hearing of > a sutta was on many, many occasions a sufficient condition for > enlightenment on the part of the listeners. > > James: Yes, this did often happen; however, Jon, if we are to accept > your way of viewing things, this would have to be the case every > single time! No one could achieve enlightenment independently > because that would necessitate a "practice"- every single person > would have to achieve enlightenment while listening to (or reading) > the Buddha's teaching. > The way I see it is as follows. Some folks heard the Buddha and became enlightened on the spot, by virtue of being able to immediately understand was being said and relate that to presently arising dhammas. Others heard the Buddha but took longer. In the latter case the process (for want of a better word) was the same, namely, what had been heard was reflected on, absorbed and related to presently arising dhammas, but this had to occur over a much longer period of time because the panna was less mature (or the teaching was not as suited to their particular proclivities as to the others'). I know we differ on this, but I just wanted to say that my view does not preclude ongoing growth of panna. > Jon: I agree that "lead" is significant here. One of the epithets of > the Buddha is 'incomparable teacher of teachable persons'. He taught, > and lead, by giving the right incremental knowledge necessary to > bring the listener to the next stage of development. > > James: This makes it sound like the Buddha was present during every > single instance of enlightenment- coaching and giving lessons. But > there were several people, the majority I would say, who achieved > enlightenment quite on their own- simply by following the Noble > Eightfold Path. > My point was that whether the person was hearing it from the Buddha or following the NEP on his own, the development (i.e., the 'practice') was the same. OK, over to you for the last say. Jon #67145 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs sarahprocter... Hi Rendal, Welcome to DSG! Thank you for your good reminders about death which may come anytime and the precious human life - the opportunity for mental development. Can I encourage you to introduce yourself a little, such as telling us where you live and a little about your interest in the Buddha's teachings? Metta, Sarah --- Rendal Mercer wrote: > To become so overly concerned with laughter and smiles is not the most > real and true reason why we are all out here. > It is indeed a very precious achievement to born in the human form. #67146 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:14 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Dear Sarah, Jon, Howard, James, all Jon, you explained: "In some other posts you have been questioning the usefulness or relevance of the terms kusala and akusala. To my understanding, those terms are simply a convenient way of denoting the 2 classes of consciousness you mention here: consciousness rooted in greed, hatred and delusion and consciousness rooted in the opposite." Joop: I understand, only they are not convenient to me. According the principle of upaya (skilful means) I prefer the longer formulae. Sarah, Yes, we had an agreement, but the question 'What is meditation?' in your come-back-message was too much a temptation; and the message of Michael too shocking. But for for me the kusala - akusala topic is more important. Thanks for your explanation too. I have done some research. In the Samyutta Nikaya, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi the expression 'akusala kamma' (unwholesome states) occurs six times and kusala kamma ten times. It's always the combination with 'kamma' that occurs. Below I give some examples (some typed quotes short and a little out of context). My evaluation is that not only these terms rare occurring in the Nikaya but also that a shift of meaning has taken place, when compared with the frequency and the way they are used in for example the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. But it's difficult to define that shift. Perhaps it has to do with Howard's point: "The point is that wholesomeness-unwholesomeness is a range, not two separate features. That range is not a matter of only black and white, but of shades of gray as well. It is not a matter of only 0 and 1, but of an infinity of intermediate values as well. The closer to 1 the more wholesome and less unwholesome, and the closer to zero the more unwholesome and less wholesome. The either-or, black or white, zero or one perspective on wholesomeness and unwholesomeness is, as I see it, a doctrinaire approach to the Dhamma that is not oriented to the way things are." Joop: I agree, this is also described by Stepehen Batchelor in his book about Mara. BTW Howard, was is "Ayn Rand Buddhism", never heard that term? James, you reacted (to Howard) with: "If a mindstate is only 1% unwholesome or 99% wholesome, it still must be abandoned. Any degree of unwholesomeness will result in rebirth and a continuation of samsara. This may seem rather strict, but that's the way I see it. What do you think?" Joop: I really will not mind; when I'm in the 1% - 99% situation - and even now - I prefer to use the wholesome part, for example in practicing compassion, and not fighting the unwholesome. But perhaps for me being a bodhisattva is more an ideal than being an arahat. Metta Joop Quotes from the SN: "Bhikkhus, just as all the rafters of a peaked house lead to the roof peak and converge upon the root peak, and all are removed when the roof peak is removed, so too all unwholesome states are rooted in ignorance and coverge upon ignorance, and all are uprooted when ignorance is uprooted." (p. 706) "But because one who enters and dwells amidst wholesome states dwells happily in this life, without vexation, despair, an fever, and because he can expext a good destination with the brakup of the body …" (p. 859) "And how, bhikkhus, is one subject to decline? Here, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has seen a form with the eye, there arise in him evol unwholesome states, memories and intentions connected with the fetters." (p. 1178) "And what, bhikkhus, are unwholesome states? They are: wrong view … wrong concentration. These are called unwholesome states. And what, bhikkhus, are wholesome states? They are: right view … right concentration. These are called wholesome states. " (p. 1535) "Bhikkhus, whatever states there are that are wholesome, partaking of the wholesome, pertaining to the wholesome, they are all rooted in diligence, converge upon diligence, and diligence is declared to be the chief among them. When a bhikkhu is diligent, it is to be expected that he will develop and cultivate the seven factors of enlightenment." (p. 1589) "And what is the starting point of wholesome states? Virtue that is well purified and view that is straight. Then, bhikkhu, when your virtue that is well purified and your view straight, based upon vitues, estabhished upon virtue, you should develop the four establishments of mindfulness in a threefold way." (p. 1629). #67147 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn Jon, Jon, that means more or less: "surprised seeing Jon and James at the same side" I do like your translation but I think it is a little wrong. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop > > Joop wrote: > > Jon and James (bien etonné de se trouver ensemble) > > > > My French is terrible, so I have to ask, is that the equivalent of the > English 'Necessity makes strange bedfellows'? #67148 From: "jcmendoza1000" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:26 am Subject: Astral Plane jcmendoza1000 To everyone: I'd like to ask if the Awakened Oner ever mentioned about the astral plane and astral bodies and if they truly exist? -JC #67149 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Sorry for the delay. J: "Well I hesitate to talk about nibbana as being worth venerating. Perhaps 'aspiring to' might be closer. But then we don't really have any proper conception of what nibbana is anyway, so it's all rather academic." Yeah, true. S: "...I would wonder though whether pa~n~na is capable of arising no matter when - that is, I'm thinking that even during dreaming pa~n~na could arise and know the quality of a citta. I'm not sure about that though. If you have time, maybe you can say more about this." J: "Sorry, but I have no idea about this. But I somehow doubt it. There are those who believe in so-called 'lucid dreaming' which they claim to be panna or some kind of kusala awareness, but it has no basis in the texts as far as I know." No, I agree regarding 'lucid dreaming'. I don't think such a state would constitute pa~n~na or 'kusala awareness'. I think, to call it such, would be just another example of a mundane trick of the mind being elevated to 'mystical' status. The whole thing seems steeped in a belief in control. That's not in the texts. Rather, I was wondering: Since dreaming is thinking, and since, given the, say, 'consciousness' such thinking has (it is marked by sa~n~na, for example, since it is subject to being remembered), and since it is not bhavanga, it is more or less part of the ongoing flux of dhammaa arising and falling away. Logically, I was thinking, it must be possible, conditions being in place, for pa~n~na to arise at such moments. I'll have to look into the citta-viithi again. Of course, since dreaming is concept, despite being mind-object, perhaps its conceptual status precludes pa~n~na arising 'within it' if you follow. Anyway, that's more or less what I was wondering. Does that twig anything for you? Sincerely, Scott. #67150 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:59 am Subject: Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Thanks for adding these terms and comments: Sarah: "Just to add the Pali terms (as given in a foot-note): 1)Pubb'uupanissayasampatti 2)titthavaasa 3)sotaapannataa 4)bahussutabhaava In othere words, 'bahussuta', (having heard much or highly learned) refers to having developed insight directly, not just to theoretical learning." Taken, of course, with the usual grain of salt, the PTS PED clarifies the three parts of the compound 'bahussutabhaava' in an interesting way. "Bahu" is rendered "to strengthen" as well as "very", and "greatly". "Suta" is given as "heard; in special sense 'received through inspired revelation'; learned; taught". Bhaava has the sense of "becoming". And bahussutabhaava is "one who has much learning". Given these aspects of the term, I think it is clear, again, that 'much learning' is that which is 'reinforced' or a function of the influence of pa~n~na. It is not just ordinary memorisation and recitation of facts. S: "As long as we see the learning as being direct understanding with wisdom on account of hearing and considering much, on account of firm understanding of the 4NT." Yes, it all hinges on this 'firm understanding of the Four Noble Truths' doesn't it? S: "Without the insight of naama-ruupa pariccheda, higher insights and stream-entry cannot be obtained. 