#67200 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:01 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? egberdina Hi Scott, > > 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. > I'm certainly not in the know, but my understanding is that kusala or akusala are not elementary qualities, they rather are collective terms, categories if you like, into which qualities are divided. There is no quality of kusalaness, or akusalaness. (IMHO) Kind Regards Herman #67201 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again egberdina Thanks, Sarah, for your reply. It makes sense. But I wonder, do cittas smile? :-) Kind Regards Herman > > > > > > > > "26. Hasituppaada is a citta peculiar to Arahats. #67202 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello again egberdina Thanks, Joop (and Howard), On 19/01/07, Joop wrote: > Hallo Herman > > Glad to hear again from you. > I hope you were not affected by the storms. Kind Regards Herman #67203 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:11 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Yeah, I think we agree. I sloppily put the term 'quality' in quotes, leading to imprecision. H: "I'm certainly not in the know, but my understanding is that kusala or akusala are not elementary qualities, they rather are collective terms, categories if you like, into which qualities are divided. There is no quality of kusalaness, or akusalaness. (IMHO)" I think it is the mental factor which is either kusala (eg. pa~n~na) or akusala (eg. lobha). And then these collective mental factors, depending on 'type' constitute the 'category'. Yeah? Sincerely, Scott. #67204 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method jonoabb Hi Andrew Andrew wrote: > 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??? > Well I'd agree there's a pretty significant difference, but then there's also the similarity I mentioned which I thought may explain why they are included in those to whom suttas were addressed. But I also agree with your comments below about ariyans not (or not always) being the sole audience. > ... > 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? If they talk, it's going to be about about Dhamma in some form or other ;-)) > Is it too remote for us worldlings IYO? > Probably ;-)) Jon #67205 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:28 pm Subject: Re: Lachen und Weinen (Was: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > 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). Well now I'm confused!! I thought we were discussing whether crying was always akusala, or whether it could sometimes be kusala (as when SURRENDER). But if that's not it, then I've lost track of things somewhere along the line. > 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) > I meant Dhamma (with a capital D). Sorry 'bout the typo. > But perhaps you wanted to say something else, why for example did you > use the term 'value' ? > I was using 'value' as in 'nature', 'quality' or 'attribute'. Probably not a good choice, I know. > (a check-question: is 'value' an ultimate or a conventional > description of reality?) > Is it a description of a paramattha dhamma? It can be seen as such, in the sense that every kusala dhamma has a common identifying characteristic, namely, the calm that is passaddhi (tranquility) cetasika, while every akusala dhamma is accompanied by the cetasika uddhacca (restlessness). > And for the rest: I think there is said enough about 'Lachen und > Weinen' now. > Agreed. Enough for now, with some left for later ;-)) Jon #67206 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Okay, Jon, you gave me the last word. That's my last word. :-) > Is that a promise? ;-)) Jon #67207 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Scott Scott Duncan wrote: > 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. > I agree with this line of reasoning, and I don't know of any specific reason why panna shouldn't arise, but I hesitate to say that it can because it somehow seems unlikely to me (just speculation on my part, though). > 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? > If panna did arise it's object couldn't be the dream (thought) but would have to be some aspect of the consciousness of which that dream is the object. Sorry, no further ideas on this! Nina may well be able to add something when she returns. Jon #67208 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) renmercer Everything is a dream, wind is a dream, life is a dream, we are all dreams to each other. This simply indicates that it is not solid, watch your breath, you can't, once you identify with anything, it has already disappeared because all things change and change is a constant we use the term "dream" or "reality". All terms for dreams or realities, all words, concepts or dreams are very clever things. At the very essence, even "bodhi dhamma" and all world traditions are also dreams. Just very clever ways to guide others to see what they feel you should see, but that too is also a dream. Sight is also a dream as are all our senses of mind or in body. As we grow, we exchange advancing dreams for our last dreams. We are all like children playing, rejecting and trading in our dreams. Even wishing to develop the stream enterer's (sotapanna) stage is also a dream. To become Arahanto is a dream. Sit, watch and get lost, eventually all things will fall away and become clear... Like settled muddy water... the great tathagata achieved it in just 7 days with his special kamma, you can at least reach sota panna in 10 days? Non returner, well, that all depends on how we dream.... Filling your head with more and more language is not going to bring about anything but collection after collection. Settle your muddy water, that too is a dream. we are all buddhas, infinate and pure. Release from the dream and all will be.... Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hi Scott Scott Duncan wrote: > 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. > I agree with this line of reasoning, and I don't know of any specific reason why panna shouldn't arise, but I hesitate to say that it can because it somehow seems unlikely to me (just speculation on my part, though). <....> #67209 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:48 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? egberdina Hi Scott, > Yeah, I think we agree. I sloppily put the term 'quality' in quotes, > leading to imprecision. > > H: "I'm certainly not in the know, but my understanding is that > kusala or akusala are not elementary qualities, they rather are collective > terms, categories if you like, into which qualities are divided. There > is no quality of kusalaness, or akusalaness. (IMHO)" > > I think it is the mental factor which is either kusala (eg. pa~n~na) > or akusala (eg. lobha). And then these collective mental factors, > depending on 'type' constitute the 'category'. Yeah? > Sounds about right to me. While on the topic of a/kusala, it has always seemed to me that those categories depend on a future for their meaning. A present mindstate is a/kusala because of a future effect it will have. Is this your understanding also? I do get stuck on this, because if a/kusala is contingent on an as yet unarisen future, no mindstate can be a/kusala in itself. A future is necessary to determine the a/kusala nature of the past. Yet a future arises only because of craving, so all arising states are rooted in craving, and are therefore akusala. Do you have any thoughts on this? Kind Regards Herman #67210 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:08 pm Subject: Existential Larry egberdina Hi Larry, If you are still posting/reading (I have made the bold assumption you are still alive), I just want to express my thanks to you for the very nice discussion we had on existentialism / Sartre. This discussion prompted me to painstakingly reread "Being and Nothingness" during my last absence from here, and I have now embarked on a third reading of it. I remain stunned by the parallels between Theravadan and existential analysis of being in the world. Sartre even has a parallel for the bhavanga citta, he calls it the fundamental project. Of course there are many differences as well, such as the complete lack of any notion of the possibility of redemption/liberation/salvation. What is possible is for wo/man to uncover / discover their fundamental project, and realise how that has determined the meaning and values of their being. If you are interested, I would certainly like to further discuss Buddhism in the light of existentialism, and vice versa. If not, that's cool too. Cheers Herman #67211 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) egberdina Hi Rendel, On 20/01/07, Rendal Mercer wrote: > Everything is a dream, wind is a dream, life is a dream, we are all dreams to each other. I have no real problems with anything you wrote, just that if everything is a dream, what then is a dream? We have a word for the dream state because it is different to other states, like the waking state, for example. But you are saying that the waking state is a dream state also. If you say there is no difference between waking and dreaming, you are simply changing the meaning of dreaming, without telling us what it has become. A description of everything describes nothing at all. Because things are known by means of difference. Kind Regards Herman #67212 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments buddhatrue Hi Jon (and Connie), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi James > > buddhatrue wrote: > > Okay, Jon, you gave me the last word. That's my last word. :-) > > > > Is that a promise? ;-)) Yeah, it's a promise that it's my last word on this thread. A promise that it's my last word on the misdirected teachings of KS?? Don't hold your breath on that one!! ;-)) (And it may seem that I have been pretty harsh on KS lately, but that is only relatively so. I used to be much worse!! I don't write even half of what I'm really thinking.) > > Jon > Metta, James #67213 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) ken_aitch Hi Sarah, -------------- S: > 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. " ------- I'd like to make doubly sure of this, if you don't mind. With the exception of the arahant's joyful citta (manovinnana-dhatu, hasituppada-citta), can we say that smiling and laughing are pure concepts? (Just like 'walking' and 'sitting?') I ask this because I think there is something called a "bodily intimation rupa" that I have never got around to studying. Maybe it's time I did? :-) Ken H #67214 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) ken_aitch Hi Rendal, This kind of talk worries me: -------------- R: > Everything is a dream, wind is a dream, life is a dream, we are all dreams to each other. This simply indicates that it is not solid, watch your breath, you can't, once you identify with