'The principal of conditionality appears clear to streamenterers because, with the dispelling of delusion, the principal 'whatever is subject to arising is all subject to ceasing' presents itself to them by way of personal direct cognition.' This is impossible without 'bahussutabhaava', without hearing about and directly understanding namas and rupas repeatedly." Mahaanidaana Sutta, regarding the phrase "Because of not understanding and not penetrating this Dhamma...": CY: "'This Dhamma' is the Dhamma of conditions. 'Because of not understanding' (ananubodhaa): because of not understanding it by way of full understanding of the known. '(Because of) not penetrating' (appa.tivedhaa): because of not penetrating by way of the full understanding by scrutinisation and the full understanding by abandoning." SUB. CY: "'This Dhamma' is dependent arising. Since this is, in denotation, the set of causes for phenomena springing from causes, he calls it 'the Dhamma of conditions.' The meaning is: the conditionality of (the conditioning phenomena) such as birth, etc. with respect to (the conditioned phenomena) such as aging and death, etc. The delimitation of mentality-materiality and the discernment of conditions do not come about by the mere first interpretation of phenomena, but by the recurrent arising of knowledge about them called 'repeated understanding.' Showing the absence of both (these kinds of knowledge), the commentator says 'not understanding it by way of full understanding of the known.' The full understanding by scrutinisation and the full understanding by abandoning are included within insight and the noble path. Insight includes them because it occurs as the abandoning of the perception of permanence, etc. and it is itself the penetration of phenomena. And the full understanding by scrutinisation is its foundation, for it suppresses the opposing states, thereby enabling insight to acquire precision and lucidity. The noble path includes them because it occurs by way of comprehension through full understanding and abandoning. Showing the absence of both kinds of penetration, the commentator says 'not penetrating it by way of the full understanding by scrutinisation and the full understanding by abandoning.'" Sincerely, Scott. #67151 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:26 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 1/18/07 5:19:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > BTW Howard, was is "Ayn Rand Buddhism", never heard that term? > ======================== Sorry - that was an attempt at humor on my part. Ayn Rand was a doctrinnaire libertarian philosopher/author and cult idol, very popular in certain intellectual circles, especially a several decades back. She had a rigid, no-shades-of-gray perspective on just about everything. I was much taken with her teachings for a good while, some thirty to forty years ago, even being what might be called a devotee - until I woke up! LOL! BTW, there never was anything resembling an "Ayn Rand Buddhism". She was thoroughly anti-religion. With metta, Howard #67152 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:37 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop, (and Howard, with whom you agree), A point of clarification regarding: J: "Perhaps it has to do with Howard's point: 'The point is that wholesomeness-unwholesomeness is a range, not two separate features. That range is not a matter of only black and white, but of shades of gray as well. It is not a matter of only 0 and 1, but of an infinity of intermediate values as well. The closer to 1 the more wholesome and less unwholesome, and the closer to zero the more unwholesome and less wholesome. The either-or, black or white, zero or one perspective on wholesomeness and unwholesomeness is, as I see it, a doctrinaire approach to the Dhamma that is not oriented to the way things are.' ...I agree, this is also described by Stepehen Batchelor in his book about Mara." To what is one to apply the conceptual 'range' noted here? Is the implication that a given moment of consciousness can be both wholesome and unwholesome (to whatever proportion) at the same time? Does this imply that 'absolute wholesomeness' and 'absolute unwholesomeness' are only theoretical and do not exist in actuality? If so, this is not supported as far as I see it. I think that the rapid arising and falling away of consciousness, where alternating states of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in succession is the way this is accounted for. I would wonder whether the accumulation of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in the 'flux of consciousness' better accounts for this notion of 'range' or proportion. What do you think? Sincerely, Scott. #67153 From: "sukinder" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:44 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sukinderpal Dear Sarah and Michael, ============================================ I apologise for any topics I raised last Saturday or for any comments I've made here to cause you any distress, Michael. Juat a couple of small clarifications: --- Michael Kalyaano com.au> wrote: > I don't recall us discussing the meaning of quiet and peace on > Saturday. I think you raised a few questions on my behalf that I would > not have phrased the way you did. ============================================ Michael and I met today for coffee. Even though my main objective was to persuade him to change his mind about DSG and visiting the foundation, we continued to discuss our different perspectives on Dhamma. I must say from the very outset that Michael is a polite and very likeable person, and though his response on-list yesterday seemed to me a bit aggressive, he assured me that he held no ill will. He says that for him, writing on-line is different from live discussions, in the latter he tends naturally, to be more considerate of the other person and this is very true, as I observe about him! I also pointed out your mistaken recollection about me having taken a picture of the two of you together with Han, and he understood that you were very busy that day trying to manage the situation with so many people coming to attend the discussion. However I believe and accept that Michael is not interested in taking part in discussions where he might find himself struggling to defend his position. Also he is generally put off by debates which he perceives as 'never ending'. He also finds that the topics of discussions are more or less the same, year after year. And this is why he is not interested in joining the list just to listen in either. I suggested that he free himself of the burden of having to take sides so that 'Dhamma' be his only aim. To this he responded saying that he has acquired many books and MP3s to learn from. Personally, I believe that there is a fundamental difference in our perspective, and it may be better to discuss in private with Michael and so I will not bring this matter of rejoining DSG again. But maybe he will decide to do so on his own, who knows? Conditions rule. :-) With metta, Sukin Ps: Michael, if you are reading this, I know you have already forgiven me in advance ;-) if I misrepresented you. However, I still want to apologize if I did indeed end up doing so. #67154 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:02 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 1/18/07 9:44:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > To what is one to apply the conceptual 'range' noted here? Is the > implication that a given moment of consciousness can be both wholesome > and unwholesome (to whatever proportion) at the same time? Does this > imply that 'absolute wholesomeness' and 'absolute unwholesomeness' are > only theoretical and do not exist in actuality?Yahoo!My Yahoo!Mail Search: If so, this is not > supported as far as I see it. > ========================== A slight degree of insight is more wholesome than total ignorance but more unwholesome than perfect wisdom. The extent to which wisdom is present is the extent to which ignorance is absent, and the extent to which ignorance is present is the extent to which wisdom is absent. The more wisdom (equivalently, the less ignorance), the greater the wholesomeness, and conversely. Likewise for craving and satisfaction, and so on. And, no, I do not rule out the absolutes. Both 0 and 1 are realities as are all intermediate values, but 0 and 1 are far more rare in occurrence. With metta, Howard #67155 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:16 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? upasaka_howard Hi again, Scott - A further comment: A mindstate with anger is one in which anger to some degree is present. The less the anger, the greater the calm (non-anger), and the more wholesome the state. The more the anger, the less the calm, and the more unwholesome the state. A state consumed by anger is an extreme of unwholesomeness, and a state of complete calm (non-anger) is an extreme of wholesomeness (along that axis of measure). Some features are positive, some negative. For a positive one, the more of it, the more wholesome, and the less of it, the more unwholesome. For a negative one, it is exactly the opposite. With metta, Howard #67156 From: connie Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:56 am Subject: Extracts nichiconn A letter from Janet Fitch's novel, White Oleander: Dear Astrid, It's been six years today. Six years since I walked through the gates of this peculiar finishing school. Like Dante: "Nel mazzo del commin di nostra vita. / Mi ritrovai per una sleva oscura. / Che la diritta via era smarrita." The third day over 110. Yesterday an inmate slit another woman's throat with a bent can. Lydia tore up a poem I wrote about a man I saw once, a snake tattoo disappearing into his jeans. I made her tape it together again, but you can't imagine the strain. Aside from you, I think this is the longest relationship I've ever had. She's sure I love her, though it's nothing of the kind. She adores those poems of mine that refer to her, thinks it's a public declaration. Love. I would ban the word from the vocabulary. Such imprecision. Love, which love, what love? Sentiment, fantasty, longing, lust? Obsession, devouring need? Perhaps the only love that is accurate without qualification is the love a very young child. Afterward, she too becomes a person, and thus compromised. "Do youlove me" you asked in the dark of your narrow bed. "Do you love me Mommy?" "Of course," I told you. "Now go to sleep." Love is a bedtime story, a teddy bear, familiar, one eye missing. "Do you love me, carita?" Lydia says, twisting my arm, forcing my face into the rough horsehair blanket, biting my neck. "Say it, you bitch." Love is a toy, a token, a scented handerchief. "Tell me love me," Barry said. "I love you," I said. "I love you, I love you." Love is a check, that can be forged, that can be cashed. Love is a payment that comes due. Lydia lies on her side of my bunk, the curve of her hip the crest of a wave in shallow water, turquoise, Playa del Carmen, Marinique. Leafing through a new "Celebridades". I bought her a subscription. She says it makes her feel part of the world. I can't see getting excited about movies I won't see, political issues of the day fail to move me, they have nothing to say within the deep prison of stillness. Time has taken on an utterly different quality for me. What difference does a year make? In a perverse way, I pity the women who are still a part of time, trapped by it, how many months, how many days. I have been cut free, I move among centuries. Writers send me books - Joseph Brodsky, Marianne Moore, Pound. I think maybe I will study Chinese. "You ever go to Guanajuato?" Lydia asks. "All the big stars are going there now." Guanajuato, Astrid. Do you remember? I know you do. We went with Alejandro the poet. From San Miguel. My Spanish wasn't good enough to determine the quality of the poet's oeuvre, but Alejandro the painter was very bad indeed. He should not have created at all. He should have simply sat on a stool and charged one to look at him. And so shy, he could never look in my eyes until after he'd finished speaking. Instead, he'd talk to my hand, the arch of my foot, the curve of my calf. Only after he had stopped could he look into my eyes. He trembled when we made love, the faint smell of geraniums. But he was never shy with you, was he? You had such good conversations - conspiring, head to head. I felt excluded. He was the one who taught you to draw. He would draw for you, and then you would draw after him. "La mesa, la botilla, las mujeres." I tried to teach you poetry, but you were always obstinate. Why would you never learn anything from me? I wish we'd never left Guanajuato. Mother. [ps Sarah, I'd love to read the Sisters with you. peace, connie] #67157 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:29 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Joop, (and Howard, with whom you agree), > > A point of clarification regarding: .... > Hallo Scott, (Howard, all) S: "To what is one to apply the conceptual 'range' noted here? Is the implication that a given moment of consciousness can be both wholesome and unwholesome (to whatever proportion) at the same time? Does this imply that 'absolute wholesomeness' and 'absolute unwholesomeness' are only theoretical and do not exist in actuality? If so, this is not supported as far as I see it. I think that the rapid arising and falling away of consciousness, where alternating states of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in succession is the way this is accounted for. I would wonder whether the accumulation of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in the 'flux of consciousness' better accounts for this notion of 'range' or proportion." Good question. The problem is that the Abhidhammikas made the system of the arising and falling away of consciousness (better say: 'consciousnesses', I think) that did not occur in this way in the Suttas. For example not in the SN quotes in my message. You are right that in the Abhidhamma system a citta is either wholesome or unwholesome (I skip the neutral) 'charged'. But the problem starts when we try to relate this to the conceptual language of the Suttas. The trick that relates this two theories of reality (the ultimate and the conventional) is the concept of "ACCUMULATION", a trick about which I already had many discussions with Nina and Sarah - About the question: "are accumulations ultimate or conventional realities?" The answer to me seemed ambigue. - A second question of me was: how many accumulations does one have? The answer I heard mostly was: two, a wholesome and a unwholesum. Scott, you used the term 'accumulations' too, perhaps you have the answer? To continue the metaphores: when the level in the bottle with wholesome rises, the level in the bottle of unwholesome get lower (they must be connected) This all, as said, is metaphorical language to connect the two theories of reality. Perhaps we can better only use that of the Suttas for the soteriological theme (Abhidhamma is useful to understand the processes in meditation). I will not surprise me if this answer gives new problems (to you) Metta Joop #67158 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:04 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? renmercer may I say that with all the knowledge and wisdom that can be gained from yoru discussions, remember one thing, Lord Buddha himself didn't speak or discuss untill he knew and experienced. We all in the human form for now, let us seek a place to sit, watch and know. I live on a very busy street in Toronto Canada, I hear traffic, sirens and people all day long. When one sits, they sit, when one stands they stand, when you are aware, you are aware. No matter where you are nothing will be perfect untill you have reached the all knowing perfected state. So when you sit, just sit, watch and be. then you may know what all this is all about. sukinder wrote: Dear Sarah and Michael, ============================================ <...> Michael and I met today for coffee. Even though my main objective was to persuade him to change his mind about DSG and visiting the foundation, we continued to discuss our different perspectives on Dhamma. I must say from the very outset that Michael is a polite and very likeable person, and though his response on-list yesterday seemed to me a bit aggressive, he assured me that he held no ill will. He says that for him, writing on-line is different from live discussions, in the latter he tends naturally, to be more considerate of the other person and this is very true, as I observe about him! <....> #67159 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:31 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? kelvin_lwin Hi Howard (Scott): I actually think the spectrum described in Abhidhamma is broader than the one you have. At one end is anger and the other is not-anger. The middle is absence of both anger and not-anger. When the mind states are enumerated, it doesn't say anything about the quality or intensity of the factors involved in them. Also, Scott's point about fluctuating states is precisely the reason kamma-resultant relation is so complex. The quality of the the time of action and surrounding states plus the time of result and surrounding states all impact the actual result. - Kel > A further comment: A mindstate with anger is one in which anger to > some degree is present. The less the anger, the greater the calm (non- anger), and > the more wholesome the state. #67160 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:57 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? upasaka_howard Hi, Kel - In a message dated 1/18/07 6:34:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, kelvin_lwin@... writes: > Hi Howard (Scott): > > I actually think the spectrum described in Abhidhamma is broader than > the one you have. At one end is anger and the other is not-anger. The > middle is absence of both anger and not-anger. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I haven't a clue as to what the absence of not-anger is. To me, anger is a species of aversion, which amounts to a form of tanha, specifically a desire for an absence. --------------------------------------------- > When the mind states > are enumerated, it doesn't say anything about the quality or intensity > of the factors involved in them. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Whatever it says, there are degrees of wisdom, degrees of craving, and so on. -------------------------------------------- Also, Scott's point about fluctuating > > states is precisely the reason kamma-resultant relation is so complex. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Scott had a very good point about fluctuating states. -------------------------------------------- > The quality of the the time of action and surrounding states plus the > time of result and surrounding states all impact the actual result. > > - Kel > ===================== With metta, Howard #67161 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Thanks for the recommendations... buddhatrue Hi Bill, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bill" wrote: > > James, > > Thanks for the resource shares. It was my pleasure. :-) I am familiar with "Access to Insight" - > I've been browsing that site for the last few months - but "What the Buddha > Taught" is new to me. Oh, I hope you enjoy it. As a personal recommendation, the writings of Ajahn Lee are really inspiring. I ordered Bhikkhu Nanamoli's translation of the > Majjhima Nikaya you recommended. I'm looking forward to studying it when it > arrives. That's great!! Let us know what you think as you study it. I'm sure this isn't news to most on the list, but just in case...I > also found a handy app called "Pali Lookup" here: > > http://www.metta.lk/pali-utils/ > > I am going to start familiarizing myself with Pali to enhance my studies. I wasn't familiar with that. It seems to be an application suitable for windows 95+, which leads me to believe that it is a rather old application. I use Windows XP so I am hesitant to install it. The program also works along with Access but I am not sure of what version of Access- again I have Access XP so I am not sure it is compatible. I am hesitant to install buggy programs as they could corrupt the registry and reguire a re-installation of Windows. Let us know how it works for you. > > Thanks again. > > Namaste, > Bill Zenn > Metta, James #67162 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James - > I agree! Ultimately all unwholesomeness needs to be rooted out. But we > proceed in steps, and we must take care not to confuse less-than- perfect with > terrible. James: I completely agree with this estimation also. I am not sure why Jon, Sarah and others insist that only moments of pure kusala are development of the path. The Buddha taught that the path is a gradual one and that "drop by drop the water pot is filled." If only moments of pure kusala were development of the path, we wouldn't get any drops! We'd be lucky to get some mist! ;-)) We cannot start at the finish line, but we can and must move > towards it, never being satisfied until the goal is won. > James: True, true. Well-said. > With metta, > Howard > > P.S. I've been meditating regularly two 45-minute sittings a day, every day, > since "that dream" ;-)), and the meditation quality - the ease, the > pleasantness, and the clarity - is dramatically on the upswing. After 10 minutes into a > meditation, there is a "locking in" after which no effort is required. And I > also find along with this a growing ease (and easygoingness) of mind all the > rest of the time. So, however "that dream" is to be evaluated, I'm glad I had > it and grateful for whatever conditions led to it. James: That's wonderful! As I said, I truly believe the dream was an auspicious sign (and you can trust my psychic ability on that one! ;- )). Since you have found the right pace, and you are retired, you might want to meditate more frequently thoughout the day, and incorporate walking meditation- just an idea. #67163 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott In the latter case the process > (for want of a better word) was the same, namely, what had been heard > was reflected on, absorbed and related to presently arising dhammas, but > this had to occur over a much longer period of time because the panna > was less mature (or the teaching was not as suited to their particular > proclivities as to the others'). > > I know we differ on this, Yes, we differ on this- and the reason we differ is because your description of the path doesn't match the Buddha's description. I mean, I can understand what you are saying; it is clear as a bell. The practitioner is supposed to hear the teachings- reflect, ponder, absorb, re-absorb, mull, contemplate, ruminate, congitate, consider, etc., etc., etc.- over those teachings until panna grows and grows. I fully understand; but this isn't what the Buddha taught is the path: "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration." Ss the Buddha taught, his path isn't simply a mental pondering and thinking about philosophical subjects, it is a practical application and a way of living. This path of practice is the same in every school of Buddhism- Mahayana, Theravada, and Vijarina! And it is viewed in the same way as the Buddha taught it. What KS teaches isn't Buddhism! Buddhism isn't a Noble One-Fold Path, it isn't a mind trip. Okay, Jon, you gave me the last word. That's my last word. :-) Metta, James #67164 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 1/18/07 7:41:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Since you have found the right pace, and you are retired, you > might want to meditate more frequently thoughout the day, and > incorporate walking meditation- just an idea. > ====================== That may be so at some point, but not at the moment. As for walking meditation, I don't usually do that in a formal way, but much of the day when I'm not involved in some particular task or other that requires focused attention, I generally maintain a broad mindfulness - of the body (in terms of sensation - especially of muscle tension, and position, movement, and so on), and also of feeling, thinking, and emotion. In that regard, I've developed a *habit* of introspection. As for increasing the number of sittings, for the time being two per day, morning and evening, is working well for me, and I plan to stick with that for a while. With regard to increasing it, I'll play that by ear. Even as a retiree, I do find that I have a LOT of things to do. At this point in time, increasing the number of sittings might well make me feel pressed for time, leading to some unnecessary stress. So, for the time being at least, I'm gonna stick with two sittings a day, which is currently a comfortable (and fruitful) middle way for me. That may change, of course, and definitely not by a going backwards. ;-) With metta, Howard #67165 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? buddhatrue Hi Rendal, You appear to be an intense student of Zen who has stumbled into the Theravada bramble patch. ;-)) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Rendal Mercer wrote: > > may I say that with all the knowledge and wisdom that can be gained from yoru discussions, remember one thing, Lord Buddha himself didn't speak or discuss untill he knew and experienced. James: This isn't true. The Lord Buddha went to two teachers before enlightenment and spoke and discussed spiritual matters with ascetics and recluses quite frequently. Perhaps you should read a good biography about the Buddha? I could recommend this link as a starter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddhartha_Gautama We all in the human form for now, let us seek a place to sit, watch and know. I live on a very busy street in Toronto Canada, I hear traffic, sirens and people all day long. When one sits, they sit, when one stands they stand, when you are aware, you are aware. No matter where you are nothing will be perfect untill you have reached the all knowing perfected state. So when you sit, just sit, watch and be. then you may know what all this is all about. James: No offense, but it is this kind of approach that gives Buddhist meditation a bad reputation. Buddhism isn't just about sitting all the time and being "aware" of sitting, listening to sounds of traffic, etc., it is about purifying the mind. A mind mired in greed, hate, and delusion, sitting all day listening to the sounds of traffic, is still going to be a mind mired in greed, hate, and delusion at the end of the day- and no closer to the Buddha's teaching. The Buddha's path begins with Right View (which we are attempting to develop in this group); then there is development of sila (non- harming, right livelihood, right speech); then there is the development of mindfulness; and finally there is the development of sitting meditation to build jhana. One must follow each stage of practice to "know what all this is all about" as you say. Sitting all day without developing the other stages will just get you a sore rear! ;-)) Metta, James > #67166 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:03 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? renmercer Precisely!!! Satipatthana