anything, it has already disappeared because all things change and change is a constant we use the term "dream" or "reality". All terms for dreams or realities, all words, concepts or dreams are very clever things. At the very essence, even "bodhi dhamma" and all world traditions are also dreams. Just very clever ways to guide others to see what they feel you should see, but that too is also a dream. Sight is also a dream as are all our senses of mind or in body. As we grow, we exchange advancing dreams for our last dreams. We are all like children playing, rejecting and trading in our dreams. Even wishing to develop the stream enterer's (sotapanna) stage is also a dream. To become Arahanto is a dream. --------------- We mustn't think that everything is a dream. If it were then there would be no difference between right and wrong, and no difference between suffering and the end of suffering. Life would be meaningless. It would be just a terrible dream with no way out. ---------------------------- R: > Sit, watch and get lost, eventually all things will fall away and become clear... Like settled muddy water... ---------------------------- No, that won't happen at all! Millions of people (from all walks of life and religions) have tried it. It only leads to frustration, resentment and bewilderment. ------------------ R: > the great tathagata achieved it in just 7 days ----------------- He did not sit and get lost in dreams until they all fell away. What he did was completely different. ---------------------- R: > with his special kamma, you can at least reach sota panna in 10 days? Non returner, well, that all depends on how we dream.... ----------------------- I don't know who has been telling you this dangerous nonsense, but you really need better friends. ---------------------------- R: > Filling your head with more and more language is not going to bring about anything but collection after collection. Settle your muddy water, that too is a dream. we are all buddhas, infinate and pure. Release from the dream and all will be... ---------------------------- As I was saying, the Buddha taught something completely different. He taught that, behind the dreams, there are realities. And he taught the cause of every reality that can ever arise. By studying his teaching (of cause and effect) we can make sense of the world, and gradually (very gradually) put an end to dukkha (the suffering that is caused by ignorance). Please stick around and study the teaching with us. Ken H #67215 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry lbidd2 Hi Herman, Good to see you again. I could discuss existentialism but I have to re-read everything. I've kind of forgotten what it's all about. As for the bhavanga citta, I think it is somehow emblematic of this life. What does Sartre have to say about our "fundamental project"? Larry --------------------------- #67216 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Good question: H: "While on the topic of a/kusala, it has always seemed to me that those categories depend on a future for their meaning. A present mindstate is a/kusala because of a future effect it will have. Is this your understanding also?" I don't think so, no. I think it is the root of a given citta, and not a future effect, which allows for whether it is kusala or akusala. That is lobha/alobha, moha/amoha, dosa/adosa. This is root condition. H: "I do get stuck on this, because if a/kusala is contingent on an as yet unarisen future, no mindstate can be a/kusala in itself. A future is necessary to determine the a/kusala nature of the past. Yet a future arises only because of craving, so all arising states are rooted in craving, and are therefore akusala." I think it is a function of kamma-paccaya (kamma condition), and in particular naanaaka.nika-kammapaccaya (asynchronous kamma condition) that the either kusala or akusala volitional actions are conditioning states for the future conditioned states. "13. Kamma Condition (i)Faultless and faulty kamma is related to resultant aggregates and kamma-produced matter by kamma condition. (ii)Volition is related to its associated states, and the matter produced thereby, by kamma conditions." (Pa.t.thaana, p.8) There are likely more conditions active as well, but this is all I have time for at present. Sincerely, Scott. #67217 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) rjkjp1 Dear JOn and Scott Panna is present when contemplating the Dhamma during waking moments. I think when we are dreaming and contemplating Dhamma it is also present. Or sometimes we may dream about giving offerings to monks for example- this may be with or with out panna. Robert #67218 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) renmercer Thanks Herman, interesting question but yes, for me all things, being, emotions are dreams. Just fleeting moments. We become happy momnetarily or angered momentarily due to our investment that things, being and feelings will be the same every moment afterwards. As you now this is the main cause to our stress and miseries. As there are meny different types of love, many different types of rock, so too are there many different types of dreams. Everyone is different in each moment that we breath, our thoughts change in accordance to our feelings and our feelings change in accordance to our experience. Change and dreams are very deeply connected and so too is our breath. If we were able to drop everything for just one moment we could see that our inhale and exhale are just one movement, one thing. Without our breath we simply would not dream. The dream states are our breaths, so everytime we breath we also dream. Our breath is what keeps us in these bodies we call Ren or Herman but otherwise we are the same movement, the very same breath. Herman Hofman wrote: Hi Rendel, On 20/01/07, Rendal Mercer wrote: > Everything is a dream, wind is a dream, life is a dream, we are all dreams to each other. I have no real problems with anything you wrote, just that if everything is a dream, what then is a dream? We have a word for the dream state because it is different to other states, like the waking state, for example. But you are saying that the waking state is a dream state also. If you say there is no difference between waking and dreaming, you are simply changing the meaning of dreaming, without telling us what it has become. A description of everything describes nothing at all. Because things are known by means of difference. <....> #67219 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) renmercer Ken, Have "No Fear", worries are dreams too. You see this is not meant to worry anybody. This is the point that All buddhas are telling us. Don't give up on life just because it is a dream for someone else. It is true, just like the nursery rhyme says it is Life is but a dream", Row, row, row your boat", you know it! Merrily, merrily life is but a dream.... This is not just a nursery rhyme, this is real. Life moves and changes at such a fast pace that it can be so hard to see, even 1,000 years ago, this is not technology that is being said to you, this is onlty a medium. No Fear, life is change, all things change my friend. Reality is scary, if you have ever faced what you have long wanted to forget about you will know what is being said to you. Life is but a dream.... Sit, watch, breath, watch some more. All talking, reading and discussing is just our way of not facing our own dukkha, our own unsatisfactoriness. Face it, sit with it, watch it. You will have no fear when this body no longer wishes to be driven, we will have to find a new vehicle to drive. No Fear....it not difficult, just unnaturel.... #67220 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry renmercer gentalmen, It's Gita, not Citta. Gita means book, just like bible means book in Hebrew, that's all. Citta is something a bit different. In Italian (latin based), citta means "city" as in "city centre", this is where we get our word in english from, meaning centre. In Sanskrit, and in Pali, citta directly indicates the centre, refering to our hearts in some cases, our mind bases or a centralized characteristic, or the developed concentration of some type of virtue. Hope you have fun with your talks. Sit, watch and witness, just simply witness, that's enough to know. ll other learnings are just trying to teach you this very simply thing,.... RenKTN LBIDD@... wrote: Hi Herman, Good to see you again. I could discuss existentialism but I have to re-read everything. I've kind of forgotten what it's all about. As for the bhavanga citta, I think it is somehow emblematic of this life. What does Sartre have to say about our "fundamental project"? Larry --------------------------- H: "Hi Larry, If you are still posting/reading (I have made the bold assumption you are still alive), I just want to express my thanks to you for the very nice discussion we had on existentialism / Sartre. This discussion prompted me to painstakingly reread "Being and Nothingness" during my last absence from here, and I have now embarked on a third reading of it. I remain stunned by the parallels between Theravadan and existential analysis of being in the world. Sartre even has a parallel for the bhavanga citta, he calls it the fundamental project. <....> #67221 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) renmercer Giving dana is always Panna. Payutto! Offering. Monks do not need our offerings, this is cultural. WHat we offer to monks is what we need to offer to the vegabonds on the streets as well, the drunkards, the homeless. These are our teachers in diguise, don't be fooled, they are teachers! One thing we need to know about offerings is that a true offering will never, ever suffice unless we give without giving. We have to remember that we have nothing in life really, nothing. wHEN THE TIME COMES WE WILL KNOW THIS EVEN MORE THEN WE DO NOW BUT IT IS TRUE. We have nothing. This is a true offering. If all we do is offer the Bhikkhus our support then what does that say about us? Are we truely supportive of our world, of our peoples, of our panna? Payutto! Offering is Wisdom for those that are greedy. This is nature, this is real, all things change. Sit watch and witness. Ren,KTN rjkjp1 wrote: Dear JOn and Scott Panna is present when contemplating the Dhamma during waking moments. I think when we are dreaming and contemplating Dhamma it is also present. Or sometimes we may dream about giving offerings to monks for example- this may be with or with out panna. Robert #67222 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) renmercer A dream is not here anymore or yet. Dream means something that is not within the reach of the one that dreams. It still has a feeling of possessiveness but is untouchable by the dreamer, the one who dreams. A dreamer is one who is engaged with nothing but feels they are doing something. Be the watcher no dreams, even in death, be the watcher. We dream what we project or hold on to and feel it is true. Herman Hofman wrote: Hi Rendel, On 20/01/07, Rendal Mercer wrote: > Everything is a dream, wind is a dream, life is a dream, we are all dreams to each other. I have no real problems with anything you wrote, just that if everything is a dream, what then is a dream? <....> #67223 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:38 am Subject: Lachen und Weinen (Was: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop > ... Hallo Jon, all Joop (some days ago): And I didn't use the term 'kusala', what I'm thinking about is: compassion (karuna). Jon: Well now I'm confused!! I thought we were discussing whether crying was always akusala, or whether it could sometimes be kusala (as when SURRENDER). But if that's not it, then I've lost track of things somewhere along the line. Joop (now): You are right. I was mixing two threads. (In the other, that still runs, I explained that I prefer not to use the dichotomy kusala-akusala) So my answer on your question (about kusala crying) "What kind of kusala do you have in mind here: dana or sila or bhavana?" should have been: Neither of this three, but "karuna". But perhaps my idea : crying can be based on karuna is not possible in the Abhidhamma-system. Metta Joop #67224 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:39 am Subject: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal jwromeijn Hallo all, Some days ago James quoted from the Upatissa Sutta:. (Sariputta saying): 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.' " I think the arahant-ideal is well formulated in this quote. One of the newest essays of Bhikkhu Bodhi has the title: " Arahants, Buddhas, and Bodhisattvas", it can be found at: www.bodhimonastery.net/docs/Arahants_Bstvas_BuddhasV2.pdf The relation arahant-bodhisattva ideal is also described by J. Samuels in: The Bodhisattva Ideal In Theravada www.buddhistinformation.com/bodhisattva_ideal_in_theravada.htm The essays described the two ideals (the bodhisattva- and the arahant- ideal) that were two thousand years ago not simply the ideal of Theravadins and the ideal of Mahayanists: the history was more mixed. And: both has the Buddha as the ideal ! The question (my question) that I have not seen answered by BB, is: CAN AN ARAHANT - as Sariputta in the Upatissa Sutta quote - HAVE COMPASSION ? Compassion (karuna) here is: compassion TOWARDS sentient beings. Clear to me is that the Buddha has compassion. Firstly because he wanted to teach everybody he met after His enlightenment, during 45 years. Secondly He also had a more 'daily' kind of compassion, for example towards "The monk with dysenterie" (Kucchivikara-vatthu : Mahavagga VIII.26.1-8) Of course somebody will ask: what is compassion? The most beautiful contemplation about what it is, is that of Nynaponika I quoted it in the end of my DSG-message #65510 It can also be defined as a sobhana cetasika in the Abhidhamma-system too: an appamanna cetasika, mental state that have limitless objects on which one practices. There has been a period in the history of Buddhism in which a monk could decide either to follow the arahant-ideal or the bodhisattva- ideal; both kind of monks lived in the same monastery. Is this possible today? Perhaps not for a monk, but for a layperson- Theravadin this is possible, I think Metta Joop #67225 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:49 am Subject: Re: Stressing sila & Cutting off at feeling philofillet Hi Matt (and JOn in ps) I just wanted to thank you for this post and say that I'm sorry I didn't respond in December. It was just not the right time, and still isn't. I just don't seem to have the capacity (time?) to get into discussions about these meaty topics - how much easier to shoot off my mouth and make a run for it. I hope I get back to you on it someday, perhaps when I win the lottery. I also want someday to comment on an interesting exchange you and Christine had in one of the talks. She was wondering if the spice goes out of life in some way when we get into Dhamma. You spoke in a very lucid way about how it doesn't, because the mental processes that are conditioned to go on will go on, our thoughts will run on the tracks that have been laid down. I'm feeling these days that this isn't the case - we can make dramatic progress in rerouting our mental tracks, and that, indeed, this might seem in one way to take the spice out of things. Our response to objects becomes a lot more sober. And this is the way it is to be, if we are to develop deeper understanding. And there might be less spice, but better comes our way. Something like that. Anyways, I hope we can discuss that someday. Not now, alas. Metta, Phil p.s Jon, I also think I owe you one from around the same time. Thanks for the feedback you gave me. Thanks again. Metta, Phil #67226 From: connie Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:02 am Subject: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) nichiconn Sarah: Well since you ask(!!), it's a cross between a 'queer eye' and a 'query':-)) Also known on DSG as a typo!" Scott: Oh, how mundane, I thought it was a request for a weird question... Connie: Sarah's not playing extractly straight with you, Scott. Queeries often describe typos of practices / pastimes of those reborn as fairies... the subject will come up in Another Saamaa's 3 verses actually. There are some parts of the text, like the Introductions and a few footnotes dealing with metre that I'm just not going to bother trying to fix up for the list. Might meet up with you off-list before I finish, Sarah? c. #67227 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) egberdina Hi RobK, On 20/01/07, rjkjp1 wrote: > > Dear JOn and Scott > Panna is present when contemplating the Dhamma during waking moments. > I think when we are dreaming and contemplating Dhamma it is also > present. > > Or sometimes we may dream about giving offerings to monks for example- > this may be with or with out panna. In dhamma terms, what is the difference if any, between a waking state and a sleeping state? Kind Regards Herman #67228 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry egberdina Hi Rendal, On 20/01/07, Rendal Mercer wrote: > gentalmen, > It's Gita, not Citta. > Gita means book, just like bible means book in Hebrew, that's all. > > Citta is something a bit different. > I could be wrong, but it sounds like you are talking about the Bhavagad Gita? Kind Regards Herman #67229 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry egberdina Hi Larry, > > Good to see you again. I could discuss existentialism but I have to > re-read everything. I've kind of forgotten what it's all about. > > As for the bhavanga citta, I think it is somehow emblematic of this > life. What does Sartre have to say about our "fundamental project"? > Thanks for your reply. The main thrust of existentialism is that each individual is responsible for everything that they do. For the world does not dictate meaning or value, meaning and values are given to the world by the individual. Which leads to the fundamental project. All the actions of an individual can ultimately be traced back to the fundamental project of that being, which can be neatly captured in the phrase "I will be X" or "I will not be X". The meanings and values given to the world are in service of the realisation of the fundamental project. People select from the objects of the world, all of which are meaningless and devoid of value in themselves, and act on them in an effort to become themselves. Of course, all these projects are doomed to failure, as both Buddhists and existentialists come to know. Consciousness is forever doomed to becoming itself, and never arriving at a state of being itself. For Buddhists, there is the aspiration to an end to this cycle of becoming. For existentialists, living life honestly is the best one can do. This means no more than accepting that one is not free to not act, (act one must - this is a denial of the non-karma producing Buddhist ideal), and that all acts are free (not determined). Kind Regards Herman #67230 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) egberdina Hi Rendel, On 20/01/07, Rendal Mercer wrote: > A dream is not here anymore or yet. Dream means something that is not within the reach of the one that dreams. > It still has a feeling of possessiveness but is untouchable by the dreamer, the one who dreams. A dreamer is one who is engaged with nothing but feels they are doing something. > Be the watcher no dreams, even in death, be the watcher. > We dream what we project or hold on to and feel it is true. > I quite like what you wrote here. I see a parallel between dreams as you write about them, and the duality of consciousness - object. Consciousness is forever separated from it's objects, and consciousness can never be it's own object. Truly, there is no object of consciousness of which it can be said "I am this". Kind Regards Herman #67231 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:18 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? egberdina Hi Scott, On 20/01/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Good question: > > H: "While on the topic of a/kusala, it has always seemed to me that > those categories depend on a future for their meaning. A present > mindstate is a/kusala because of a future effect it will have. Is this > your understanding also?" > > I don't think so, no. I think it is the root of a given citta, and > not a future effect, which allows for whether it is kusala or akusala. > That is lobha/alobha, moha/amoha, dosa/adosa. This is root condition. > Thanks for your reply. Is the root condition part and parcel of the citta? Is the a/kusala nature of a citta known with it's arising and ceasing? Or is it the case, because a/kusala are categories, lacking any own irreducible quality, that attributions of a/kusala occur always after the event to which they are applied? > H: "I do get stuck on this, because if a/kusala is contingent on an > as yet unarisen future, no mindstate can be a/kusala in itself. A > future is necessary to determine the a/kusala nature of the past. Yet > a future arises only because of craving, so all arising states are > rooted in craving, and are therefore akusala." > > I think it is a function of kamma-paccaya (kamma condition), and in > particular naanaaka.nika-kammapaccaya (asynchronous kamma condition) > that the either kusala or akusala volitional actions are conditioning > states for the future conditioned states. > > "13. Kamma Condition > (i)Faultless and faulty kamma is related to resultant aggregates and > kamma-produced matter by kamma condition. > (ii)Volition is related to its associated states, and the matter > produced thereby, by kamma conditions." (Pa.t.thaana, p.8) > > There are likely more conditions active as well, but this is all I > have time for at present. > Please don't go to any length if you