KTN kelvin_lwin wrote: Hi Howard (Scott): I actually think the spectrum described in Abhidhamma is broader than the one you have. At one end is anger and the other is not-anger. The middle is absence of both anger and not-anger. When the mind states are enumerated, it doesn't say anything about the quality or intensity of the factors involved in them. Also, Scott's point about fluctuating states is precisely the reason kamma-resultant relation is so complex. The quality of the the time of action and surrounding states plus the time of result and surrounding states all impact the actual result. - Kel > A further comment: A mindstate with anger is one in which anger to > some degree is present. The less the anger, the greater the calm (non- anger), and > the more wholesome the state. #67167 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thanks for the recommendations... renmercer Bill, Interesting to read your's and other email. Over the year, since the Tathagatta's passing many ideas have been propigated and studied. What the Buddha Taught is fascinating, however I prefer to watch what the buddha watched. What the buddha taught is what he realized from his practise and to say I study the Bohi-dhamma is also to say that you are not wishing to become a Buddha. Buddha was not Buddhist, nor was Joshau Alaha a Christian or Mohamed and Muslem or Krishna a Hindu. All of their great examples were on the cutting edge, they found no one that they connected with truthfully and they sote to see life for themselves. Why do we follow others so much, the buddha's recognition and teaching IS very profound and admired for it's simplicity, however it6 was his example that really is the teaching. people run and speak from left to right saying oh...this is soooo profound and that is soo profound. Why don't we get lost like the Buddha did? only to find ourselves exactly where we had lost ourselves. Give up everything, get lost! Satipatthana! #67168 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:20 pm Subject: Hello again egberdina Hi all, Thought I'd drop in and see what's happening. Not much news from my side. I'm still not a Buddhist, and am becoming more convinced then ever that the Third Noble Truth is more a noble belief or hope than a truth. On the other hand, the First and Second Noble Truths remain unshakeably rock-solid descriptions of the way things are, so perhaps I'm half a Buddhist. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that half of Buddhism is verifiably precise and accurate. I look forward to not fighting with anyone (using my trusty non-anger) :-) Kind Regards Herman #67169 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:42 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hi Joop, (and All in Whole or Part), Thanks for your reply. I've time to begin a response: S: "...I think that the rapid arising and falling away of consciousness, where alternating states of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in succession is the way this is accounted for. I would wonder whether the accumulation of wholesomeness or unwholesomeness in the 'flux of consciousness' better accounts for this notion of 'range' or proportion." J: "...The problem is that the Abhidhammikas made the system of the arising and falling away of consciousness (better say: 'consciousnesses', I think) that did not occur in this way in the Suttas. For example not in the SN quotes in my message..." Yeah, I skipped indeterminate as well. Consider: SN 1,11(1): "Don't you know, you fool,[Not you, Joop! - S.] That maxim of the arahants? Impermanent are all the formations; Their nature is to arise and vanish. Having arisen, they cease: Their appeasement is blissful." SN 6,15(5): "Impermanent indeed are formations; Their nature is to arise and vanish. Having arisen, they cease: Their appeasement is blissful." SN 22,81,(9): "...That perplexity, doubtfulness, indecisiveness in regard to the true Dhamma is a formation. That formation - what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it born and produced? When the uninstructed worldling is contacted by a feeling born of ignorance-contact, craving arises: thence that formation is born. "So that formation, Bhikkhus, is impermanent, conditioned and dependently arisen..." I'll be back, man. Sincerely, Scott. #67170 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) kelvin_lwin Hi All, After reading through the responses I looked through Dr. Mehm Tin Mon's Abhidhamma book and found the following excerpt of smiles/laughs which disagrees with the conclusion Jon reached based on Sarah's source. Just FYI, thanks. - Kel Hasituppàda and 4 somanassa-mahà-kiriya cittas produce smiles in Buddhas and arahats. Two lobha-måla-diññhigata-vipayutta-somanassa cittas and 4 somanassa-mahà-kusala cittas produce smiles and laughters in sekha-persons i.e., sotàpannas, sakadàgàmãs and anàgàmãs. Four lobha-måla-somanassa cittas and 4 somanassamahà- kusala cittas produce smiles and laughters in puthujjanas (worldlings). #67171 From: connie Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:53 pm Subject: whatever nichiconn another voice heard from: "What KS teaches isn't Buddhism! Buddhism isn't a Noble One-Fold Path, it isn't a mind trip. Okay, Jon, you gave me the last word. That's my last word. :-)" my best unspoken comment: whoo hoo! 'bout time you stop repeating the same snark. In my Arrogant Opinion. metta yourself. my nicer self: have a nice mined trip. get over yourself. connie #67172 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:19 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Sukin (& Michael), Thank you for your kind note. It's true that talking one-to-one in person is different from writing on list or even attending a group discussion. As you say, Michael is very considerate and polite to meet. I was a little taken aback by the response because I'd made a note during our brief chat and had mentioned it would be a good topic to raise and in the discussion I thought he had thanked me for a clarification of KS's on the issue, so I had no idea I'd messed up in anyway. No matter. It was a long afternoon as Han said, especially for newcomers to the Foundation and the 'quiet chat' we'd gone early to meet Michael for was rather short-lived, so misunderstandings were likely! As for topics and discussions being the same here year after year, pls anyone introduce any different topics you wish! Of course, when it comes to the Dhamma, however, the truths don't change - only our understanding evolves:-). I agree with your comment that it's a question of studying Dhamma - no need or help to think in terms of 'sides' or 'debates' as I see it. Thanks again for helping me to understand Michael's reluctance to discuss further here (for now???). As you say, 'Conditions Rule'!! Metta, Sarah p.s It was Lodewijk who was taking pictures when we were sitting outside. I'm used to you being the main 'clicker', but you weren't the only one that day! =============== #67173 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello again sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Egbert wrote: > Hi all, > > Thought I'd drop in and see what's happening. > > Not much news from my side. I'm still not a Buddhist, .... S: One of our Canadian friends recently was stressing just the same thing.... Who needs the label anyway? ..... > and am becoming > more convinced then ever that the Third Noble Truth is more a noble > belief or hope than a truth. On the other hand, the First and Second > Noble Truths remain unshakeably rock-solid descriptions of the way > things are, so perhaps I'm half a Buddhist. Perhaps it would be more > accurate to say that half of Buddhism is verifiably precise and > accurate. ..... S: what about the Path? Wouldn't that affect the percentages? .... > > I look forward to not fighting with anyone (using my trusty non-anger) > :-) .... S: Oh yeah..... [brace position!!] Hope you, Vicki and the gang are all doing well this New Year! Metta, Sarah ======== #67174 From: han tun Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:25 pm Subject: Off to Yangon hantun1 Dear Sarah and others, I am off for Yangon. I will contact you when I come back. Metta, Han #67175 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:42 pm Subject: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was: Extracts) sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all, --- connie wrote: > [ps Sarah, I'd love to read the Sisters with you. peace, connie] ... S: Ok, as long as I'm not just reading to myself, I'm game to go with the Sisters. I think it may be quite a suitable text for all - whether newcomers here, occasional visitors, tough Abhidhamma-nuts or Serious-Meditators.... For all, Connie is referring to the Theriigaathaa, translated by Mrs Rhys Davids as 'Psalms of the Sisters'(PTS). It gives the verses of the enlightened Sisters with the commentary. Some of these have been posted before, but I'll still start at the beginning, skipping some verses which don't have any commentary or notes. Connie, if you have any Pali terms or different translation notes to add anytime or your own zany sub-commentary, that would be great, but no sweat or pressure or rule about it, OK! As Scott and Connie have pointed out, Mrs R-D's translations can be rather 'quaint', to put it politely. Considering this translation was first published in 1909 (PTS), it's not surprising. Infortunately, some of the more recent ones, such as Norman's do not include the commentary and are not on-line as far as I know. I hope others will join in from time to time with comments/queeries/disagreements to make it more interesting. I should mention that the Theriigaathaa, along with the Theragaathaa ('Psalms of the Brethren', form part of the Khuddaka Nikaya, the fifth book of the Sutta Pitaka. The commentary was compiled by Dhammapaala from older commentaries and together they have been included in the Theravada pali canon and rehearsed at the various Councils since their compilation. Metta, Sarah ====== #67176 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] whatever sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all One-Folders, --- connie wrote: > another voice heard from: "What KS teaches isn't Buddhism! Buddhism > isn't a Noble One-Fold Path, > it isn't a mind trip. .... S: I came across a sutta the other day I wasn't familiar with, stressing rt understanding - forget where. For those for whom it sounds like a One-Fold Path, this letter of Nina's may be of interest: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/66789 .... > Okay, Jon, you gave me the last word. That's my last word. :-)" .... S: 'Conditions Rule' as Sukin would say... .... > my nicer self: have a nice mined trip. > get over yourself. ... S: :-) Mettamind, Sarah ======= #67177 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:34 pm Subject: The Definition of Energy (Viriya) bhikkhu5 Friends: What is the Definition of Energy (Viriya) ? The Blessed Buddha once said: What, Bhikkhus, is the ability of Energy? Here, Bhikkhus, the Noble Disciple lives with energy aroused for the elimination of disadvantageous states and for gaining of advantageous states. He is determined, resolute in all his efforts, not evading any good opportunity to train all the advantageous mental states. This is called the ability of Energy! Source: Samyutta Nikaya V 48 Without Energy, there is no advantageous action or effort! Without any advantageous Action, there is no good Result! No cause gives no effect! Therefore: Stir your-self up! For details on this Enthusiastic Ability of Energy see: Energy is the 6th step on the Noble 8-fold Way: Right Effort http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Effort.htm Energy is the 5th Mental Perfection (parami): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Enthusiastic_is_Energy.htm Energy is 3rd Link to Awakening (viriya-sambojjhanga): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Energy_Viriya.htm How to Feed Energy: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Energy.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <...> #67178 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Off to Yangon sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- han tun wrote: > Dear Sarah and others, > > I am off for Yangon. > I will contact you when I come back. ... S: Have a safe trip and we'll all look forward to your return. Thank you for your further comments in the messages on the topics we discussed. I particularly appreciated your detailed further comments on the vipaka-vipaka point of discussion. It was very thorough and clear. I think it helps a lot when we appreciate that no kamma can bring about any vipaka without the support of pakatu-upanissaya paccaya (natural decisive condition) and that this is very wide as you say. Accumulations, vipaka and even concepts from long, long ago or just an instant ago can be a condition for accumulations or vipaka now.... I appreciate your further elaborations and the questions you raise a lot. I'll look f/w to your series on Dana in due course (and also the one on 'Conditions' if you ever feel it's the appropriate time do do so without tiring your eyes too much!). Best wishes to you (and your wife). Metta, Sarah ======== #67179 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:19 pm Subject: Sisters 1 sarahprocter... Dear Friends, http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/davids/psalms/psalms.html "Psalms of the Early Buddhists - Psalms of the Sisters" (Theriigaathaa, translated by Mrs Rhys Davids, first pub. 1909, PTS) .... Verse 1 Verse uttered by a certain Sister, a Bhikkhunī of Name Unknown. "Sleep softly, little Sturdy, take thy rest At ease, wrapt in the robe thyself hast made. Stilled are the passions that would rage within, Withered as potherbs in the oven dried." [Norman transl (PTS): "Sleep happily, little therii, clad in the garment (which you) have made; for your desire is stilled, like dried-up vegetables in a pot."] Commentary: "How was she reborn? Long ago, a certain daughter of one of the clans became a fervent believer in the teaching of the Buddha Ko.naagamana,(1) and entertained him hospitably. She had an arbour made with boughs, a draped ceiling, and a sanded floor, and did him honour with flowers and perfumes. And all her life doing meritorious acts, she was reborn among the gods, and then again among men when Kassapa was Buddha, under whom she renounced the world. Reborn again in heaven till this Buddha-dispensation, she was finally born in a great nobleman's family at Vesālī. From the sturdy build of her body they called her Sturdykin. She became the devoted wife of a young noble. When the Master came to Vesālī, she was convinced by his teaching, and became a lay-disciple. Anon, hearing the Great Pajāpatī the Elder preaching the Doctrine, the wish arose in her to leave the world, and she told this to her husband. He would not consent; so she went on performing her duties, reflecting on the sweetness of the doctrine, and living devoted to insight. Then, one day in the kitchen, while the curry was cooking, a mighty flame of fire shot up, and burnt all the food with much crackling. She, watching it, made it a basis for rapt meditation on the utter impermanence of all things. Thereby she was established in the Fruition of the Path of No-Return. Thenceforth she wore no more jewels and ornaments. When her husband asked her the reason, she told him how incapable she felt of living a domestic life. So he brought her, as Visākha brought Dhammadinnā,(2) with a large following, to Great Pajāpatī the Gotamid, and said: 'Let the reverend Sisters give her ordination.' And Pajāpatī did so, and showed her the Master; and the Master, emphasizing, as was his custom, the visible basis whereby she had attained, spoke the verse above. Now, when she had attained Arahantship, the Sister repeated that verse in her exultation, wherefore this verse became her verse." ***** (1) Koṇāgamana and Kassapa successively preceded Gotama as Buddhas. (2) See Ps. xii. ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #67180 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello again egberdina Hi Sarah, > > and am becoming > > more convinced then ever that the Third Noble Truth is more a noble > > belief or hope than a truth. On the other hand, the First and Second > > Noble Truths remain unshakeably rock-solid descriptions of the way > > things are, so perhaps I'm half a Buddhist. Perhaps it would be more > > accurate to say that half of Buddhism is verifiably precise and > > accurate. > ..... > S: what about the Path? Wouldn't that affect the percentages? > .... Being free of dukkha is not possible IMHO (the emphasis is on being). If there is a Path that leads to the end of dukkha, it can only be a Path that leads to the end of being. And there can be no knowing of having arrived. Or even if you're on the way. Because there is no partial or gradual attenuation of being, you are either there, or you're not. > > > > I look forward to not fighting with anyone (using my trusty non-anger) > > :-) > .... > S: Oh yeah..... [brace position!!] > :-) > Hope you, Vicki and the gang are all doing well this New Year! > Vicki has aged around 10 years in the last few months (don't tell her I said that). She is suffering from various chronic ailments, that seem to defy all treatment. We've only got one boy left at home, and he has discovered the joy of girlfriends, so we hardly see him. The rest are also doing very well. It is especially pleasing that Dan, the oldest one who gave us a few mental health scares, has become a very well-adjusted young man. Kind Regards Herman #67181 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:29 pm Subject: Re: whatever buddhatrue Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > my best unspoken comment: whoo hoo! 