are unable, but this does mean that even with the remainderless uprooting of craving, a future continues to arise? Kind Regards Herman #67232 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:36 am Subject: Re: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo all, > > >... > One of the newest essays of Bhikkhu Bodhi has the title: > " Arahants, Buddhas, and Bodhisattvas", it can be found at: > www.bodhimonastery.net/docs/Arahants_Bstvas_BuddhasV2.pdf > Reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's essay more carefully I found two important points that had to do with my message this morning. First about the compassion of the Buddha, the being oriented to other beings. The second about the strange fact that de Buddha Himself was a bodhisattva before being born as Siddharma Gautama nowhere in the Suttas is described how to get a bodhisattva. So I have not yet solved the problem how - within the Theravada framework - to awaken (enlighten) without losing my ability to have compassion for other beings. Metta Joop "There are nine epithets here [of the Buddha]. Of these nine, four are also used for arahant disciples: arahant, possessed of true knowledge and conduct, an exalted one, enlightened; five are used exclusively for the Buddha: perfectly enlightened one, knower of the world, unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, the Blessed One. Note that of these five, two (unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans) explicitly refer to the Buddha's significance for others … The formula for the arahant … Now all these epithets are true for the Buddha as well, but the Buddha is not described in this way; for these terms emphasize the attainment of one's own liberation, and the Buddha is extolled, not primarily as the one who has attained his own liberation, but as the one who opens the doors of liberation for others. That is, even in the archaic suttas of the Nikayas, an "other- regarding" significance is already being subtly ascribed to the Buddha's status that is not ascribed to the arahant." (p. 8, 9) "Why is it that in the Nikayas we never find any instance of a disciple coming to the Buddha to ask for guidance in following a bodhisattva path to Buddhahood? And why is the Buddha never seen exhorting his followers to take up the bodhisattva path? The questions themselves seem perfectly legitimate, and I've tried working out several explanations, though without complete success." (p. 13) "In the final analysis, I have to confess that I can't provide a cogent explanation. In view of the fact that in later times, so many Buddhists, in Theravada lands as well as in the Mahayana world, have been inspired by the bodhisattva ideal, it is perplexing that no teachings about a bodhisattva path or bodhisattva practices are included in the discourses regarded as coming down from the most archaic period of Buddhist literary history." (p. 14) #67233 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:14 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hi Herman, H: "Is the root condition part and parcel of the citta? Is the a/kusala nature of a citta known with it's arising and ceasing? Or is it the case, because a/kusala are categories, lacking any own irreducible quality, that attributions of a/kusala occur always after the event to which they are applied?" The roots, as far as I understand, determine whether an intentional state is kusala or akusala by root condition (hetu paccaya). Dosa, lobha, and moha are akusala; adosa, alobha, and amoha are kusala. When these mental factors arise with citta I think it is these that determine the moral quality of the moment of consciousness. "1. Root Condition The roots are related to the states with which roots, and the matter produced thereby, by root condition." (Pa.t.thaana, p.2) I think, since the cetasikas which are roots are paramattha dhammaa and since they, in their arising condition the states which arise with them, that the categorisation of kusala or akusala is based on these. Therefore, given this, I think that the moral quality can be known. I'm not so sure about the timing of this knowing. I'd also venture, again not sure, that the designation 'kusala/akusala' is a conceptual designation, but they are concepts of the real since they designate that which really exists - the roots, for example. H: "...but this does mean that even with the remainderless uprooting of craving, a future continues to arise? I'm not totally sure of the question. I'll stick to the above, assuming the question falls out of it. In the Commentary to The Mahaanidaana Sutta (Bh. Bodhi,tr.): SUB CY: "...'underlying tendency (anusaya) has another meaning, that of gaining strength in the mental continuum because of being unabandoned," (p.69). CY: "...this view does not underlie this like a vine or a creeper, it underlies this in the sense that it has not been abandoned" SUB CY: "That is, it has not been eradicated by the path. 'Underlying' means capable of arising when it gains a cause (which activates it)," (p.91). I don't know about 'a future' but, just sticking with realities (craving as in your example) I'd suppose that, with 'the remainderless uprooting of craving', craving would no longer arise. Sincerely, Scott. #67234 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:24 am Subject: Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) scottduncan2 Dear connie, Connie: Sarah's not playing extractly straight with you, Scott. Queeries often describe typos of practices / pastimes of those reborn as fairies... the subject will come up in Another Saamaa's 3 verses actually." Gotcha, looking forward to the study. S. #67235 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:31 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Sorry, this should have read: "1. Root Condition The roots are related to the states which are associated with roots, and the matter produced thereby, by root condition." (Pa.t.thaana, p.2) Scott. #67236 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:08 am Subject: Dreaming and Seeming [Re: [dsg] Meditation (again)] upasaka_howard Hi, Ren (and Herman, and all) - In a message dated 1/20/07 1:03:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, renmercer@... writes: > Thanks Herman, > interesting question but yes, for me all things, being, emotions are > dreams. Just fleeting moments. ======================== In the Mahayanist Diamond Sutra, the Buddha is purported to have taught: _________________________ As stars, a fault of vision, as a lamp, A mock show, dew drops, or a bubble, A dream, a lightning flash, or cloud, So should one view what is conditioned ---------------------------------------------- That is the more literal translation of the poetic signature quote at the end of my posts. Note that it doesn't literally say that all conditioned phenomena *are* dreams, but that that is how one should *view* them. Elsewhere in Mahayana it is said that life is *like* a dream, but not that it *is* a dream. There are levels of seeming unreality to things. When examined carefully, actual dream experience is seen to have an unrealityto it as compared to waking experience, merely conventional objects are seen to have an unreality to them as compared to paramattha dhammas, and paramattha dhammas are seen to have no separate reality to them. And in these senses, they are all dreamlike. In the Uraga Sutta of the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha taught the following: ___________________ The monk seeing in states of becoming no essence, as he would, when surveying a fig tree, no flowers, sloughs off the near shore & far — as a snake, its decrepit old skin. ----------------------------------- and also ___________________ The monk who hasn't slipped past or turned back, knowing with regard to the world that "All this is unreal," sloughs off the near shore & far — as a snake, its decrepit old skin. ---------------------------------- In the Phena Sutta, the Buddha taught the following: ____________________ Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately. --------------------------------------------- Also, in MN 22, the Buddha mentioned "I have compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... ." So, there is ample evidence, I would say, of the Buddha pointing to the dreamlike quality of all dhammas, their impermanence and not-self characteristics alone justifying such a perspective. While it is false that all is a dream, it is quite true that all is dreamlike. With metta, Howard ** #67237 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and Sarah, and all) - In a message dated 1/20/07 5:08:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@... writes: > Sarah: Well since you ask(!!), it's a cross between a 'queer eye' and a > 'query':-)) Also known on DSG as a typo!" > > Scott: Oh, how mundane, I thought it was a request for a weird question... > > Connie: Sarah's not playing extractly straight with you, Scott. Queeries > often describe typos of practices / pastimes of those reborn as > fairies... the subject will come up in Another Saamaa's 3 verses actually. > There are some parts of the text, like the Introductions and a few > footnotes dealing with metre that I'm just not going to bother trying to > fix up for the list. Might meet up with you off-list before I finish, > Sarah? > c. > ============================ Connie and Sarah, there are elements of this conversation that I find not so pleasant. Presumably there is no realization by you of the sense that I am addressing, but I think that you might want to consider how some connotations of the language used here might be most inappropriate and upsetting. Scott, I believe you are missing what I am addressing, which is why I didn't include you in the salutation. With metta, Howard #67238 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) scottduncan2 Dear Robert (and Jon), Thanks for the post. This is interesting and stirs up more questions: R: "Panna is present when contemplating the Dhamma during waking moments. I think when we are dreaming and contemplating Dhamma it is also present. Or sometimes we may dream about giving offerings to monks for example- this may be with or with out panna." Can a dream be 'contemplation of Dhamma'? Or does the dream dream about contemplating Dhamma? Atthaasaliini: "Pa~n~na means one understands (pajaanaati). What does one understand? The Ariyan Facts (or Truths) by the method: This is ill, etc. But in the Great Commentary understanding is defined as 'it causes to know (or understand. What does it cause to know? Impermanence, ill, soullessness.' Through overcoming ignorance, it is a controlling faculty and gives the compound 'understanding faculty.' It has illumination and understanding as characteristic. As when a lamp burns at night in a four-walled house the darkness ceases, light manifests itself, so understanding has illuminating as its characteristic. There is no illumination equal to the illumination of understanding. To the wise at a single sitting the ten thousand world-spheres appear as of one light," (p.161). I think, for me, the question becomes: What can be an object of understanding? What, in a dream for example, can come to be illuminated by understanding? Any thoughts? Sincerely, Scott. #67239 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:59 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop, I've a bit of time for: J: "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?" I appreciate your expression of faith. In his introduction to his translation of the Mahaanidaana Sutta, Bh. Bodhi makes this point, which might help to allay your confusion: "Though the formula for dependent arising presents the factors in a linear sequence, this should not be taken to imply that they fit together in a temporally progressive chain of causes and effects. As was pointed out earlier, the selection of factors and their sequential arrangement are made from the instructional point of view, the purpose being to expose the inner dynamics of the round in order to demonstrate how to dismantle it. By resorting to abstraction, each phrase in the formula treats as a one-to-one bond what is in actuality a situation of immense complexity involving a multitude of conditions arousing and sustaining a multitude of dependent phenomena. In some cases a strong causal influence operates from one factor to another, in others the relation is one of mere necessary dependence. In some cases the formula describes a movement from condition to effect occupying time, even a succession of lives; in others it portrays a cross-section of events occuring at the same moment," (p.10). J: "(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.)" Okay. Just so you know, I identify with 'Theravada-orthodoxy'. With respect, I have no wish to discuss Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's ideas. J: "...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." I'm sorry but the above is quite unclear to me; especially the last statement. If you think it useful, I'd appreciate a re-phrasing. Sincerely, Scott. #67240 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:47 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo Scott, J (yesterday): "...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 [typo: must be 'theory'] is the most useful." S:I'm sorry but the above is quite unclear to me; especially the last statement. If you think it useful, I'd appreciate a re-phrasing. J: (now) NO; I don't think that can be useful. Because you made technical remarks but skip the most important beginning of my message: About your jumping of arising and falling away of paramattha dhamma (the Abhidhamma theory of reality) to the arising and falling away of khandas (the conventional Sutta-theory). And because you did not answer my question about timescales of several processes. Metta Joop #67241 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:18 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop, Thanks for the reply: J: "(now) NO; I don't think that can be useful. Because you made technical remarks but skip the most important beginning of my message: About your jumping of arising and falling away of paramattha dhamma (the Abhidhamma theory of reality) to the arising and falling away of khandas (the conventional Sutta-theory). And because you did not answer my question about timescales of several processes." Fair enough. I fear, on the above, that we must agree to disagree. The 'khandas', as I see them, include ruupa-khanda, vedanaa-khanda, sa~n~na khanda, sankhaara-khanda, and vi~n~nana khanda. Whether one chooses to consider 'the Abhidhamma theory of reality' or 'the conventional Sutta-theory', I think the 'reality' is the same (or the word 'reality' is meaningless). Ruupa arises and falls away. The cetasikas which include vedanaa, sa~n~na, and all the other mental factors under the rubric 'sankhaara, as well as citta all arise and fall away. One makes a mistake, in my opinion, to forget that 'sankhaara' refers, in fact, to all of the single mental factors which can accompany citta in various combinations and arise conascently. 'Sankhaara' is not, in my opinion, a 'whole' which has its own rate of arising and falling away. It is the failure to take the teachings of Abhidhamma into account that one goes astray when misunderstanding 'conventional Sutta-theory', in my opinion again. If there is a way we can discuss, without simply showing each other the various ways in which we are incorrect, I'm all for it. As I said, though, I suspect we may have to amiably agree to disagree. Sincerely, Scott. #67242 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:30 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? egberdina Thanks for your replies, Scott. #67243 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:32 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? egberdina Hey Scott, Me again. I forgot to say that that last post was from me :-) Cheers Herman #67244 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:45 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Hey man (Herman, that is), You're welcome. Scott. #67245 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry lbidd2 Hi Ren, What??? I think you misread. Larry -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Rendal Mercer wrote: > > gentalmen, > It's Gita, not Citta. #67246 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:03 pm Subject: Re: Dreaming and Seeming [Re: [dsg] Meditation (again)] egberdina Hi Howard, Ren and all, > ======================== > In the Mahayanist Diamond Sutra, the Buddha is purported to have > taught: > _________________________ > As stars, a fault of vision, as a lamp, > A mock show, dew drops, or a bubble, > A dream, a lightning flash, or cloud, > So should one view what is conditioned > ---------------------------------------------- Very well said. I find this subject matter very interesting, especially the differences, if any, between the dreaming and waking state. I would say that a dream is a state in which there is no mindfulness of the act (of dreaming). In that regard, there is no difference between a night dream, and a daydream. Nightdreams and daydreams are flights of fancy, characterised by a lack of mindfulness. Of course, there is lucid dreaming, but then, there is also directed waking imagination, and both of these are mindful activities. Sleep, and dreaming, are unmindful, while the waking state can be mindful, although it often isn't. The thing that seeems to be different between the mindful and unmindful state is that one "suffers" the unmindful state. It has a mind of its own, there is no active participation in the selection of the plot, the objects in the plot, and how their interaction unfolds. On the other hand, the mindful state carries with it the possibility of veto, and no arising intention has carte-blanche. In a mindful state, the object of consciousness is held, knowing that it is held, and knowing that it does not need to be held. This, of course, is the basis for the Buddha's being able to advise on what are, and are not, suitable objects to hold in consciousness. Kind Regards Herman #67247 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:15 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? renmercer The links of dependant arising are not complete. Find the missing link. They do work in depence of one another 'this arises to that" but not necessarily in order. There is one thing missing thou. Sit, watch and witness and you will find if your panna is well and your inner eye is strong. keep working at it, it will come. renKTN #67248 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal renmercer It is impossible to reach the stage of Arahanto with compassion. We all have to be a Bodhisatt for a period of time and in order to realize this path that you are questioning now, compassion has to be there. Enlightenment is the full accummulation of wisdom and compassion. What is compassion? Compassion is the wisdom that progression from misery, advancement from suffering but with out wisdom you maybe injurying a being from their own lessons in this or any other world. We are all here to learn, grow and become light, that's what en-light-en-ment means, to be light. Stephen Hawking would love this as it is all about light and energy. The debate about Bodhisattvas, Arahanto, and Buddho is a childs game. We need to know that without wisdom and compassion you will suffer more than you need to. Growth needs suffering in order to motivate our selves forward but there is an easier way and as a human you will naturally choose an easier way, this is your intelligence at work. Let us not forget the positive attributes that suffering gives to us. Life is not suffering, we suffer because we do not know life. ren #67249 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:18 pm Subject: Re: The Roots egberdina Hey Scott and all, On 21/01/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Sorry, this should have read: > > "1. Root Condition > The roots are related to the states which are associated with roots, > and the matter produced thereby, by root condition." (Pa.t.thaana, p.2) > > Scott. I am wondering about the roots. There are greed, hate and delusion, and then there are their negations, non-greed, non-hate, non delusion. It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former three. What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone? Kind Regards Herman #67250 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:17 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? renmercer Dear Scott e Joop! You are playing a childs game! Please do not hate me for saying so. I know this may seem like a snack in the face, deserving no reply, h-ever, you are both missing the point in All Dhamma. Dharma is Fear! Fear means truth. Fear is what the truth IS. Dhamma is TRU! Dhamma is no more Buddhist then quantum Physics is Christian.Dhamma is just a word pointing at and refering to another point. Identity seeing Identity and pointing at one another. Nothing more, nothing less, just. Sit more, say less, just sit, watch & witness meaningless, sunnyata, samadhi, nibbana, buddha-nature, bodhi-mind, ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. We can sometimes play games with ourslves unwatchfuly, non-observently. Before we play games with others we first play games with ourselves. Before we utter anything that is not ture, we have first have to disown ourselves and be less then what we truely are, therefore we own what we think and feel, without physical act of proof. As we think, feel etc... we make impressions within our mind states in the form of feelings, these feelings are actually, non other then the energy that all buddhas in all ages have spoken about. If one can controll these feelings, trhen