'bout time you stop repeating the > same snark. In my Arrogant Opinion. > metta yourself. > > my nicer self: have a nice mined trip. > get over yourself. LOL! Do you have something specific to say to me, or just the usual gibberish?? :-) > > connie > Metta Yourself, James #67182 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 kinds of Progress (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... [Re-post without the Pali diacriticals!] Hi Andrew, Good to see your thoughtful posts while we were away! --- Andrew wrote: > Nyanatiloka' s Dictionary lists 4 modes of progress to deliverance: > 1. painful progress with slow comprehension > 2. painful progress with quick comprehension > 3. pleasant progress with slow comprehension > 4. pleasant progress with quick comprehension > [see "patipada"] ..... S: This caught my attention because K.Sujin often refers to the Pali terms for these 4 kinds of progress and I'm always lost, so you've prompted me to check them out and give the full extract and add the missing Pali terms: "There are 4 modes of progress to deliverance: (1) painful progress with slow comprehension (dukkhaa pa.tipadaa dandhaabhi~n~naa) (2)painful progress with quick comprehension (dukkhaa pa.tipadaa khippaabhi~n~naa) (3) pleasant progress with slow comprehension (sukhaa pa.tipadaa dandhaabhi~n~naa) (4) pleasant progress with quick comprehension (sukhaa pa.tipadaa khippaabhi~n~ naa) In A. IV, 162 it is said: (1) "Some person possesses by nature excessive greed, excessive hate, excessive delusion, and thereby he often feels pain and sorrow; and also the 5 mental faculties, as faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom (s. indriya 15-19) are dull in him; and by reason thereof he reaches only slowly the immediacy (aanantariya, q.v) to the cessation of all cankers. (2) Some person possesses by nature excessive greed, etc., but the 5 mental faculties are sharp in him and by reason thereof he reaches quickly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... (3) "Some person possesses by nature no excessive greed, etc., but the 5 mental faculties are dull in him, and by reason thereof he reaches slowly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... (4) 'Some person possessess by nature no excessive greed, etc., and the mental faculties are sharp in him, and by reason thereof he reaches quickly the immediacy to the cessation of all cankers .... See A. IV, 162, 163, 166-169; Dhs. 176ff; Atthasā lini Tr. I, 243; 11, 291, 317." ***** S: Your questions are interesting ones which I'll leave to you and Jon to discuss further. Metta, Sarah ======= #67183 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... [Another re-post without the squiggles and an early mistake about the translator of the first quote- apologies!] Dear All, Here's a more complete extract of the one I re-quoted earlier. This is from: Naarada's translation of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/chapter_1.htm "26. Hasituppaada is a citta peculiar to Arahats. Smiling is caused by a pleasurable feeling. There are thirteen classes of consciousness by which one may smile according to the type of the person. An ordinary worldling (puthujjana) may laugh with either one of the four types of cittas rooted in attachment, accompanied by pleasure, or one of the four kusala cittas, accompanied by pleasure." [See also, CMA (Bodhi note),VI #11 and chart 6.2] to the same effect] "Sotaapannas, Sakadaagaamiis, and Anaagaamiis may smile with one of the two akusala cittas, disconnected with false view, accompanied by pleasure, or with one of the four kusala cittas. Arahats and Pacceka Buddhas may smile with one of the four sobhana kiriya cittas or hasituppaada. Sammaa Sambuddhas smile with one of the two sobhana kiriya cittas, accompanied by wisdom and pleasure. There is nothing but mere mirth in the hasituppaada consciousness. " "The Compendium of Philosophy[S:i.e.Aung's translation of the same text] states: "There are six classes of laughter recognized in Buddhist works: (1) sita: - a smile manifesting itself in expression and countenance; (2) hasita: - a smile consisting in the slight movements of the lips just enough to reveal the tips of the teeth; (3) vihasita: - laughter giving out a light sound; (4) upahasita: - laughter accompanied by the movement of the head, shoulders, and arms; (5) apahasita: - laughter accompanied by the shedding of tears; and (6) atihasita: - an outburst of laughter accompanied by the forward and backward movements of the entire body from head to foot. Laughter is thus a form of bodily expression (kaaya-vi~n~natti), which may or may not be accompanied by vocal expression (vacii-vi~n~natti). Of these, the first two classes are indulged in by cultured persons, the next two by the average man, and the last two by the lower classes of being." ***** S: I can't find this in the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, so I believe this note of Aung's has been compiled from different sources. However, by way of a useful reminder that it's really a question in the end of understanding the cittas when they arise, rather than just speculating about different situations, under the section on 'killing' in the commentary, it says: "even when a laughing king orders an execution it is with a hateful consciousness. " Metta, Sarah =========== #67184 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 kinds of Progress (was: Meditation (again)) corvus121 Hi Sarah Thanks for reposting this. I suppose we can add "patipada" to our list of purely conceptual words (i.e. words refering to concepts)? Speaking of "painful progress" of another sort, Reg [who you have met] came up to visit me a few days ago and had an accident on his motorbike. Very lucky to have received only minor grazes and bruises. He's back home now and fine, although a little shaken. I'm glad to hear that your trip to Thailand went well. As usual, the discussions have obviously led to alot of Dhamma reflection - both painful and pleasant. ;-)) Bye for now Andrew > > Nyanatiloka' s Dictionary lists 4 modes of progress to deliverance: > > 1. painful progress with slow comprehension > > 2. painful progress with quick comprehension > > 3. pleasant progress with slow comprehension > > 4. pleasant progress with quick comprehension > > [see "patipada"] #67185 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again) egberdina Hi Sarah, > > "26. Hasituppaada is a citta peculiar to Arahats. The question spontaneously arises. What, then, is an Arahat? Is it something/someone that has cittas? #67186 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:48 am Subject: Re: Hello again jwromeijn Hallo Herman Glad to hear again from you. Metta Joop #67187 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo Scott, all Although you had not finsished your response to me, a first reaction. I thought we were talking about the Abhidhamma theory in which ultimate phenomena (sometimes called in a popularising way called 'atoms') arise and fall away in the timescale of milli-seconds or shorter.. But now you jump in your Sutta-examples to the arising and falling away of formations (that must be the five khandas, isn't it?) I have no problems at all with this khanda-Sutta-examples. I mean: I don't understand it completely but I have faith in the truth of it; I know dhukkha, anicca and anatta are correct principles. What I'm not sure of is for example is the time-scale off arising and falling away of the 12 links of the paticca samuppada of which SN 22,81 (and you) is speaking about? (Take care before your answer: Theravada-orthodoxy states that paticca samuppada is about three lifetimes, I think with for example Buddhadasa Bhikkhu that's about processes within one lifetime: processes witin a second but also processes that take some minutes or some days.) I even have no problems with the opinion (I think your message is about this opinion) that the Abhidhamma-system is already used in the Suttas. I agree that, I only state: sometimes the Abhidhamma-theory of describing reality is the most useful and sometimes the conventional (conceptual) theory is more useful. And I think for the long-time process of awakening the conventional theiry is the most useful. Metta Joop #67188 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:17 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo Scott, I forgot to make a remark: A "formation" is more than one phenomena (dhamma); otherwise it should not be called a "formation" Other translations for "khanda" are: compound, aggregates: all terms of concepts having more than one atom Joop #67189 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sisters 1 sarahprocter... All, Uh-oh - more diacritic trouble. Just ignore for now til Connie comes to my rescue to sort something out....(the trouble is it always looks fine when I'm posting, so I don't realise til later). James, I think we all have this problem - it relates to the diacritics on the web-site we're using. Some friends before mentioned they had trouble with some of Nina's writings and 'Cetasikas' before, but by downloading the p-charter font (from Zolag) and using this as a default setting, I think that one can be fixed. For these other ones, we have to 'convert the symbols' or use velthius when posting any Pali terms. Sarah --- sarah abbott wrote: > life. So he brought her, as Visākha brought Dhammadinnā,(2) > with > a large following, to Great Pajāpatī the Gotamid, and said: > 'Let > the reverend Sisters give her ordination.' And Pajāpatī did #67190 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again) sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > > > "26. Hasituppaada is a citta peculiar to Arahats. > > The question spontaneously arises. .... S: And a quick spontaneous answer... ... >What, then, is an Arahat? .... S: Cittas, cetasikas and rupas ... >Is it > something/someone that has cittas? .... S: No - 'arahant' is a concentional label used to refer to particular kinds of cittas and cetasikas for convenience. So we could say 'hasituppaada is a kind of citta only found amongst those cittas in which no anusayas (latent defilements) remain at all due to the eradication of all defilements by the previous magga cittas'. Speak later, Metta Sarah p.s Very sorry to hear about Vicki's difficulties.....may she be well soon. ================ #67191 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:01 am Subject: Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was: Extracts) scottduncan2 Sarah and connie, connie: "[ps Sarah, I'd love to read the Sisters with you... Sarah: "Ok, as long as I'm not just reading to myself, I'm game to go with the Sisters...I hope others will join in from time to time with comments/queeries/disagreements to make it more interesting." I'm in sisters. What's a queery? Scott. #67192 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] whatever jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Connie & all One-Folders, > .... > S: I came across a sutta the