one potiential can be increased to be able to deal with other more subtle matters. It is really the same pattern, just in different arenas. sati, renKTN Watch your mind, your thoughts, how you feel about your thoughts, how you feel about others thoughts of you, of this, of that. Whatever you think changes, whatever you feel changes,so there is no security in that, no mind does not mean stupid, it means clear mind. Only you can do this for you. In the end there is no you but it all starts with you #67251 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry lbidd2 Hi Herman, So the fundamental project is to decide on what kind of person one wants to be, then strive to live that ideal, knowing that, as an ideal, it is fundamentally unrealistic, but nevertheless a desirable motivation, because we chose it? What if we can't decide? We make choices and evaluations anyway, but the project is muddled. Is that it? I had a thought. Maybe you could post a paragraph from "Being and Nothingness" occasionally. It might make an interesting accompaniment to Sarah's "Psalms of the Sisters". Larry #67252 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:02 pm Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: > 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. > I get your meaning (I think), but not your reasons. Care to explain further? Jon #67253 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane jonoabb Hi JC JC Mendoza wrote: > 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. > I think in Buddhist terms astral travel would be seen as an imagined experience only. Jon #67254 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments jonoabb Hi James buddhatrue wrote: > Yeah, it's a promise that it's my last word on this thread. A promise > that it's my last word on the misdirected teachings of KS?? Don't hold > your breath on that one!! ;-)) > > (And it may seem that I have been pretty harsh on KS lately, but that > is only relatively so. I used to be much worse!! I don't write even > half of what I'm really thinking.) > OK, OK, I'm giving you the last word; spare us the rest, please !! Jon #67255 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) jonoabb Hi Joop Thanks for the translation ... Joop wrote: > Jon, that means more or less: "surprised seeing Jon and James at the > same side" > Yes, I was surprised, too (although I notice we had quite different reasons for being there ;-)) But it seems to happen quite a lot more these days than in the past. Jon #67256 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - ========================= The business of what is an actual phenomenon & what is just an absense of such is unclear and is often just a matter of language use. Is wisdom an activity and ignorance its absence, or is ignorance an obscuration and wisdom its absence? Or, in fact, is neither quite the case: Is it possible that correct functioning of cognitive operations, especially sa~n~na, is what wisdom is, and incorrect functioning is what ignorance is, each the absense of the other, and each appearing in degrees. It's not really all that clear, is it? Also, the use of the "a" prefix in Pali & Sanskrit may well be more than mere negation. Often, it is a linguistic "opposition operator", so that non-greed may not be the negation of greed, but its opposite. It's not such a simple matter. With metta, Howard #67257 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:08 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Rendal, Dude!?!? R: "You are playing a childs game! Please do not hate me for saying so..." I don't hate you, man, however, I'm sorry to say, I have absolutely and totally no idea what you are on about. Sincerely, Scott. #67258 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smiles & Laughs jonoabb Hi Kel Thanks for this additional information. kelvin_lwin wrote: > 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. > Yes, the difference as I see it is that Bhikkhu Bodhi/Ven Narada say that the sekha (sotapanna, sakadagami, anagami) smile but say nothing about laughing, whereas according to Dr Mehm Tin Mon the sekha may both smile and laugh. Is that how you see it? On my reading, the cittas involved according to both sources are the same. Jon #67259 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/20/07 6:06:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi JC > > JC Mendoza wrote: > >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. > > > > I think in Buddhist terms astral travel would be seen as an imagined > experience only. > > Jon > ======================== An astral body, however, oes seem to have been mentioned in a couple suttas. With metta, Howard #67260 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:20 pm Subject: Re: The Roots scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Hope I'm not annoying you with constant replies. H: "I am wondering about the roots. There are greed, hate and delusion, and then there are their negations, non-greed, non-hate, non delusion. It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former three. What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone?" My thoughts: These six are cetasikaa. They are all naama, and are paramattha dhammaa. They arise conascently with citta. They are not 'an absence' or 'a nothing'. They are realities. Their names are conceptual. Sincerely, Scott. #67261 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi Howard and Scott, Thanks for your thoughts. On 21/01/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Hope I'm not annoying you with constant replies. > Not at all. The more the merrier I say. > H: "I am wondering about the roots. There are greed, hate and delusion, > and then there are their negations, non-greed, non-hate, non delusion. > It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former > three. What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an > absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone?" > > My thoughts: > > These six are cetasikaa. They are all naama, and are paramattha > dhammaa. They arise conascently with citta. They are not 'an > absence' or 'a nothing'. They are realities. Their names are conceptual. > The reason I thought the latter three roots were absences or negations of the former three was because of the Pali prefix a. Say, in the case of non-delusion, there are plenty of words that could have been used that would clearly indicate a positive, a something. Understanding, insight, or some such words could have been used, but specifically non-delusion was chosen. You may well both be right, and that not too much should be read into the words. But on the other hand, there is not only the question of negative roots, there also seem to be a number of negative conditions listed amongst the paccayas. It seems that there is room to see the absence (natthi) condition as a negation of the presence (atthi) condition, and like wise the non-disappearance (avigata) condition as a negation of the disappearance (vigata) condition. I think that notions of negative causation do play in the Buddhist scheme of things. (BTW, my object in discussing these matters is not dispution, or defence of a particular view. I am very much interested in phenomenology, and it seems to me that there is much in Theravadin Buddhism which is phenomenology of the highest order. Just so you know :-) Kind Regards Herman #67262 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi again, Jon - There is the following reference to what I think is the astral body in DN 11: _______________ "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates another body, endowed with form, made of the mind, complete in all its parts, not inferior in its faculties. Just as if a man were to draw a reed from its sheath. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the sheath, this is the reed. The sheath is one thing, the reed another, but the reed has been drawn out from the sheath.' Or as if a man were to draw a sword from its scabbard. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the sword, this is the scabbard. The sword is one thing, the scabbard another, but the sword has been drawn out from the scabbard.' Or as if a man were to pull a snake out from its slough. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the snake, this is the slough. The snake is one thing, the slough another, but the snake has been pulled out from the slough.' In the same way — with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates another body, endowed with form, made of the mind, complete in all its parts, not inferior in its faculties."This, too, is called the miracle of instruction. ------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #67263 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Existential Larry egberdina THanks, Larry, for your post, > > I had a thought. Maybe you could post a paragraph from "Being and Nothingness" > occasionally. It might make an interesting accompaniment to Sarah's "Psalms of the > Sisters". > I like your suggestion very much. I'll make sure that the quotes are very relevant to Buddhism. Your questions are good ones, and hopefully I'll find the quotes that answer them. In time. :-) Kind Regards Herman #67264 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method - Further comments buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > OK, OK, I'm giving you the last word; spare us the rest, please !! OMG! I actually got Mr. Roboto to show an emotion! (Irritation) This is a banner day! ;-)) > > Jon > Metta, James #67265 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Roots scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Since you don't mind, I'll address the following for now: H: "The reason I thought the latter three roots were absences or negations of the former three was because of the Pali prefix a. Say, in the case of non-delusion, there are plenty of words that could have been used that would clearly indicate a positive, a something. Understanding, insight, or some such words could have been used, but specifically non-delusion was chosen." I think amoha (non-delusion) is pa~n~na cetasika ('understanding', 'insight') as you note. This is confirmed in Dhammasa"nga.ni: "[1057]What is the absence of dullness? "Knowledge about ill, and about the uprising of ill, about the cessation of ill, and about the way leading to the cessation of ill; knowledge about the former things, about the latter things, about both taken together; knowledge about the assignable causation of causally determined states - even that kind of insight which is understanding, search, research, searching the Truth, etc. [continue as in 34]. "[34]What on that occasion is the absence of dullness (amoho)? "Answer as for the 'faculty of insight', 16. "[16]What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? "The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, discrimination, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide', intuition, intelligence, a 