other day I wasn't familiar with, stressing > rt understanding - forget where. > > For those for whom it sounds like a One-Fold Path, this letter of Nina's > may be of interest: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/66789 > .... Hallo Sarah, James, Connie (if she wants to participate in a discussion), all Although directed to the (ironic called 'One-Folders') a remark on the quote of Nina that Sarah used as an argument. (I don't know argument for what, for "stressing tr understanding" ? (whatever that means) In 66789: "If one encourages people to develop jhåna as a foundation for vipassanå many misunderstandings are bound to arise. People may not know what true calm is, they may not know what jhåna is. They do not realize that the objects of vipassanå and samatha are different. ******* Nina." Joop: Without doubt there are socalled meditation teachers who give instructions without knowing what true calm is and who do not realize that the objects of vipassanå and samatha are different. But is it really the aim Nina to generalize and use this dabblers as a proof that one needs no concentration before mindful-meditation can really start? Every competent meditation teachers realizes that the objects of vipassanå and samatha are different. What I understood but perhaps I'm not competent: object of vipassana is a ultimate reality (I'm not so happy with the term'object' as if one choses it; it happens) is and STARTING-object of samatha is a conceptual reality. Metta Joop #67193 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane jonoabb Hi JC jcmendoza1000 wrote: > To everyone: > I'd like to ask if the Awakened Oner ever mentioned about the astral > plane and astral bodies and if they truly exist? > -JC > I don't know of any mention. What's your interest in this? Jon #67194 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was: Extracts) sarahprocter... Hi Scott, --- Scott Duncan wrote: > I'm in sisters. ... S: Good show - you'll be a great help with bits of Pali and so on! I also thought that along the road it might be useful for someone to add bits from Dict of PPN for background. Lets see if we can get over the font-teething problems.....if you have a better way to do it, be our guest! What's a queery? .... S: Well since you ask(!!), it's a cross between a 'queer eye' and a 'query':-)) Also known on DSG as a typo! Metta, Sarah ======== #67195 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello again upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/19/07 12:24:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Vicki has aged around 10 years in the last few months (don't tell her > I said that). She is suffering from various chronic ailments, that > seem to defy all treatment. > > We've only got one boy left at home, and he has discovered the joy of > girlfriends, so we hardly see him. The rest are also doing very well. > It is especially pleasing that Dan, the oldest one who gave us a few > mental health scares, has become a very well-adjusted young man. > ========================== Wonderful about Dan! That is such a blessing when things turn around like that! May there be an equally dramatic turn-around with Vicki. Just keep at it, and don't let the doctors off the hook. (Some doctors like to trivialize the situation or blame the patient when they don't have answers.) When they do get a handle on the problems, a rapid "aging" may, with right treatment of her conditions, just as quickly reverse itself. Such apparent aging is often only temporary appearance due to passing conditions, especially exhaustion & worry. For what it is worth, I will keep you both in my thoughts and prayers. With metta, Howard #67196 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs jonoabb Hi James (and Howard) buddhatrue wrote: > James: I completely agree with this estimation also. I am not sure > why Jon, Sarah and others insist that only moments of pure kusala are > development of the path. The Buddha taught that the path is a > gradual one and that "drop by drop the water pot is filled." If > only moments of pure kusala were development of the path, we wouldn't > get any drops! We'd be lucky to get some mist! ;-)) > As I read the teachings, consciousness that is rooted in sobhana (i.e., kusala) factors cannot be rooted in akusala factors, and vice versa. Of course, kusala consciousness (and akusala consciousness) may be either weak or strong. Thus, all kusala, even the weakest, is 'pure' kusala (and weak akusala is likewise 'pure' akusala). This is how the water pot is filled drop by drop: one (weak) moment of kusala is a support for another (weak) moment in the future. Jon #67197 From: JC Mendoza Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane jcmendoza1000 Nothing, I've just recently discovered that the astral plane was mentioned in the many religious traditions in India, and if it is real whyn isn't it mentioned in the Suttas. Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hi JC jcmendoza1000 wrote: > To everyone: > I'd like to ask if the Awakened Oner ever mentioned about the astral > plane and astral bodies and if they truly exist? > -JC > I don't know of any mention. What's your interest in this? #67198 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:25 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop and All Wholesomystics, I've a bit of time for: J: "But the problem starts when we try to relate this to the conceptual language of the Suttas. The trick that relates this two theories of reality (the ultimate and the conventional) is the concept of "ACCUMULATION", a trick about which I already had many discussions with Nina and Sarah - About the question: "are accumulations ultimate or conventional realities?" The answer to me seemed ambigue..." I may have been unclear, for which I apoligise, but I wasn't intending to have the discussion veer in this direction at all; that is whether 'accumulations are ultimate or conventional realities'. This appears to be your own question, which I don't share. Rather I was considering the point regarding 'range' of kusala or akusala. In using the term 'absolute' I was not meaning paramattha, instead I was getting to the following: The notion that a given moment of consciousness can be both kusala and akusala at the same time. I may be misunderstanding the particular focus here, but it seems as if concepts like 'range' or 'continuum' and the like are problematic because they rest on a bed of subtle permanence, that is, an implied sort of 'lastingness', albeit and supposedly brief (but not as brief as the much maligned 'moment' of consciousness - just long enough to not be the same thing) over which things are said to go from one thing to another during the same period. I was wanting to see if this was being posited, since it wasn't the way I was understanding things. J: "- A second question of me was: how many accumulations does one have? The answer I heard mostly was: two, a wholesome and a unwholesum. Scott, you used the term 'accumulations' too, perhaps you have the answer?" SN 45,175 (5): "Bhikkhus, there are these seven underlying tendencies. What seven? The underlying tendency to sensual lust, the underlying tendency to aversion, the underlying tendency to views, the underlying tendency to doubt, the underlying tendency to conceit, the underlying tendency to lust for existence, the underlying tendency to ignorance. These are the seven underlying tendencies. This Noble Eightfold Path is to be developed for direct knowledge of these seven underlying tendencies, for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their abandoning." SN 22,35(3): "...Bhikkhu, if one has an underlying tendency towards something, then one is reckoned in terms of it. If one does not have and underlying tendency towards something, then one is not reckoned in terms of it..." SN 22,89,(7): "...As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit 'I am', the desire 'I am', the underlying tendency 'I am that had not yet been uprooted - this comes to be uprooted..." Note 47: "Ya.m kno bhikkhu anuseti tena sa"nkha.m gacchati. The verb anuseti implies anusaya, the seven underlying tendencies, or, more simply, the three underlying tendencies of lust, aversion, and ignorance. Spk: If one has an underlying tendency towards form by way of sensual lust, etc., then one is described in terms of that same underlying tendency as 'lustful, hating, deluded.' But when that underlying tendency is absent, one is not reckoned thus..." I think, and I'll stand corrected by those in the know, that it is kusala and akusala which accumulates, this being a 'quality' of a moment of consciousness. The realities making up this moment are many and varied - citta with accompanying cetasikas. If you've had this discussion with Nina and Sarah, and remain as stated, you've already had it with the best so I'll leave it at that. J: "To continue the metaphores: when the level in the bottle with wholesome rises, the level in the bottle of unwholesome get lower (they must be connected)..." To what do you equate 'the bottle' in your metaphor? As in my original question, within what do you see these levels appearing? How do you see the corresponding 'levels' as being 'connected'? How do you account for the change in 'levels'? Sincerely, Scott. #67199 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was: Extracts) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Me: "What's a queery?" S: Well since you ask(!!), it's a cross between a 'queer eye' and a 'query':-)) Also known on DSG as a typo!" Oh, how mundane, I thought it was a request for a weird question... Scott.