'goad', wisdom as faculty, wisdom as power, wisdom as a sword, wisdom as a height, wisdom as light, wisdom as glory, wisdom as splendour, wisdom as a precious stone; the absence of dullness, searching the Truth, right views - this is the wisdom that there then is." I don't know if the above serves as a base to consider the phenomenology of the matter but I think that this shows that pa~n~na cetasika - amoha, the absence of dullness, non-delusion - has plenty of 'positive' aspects. Sincerely, Scott. #67266 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Connie (and Sarah, and all) - > > In a message dated 1/20/07 5:08:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, > connieparker@... writes: > > > Sarah: Well since you ask(!!), it's a cross between a 'queer eye' and a > > 'query':-)) Also known on DSG as a typo!" > > > > Scott: Oh, how mundane, I thought it was a request for a weird question... > > > > Connie: Sarah's not playing extractly straight with you, Scott. Queeries > > often describe typos of practices / pastimes of those reborn as > > fairies... the subject will come up in Another Saamaa's 3 verses actually. > > There are some parts of the text, like the Introductions and a few > > footnotes dealing with metre that I'm just not going to bother trying to > > fix up for the list. Might meet up with you off-list before I finish, > > Sarah? > > c. > > > ============================ > Connie and Sarah, there are elements of this conversation that I find > not so pleasant. Presumably there is no realization by you of the sense that I > am addressing, but I think that you might want to consider how some > connotations of the language used here might be most inappropriate and upsetting. > Scott, I believe you are missing what I am addressing, which is why I > didn't include you in the salutation. > > With metta, > Howard It's good of you to point this out. Hate is one of the three poisons of the mind. Hate is intrinsic to all worldlings. This hate must find an object to survive- and often that object is gay people. Those who have hate for gay people, either subtly or blatantly, boldly stated or put it guised form (such as in this post) don't see anything wrong with it. It is only those who have lessened hate in their minds who find such displays repugnant and destructive. Howard, your mind is obviously more purified than these non-meditators posting such disgusting chatter. Metta, James Ps. I know that all participants will deny any such meaning. Such is the nature of delusion- another poison of the mind. #67267 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: The Roots kelvin_lwin Hi Herman, > It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former > three. Nope, this is wrong assumption. They cannot coexist but they can co-non-exist. They are negative and positive qualities which means there can be things that are neutral. > What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an > absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone? It's not a nothing, it's just not one of the 6 roots. Example is the seeing consciousness which is merely a resultant and hence not be 'active' to require a root. - Kel I'll paste the following tidbits as some example to ponder: Adosa is opposed to dosa and it can overcome dosa. It is not mere absence of hatred or aversion, but is a positive virtue. Dosa has the characteristic of roughness and cruelty whereas mildness and forgiveness is the chief characteristic of adosa. Dosa is like an enemy whereas adosa is like an agreeable good friend. Adosa is also reflected as goodwill for its nature of kindness and helpfulness. When adosa turns its attention to living beings wishing them to be happy, it is known as mettà , i.e. loving-kindness. #67268 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Smiles & Laughs kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, > Yes, the difference as I see it is that Bhikkhu Bodhi/Ven Narada say > that the sekha (sotapanna, sakadagami, anagami) smile but say nothing > about laughing, whereas according to Dr Mehm Tin Mon the sekha may both > smile and laugh. Is that how you see it? Yep. > On my reading, the cittas involved according to both sources are the same. Yea, the cittas enumeration is the same. If you can have kids and be in householder life, why can't you laugh? Especially if laughter can be kusala also ... More technically, I think the same cittas should be capable of the same actions. Therefore, sekhas who are still capable of maha-kusalas and some akusalas will laugh just like a worldling with those cittas. Only arahats eliminate all those laughing- capable cittas and kiriya cittas are of different nature. - Kel #67269 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Scott) - In a message dated 1/20/07 7:11:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > (BTW, my object in discussing these matters is not dispution, or > defence of a particular view. I am very much interested in > phenomenology, and it seems to me that there is much in Theravadin > Buddhism which is phenomenology of the highest order. Just so you know > :-) > ====================== A shared perspective, Herman! :-) With metta, Howard #67270 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:36 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo Jon My reasons are psychological, MY psychology; very subjective, so rather atta and rather unimportant. But I will try. First; I have studied now for some years the Abhidhamma-system for describing realitiy and I recognize that the intellectual drive to understand this genius system did play a big role in this study. I don't hate my intellectual drive (that's why I'm not a Zen-buddhist) but more important of course is to reach more and more altruism, loving kindness and wisdom. Second; in that aim it doesn't work too well if I see it as if there is a fight between the kusala and the akusala in me; this dichotomy between good and evil doesn't attract me. As I said to James some days ago: I don't fight the akusala (Theravada-terminology is sometimes rather aggressive) but let the kusala in me do his (or: her) work. Third (in fact the first reason reformulated) , you speak of "the 2 classes of consciousness"; I sometime recognize an akusala consciousness arising in me, this system really helps me in my meditation. But in my daily life I'm more oriented on the 'tendencies' in me (the famous 'accumulations' about which I discussed with Nina and Sarah several times). And 'tendencies' are conventional language. Fourth (in fact the second reason reformulated); I'm not yet a bodhisattva, I recognize the akusala tendencies in me but I don't want to pay to much attention to them: that doesn't work. Metta Joop #67271 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:40 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Dear Scott, Yes, lets' agree to disagree. Thanks for the information about khandas and thanks for this discussion. Metta Joop #67272 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) scottduncan2 Dear All, Contrary to Howard's belief that this all went over my head, I insist that the fault in this tempest in a tea pot lies with me. As such, I apologise. My question: 'What's a queery' was the start of this. Although I was joking about the typo as typo, I saw later (too late) the double-entendre and it was certainly not lost on me. And my opinion is, knock off the squeamishness. There is no need to make this non-issue a vehicle for old grudges, which is exactly what it is and I know you all know it. I sincerely doubt that anyone here worries about who or how one loves. I know I don't. I've spent more time on the psychoanalytic couch than you can shake a stick at and am well aware of the homosexual roots of my heterosexuality. Some of you might say the same of the heterosexual roots of your homosexuality. Or one could say the masculine roots of one's femininity. Or the feminine roots of one's masulinity. I just doesn't matter, as I see it. As for 'The Sisters' (don't mean to pre-empt the order of presentation), XXIX Another Saamaa: "She also, heaping up good like the foregoing, was born, in the time of Vipassi Buddha, as a fairy on the banks of the River Candabhaagaa. Devoted to fairy pastimes..." Just as connie said. And believe me, there is no anti-homosexual bias in this ancient stuff. Let's just get on with our various discussions. I don't seek controversy or conflict but anyone is welcome to discuss this post with me off-line if you wish. Sincerely, Scott. #67273 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:44 pm Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop, Thanks, man: J: "Yes, lets' agree to disagree. Thanks for the information about khandas and thanks for this discussion." I learned something in the process. Sincerely, Scott. #67274 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:38 pm Subject: The Origin of Energy! bhikkhu5 Friends: What is the Origin & Cause of Energy? The Blessed Buddha once said: Where, Friends, is the ability of Energy to be seen & found? The Energy ability is to be found among the Four Right Efforts... SN V 196 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Effort.htm What is Right Effort? The effort to overcome already present damaging mental states.. The effort to prevent future damaging mental states from arising.. The effort to develop yet unarisen advantageous mental states.. The effort to maintain already arisen advantageous mental states.. That is Right Effort! SN V 2 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vayamo/index.html Damaging mental states should be seen & battled in every moment! Beneficial states should be sought and cultivated in every moment! The enthusiasm in doing that, conditioned by that, is right energy! For details on the Enthusiastic Ability of Energy see: Energy is the 6th factor of 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 * <...> #67275 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 1/20/07 10:46:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear All, > > Contrary to Howard's belief that this all went over my head, I insist > that the fault in this tempest in a tea pot lies with me. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: While this is not an issue about murder and torture, it isn't nothing at all either. ------------------------------------------------- > > As such, I apologise. > > My question: 'What's a queery' was the start of this. Although I was > joking about the typo as typo, I saw later (too late) the > double-entendre and it was certainly not lost on me. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: If you saw it only later and not when you raised the question, then your questioning was innocent, and you bear no responsibility. --------------------------------------------- > > And my opinion is, knock off the squeamishness. There is no need to > make this non-issue a vehicle for old grudges, which is exactly what > it is and I know you all know it. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure! Why be squeamish! Perhaps we can throw in a few amusing Jew jokes too while we're at it. Why leave any stones unturned? I'm squeemish, because I don't like bigotry and unkindness. Isn't that enough of a reason? I hold no grudges, BTW, old or new. I don't think James does either. Disgreements on matters are different from grudges. And I can tell you that my reply to Connie & Sarah had nothing to do with serving as "a vehicle for old grudges"! I replied because I was upset at what I had read, and I would have been morally at fault to say nothing. The conversation was surprising and disappointing to me. Certainly it wasn't viscious, but, IMO, it was improper, insensitive, and unkind. I frankly think it calls for a backing off and an apology. I wrote my reply to Connie and Sarah with a moderate tone and very much "pulling my punches" in hopes of making it easy for there to be given a quick explanation or apology. I was hoping to point out a thoughtless error that could be quickly and easily rectified. What I am also squeamish about, very much so, is raising the issue, because it bothers me greatly to criticize good friends, but I just could not fail to address this matter. ------------------------------------------ > > I sincerely doubt that anyone here worries about who or how one loves. > I know I don't. I've spent more time on the psychoanalytic couch > than you can shake a stick at and am well aware of the homosexual > roots of my heterosexuality. Some of you might say the same of the > heterosexual roots of your homosexuality. Or one could say the > masculine roots of one's femininity. Or the feminine roots of one's > masulinity. I just doesn't matter, as I see it. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Good for you. But you weren't directly involved with this matter, and so your lack of bigotry has little bearing on this. --------------------------------------------- > > As for 'The Sisters' (don't mean to pre-empt the order of > presentation), XXIX Another Saamaa: > > "She also, heaping up good like the foregoing, was born, in the time > of Vipassi Buddha, as a fairy on the banks of the River Candabhaagaa. > Devoted to fairy pastimes..." > > Just as connie said. And believe me, there is no anti-homosexual bias > in this ancient stuff. ------------------------------------------- Howard: The double entendres, not in this ancient stuff, but in the current messages, seemed rather clear to me. ------------------------------------------ > > Let's just get on with our various discussions. I don't seek > controversy or conflict but anyone is welcome to discuss this post > with me off-line if you wish. > Sincerely, > > Scott. > =========================== With metta, Howard #67276 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:00 pm Subject: Re: The Roots ken_aitch Hi Herman, ---------- H: > I am wondering about the roots. There are greed, hate and delusion, and then there are their negations, non-greed, non-hate, non delusion. It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former three. What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone? ---------- Your questions are always good food for discussion and well appreciated. But I wonder if you are making progress of your own. Are you learning any Abhidhamma? You will have heard countless times that alobha, adosa and amoha are not 'nothings' - they are paramattha dhammas (absolutely existent realities). Perhaps instead of going over old ground you could be building on that knowledge. Just my thoughts! :-) Ken H #67277 From: connie Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:30 pm Subject: queery nichiconn dear Howard and James, your presumptions are showing. don't hold your breath on my account. non-apologetically, connie #67278 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) corvus121 Dear All "Some people speak with malicious intentions and others with the conviction that they are right. But the sage does not enter into any controversy that has arisen. Therefore, the sage is free from all mental obstruction." - Dutthatthaka Sutta from the Sutta Nipata. Best wishes (Unsagacious) Andrew #67279 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) sarahprocter... Hi Howard, James & all, --- upasaka@... wrote: > I'm squeemish, because I don't like bigotry and unkindness. .... S: I think we should all 'mind our own cittas' in this (or any other)discussion and be careful of suggesting unwholesome motives in others when we may well be mistaken. Otherwise it's easy to end up disturbed or angered unnecessarily. I wrote a spelling typo - 'queery' and when queried on it, made a silly joke about the spelling being a cross between 'query' and 'queer eye'. I was addressing a North American who I'd assume would be very familiar with the very common and now common and mainstream expression 'queer eye' after the run-away success round the world of the (American)series 'Queer Eye for a Straight Guy'.(I watch little TV, but this is one of my favourites and certainly not concerned with any bigotry or unkindness). I read Connie as merely picking up on the title with her quip about my not being 'quite straight' and again the archaic use of language in Theriigaathaa. I certainly never expected the intro to the new series to be so controversial!! In any case, I apologise for any misunderstandings (easy on the internet). May we all rest this aspect of the thread here unless anyone particularly needs to have a 'last word'. Metta, Sarah ========= #67280 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi KenH, It is good to hear from you. On 21/01/07, ken_aitch wrote: > Hi Herman, > > ---------- > H: > I am wondering about the roots. There are greed, hate and delusion, > and then there are their negations, non-greed, non-hate, non delusion. > It seems to me that the latter three exist as absences of the former > three. What I don't understand is how a citta can be rooted in an > absence ( a nothing). Thoughts, anyone? > ---------- > > Your questions are always good food for discussion and well > appreciated. Thank you, Ken. I'd hate to be remembered as a boring old fart. > But I wonder if you are making progress of your own. This is a good and useful question. I have come to realise all notions of progress, in terms of becoming this or that, as being delusional. I accept that I will never progress to become anything. In the meantime, I just gress, like everyone else. Are > you learning any Abhidhamma? I think I am. But I need to qualify that. Abhidhamma covers very broad ground. I think I am learning those aspects of Abhidhamma which correspond with what is possible to be experienced. On the other hand, I am realising that some of Abhidhamma can never be experienced, such as the Patthana. The Patthana is very much explanatory, and the reality of an explanation cannot be experienced. > You will have heard countless times that > alobha, adosa and amoha are not 'nothings' - they are paramattha dhammas > (absolutely existent realities). You are no doubt 100% correct. But it is also true that if these things were said, they did not register with me previously. And that's just the way things go. Perhaps instead of going over old > ground you could be building on that knowledge. > > Just my thoughts! :-) Sure :-) What would be the purpose, Ken, in building up this knowledge? ( Not that I deliberately act dumb, it is just that you seem to have a goal in mind, and I wonder what that is?) Kind Regards Herman PS I do hope to catch up with you, Ken, in the next thirty years or so. I think we have much in common. #67281 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) rjkjp1 Dear Scott When dreaming there are mind-door processes occuring alternated by periods of bhavanga cittas. The main difference between a dream while asleep and a day dream is that there are more bhavanga cittas interspersed. Panna cetasika arises often when we contemplate Dhamma correctly. Thus if our dream is about Dhamma, considering aspects of it, then there may be panna present at those moments. Robert #67282 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation (again) sarahprocter... Dear Scott (RobK, Jon & all), Just to add a little textual supplement here: > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" > wrote: <...> > > Can a dream be 'contemplation of Dhamma'? Or does the dream dream > > about contemplating Dhamma? .... Sarah: I forget if you have Sammohavinodani (translated as 'Dispeller..'PTS). You'll appreciate the detail on dreams in ch 16 'Classification of Knowledge'. (see 'Dreams' in U.P. for more quotes given before). Here are a couple which may be relevant to this thread: "But one who sees a dream sees it owing to four reasons, namely: 1) owing to a disturbance of the elements (dhaatukkhobha), or 2) owing to what was experienced previously (anubhuutapubba), or 3) owing to provision by deities (devatopasa.mhaara), or 4) owing to a portent (pubbanimitta)"*** .... "The stopping of dreams comes about owing to the stopping of contact with these four root causes. But only trainers and ordinary men see these four kinds of dreams owing to non-abandonment of the perversions. Non-trainers do not see them owing to the abandonment of the perversions." ***** "For this is said: 'Overcome by ape's drowsing, Majesty, he sees a dream' (Mil 300). "Overcome by ape's drowsing' means sleeping with monkey sleep (makka.taniddaa); for just as a monkey's sleep is easily broken, one who is sleepig with sleep which is easily broken because of being interspersed again and again with profitable, etc consciousness, and in the occurrence of which there is dipping again and again into the life continuum, sees dreams. Hence this dream is either profitable or unprofitable or indeterminate.' "Herein, in one doing in a dream [such things as] paying homage at shrines, listening to the Law, preaching the Law, etc, it is profitable; in one doing [such things as] killing of living beings, it is unprofitable; when free from either extreme, at the moment of advertence and registration it is indeterminate..... "But how, then does profitable and unprofitable kamma done in a dream have result or no result? It has result. But owing to weakness it cannot bring about rebirth linking. But when rebirth linking has been given by other kamma, it may be experienced during the course [of an existence]." ***** Metta, Sarah ***p.s see also the chapter referred to above in 'Milinda's Questions'. Here's a link to the older T.W.Rhys Davids translation with an extract from the start of the chapter 'What is it that is called a Dream?' http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe36/sbe3606.htm "[DILEMMA THE SEVENTY-FIFTH. DREAMS.] 33. 'Venerable Nâgasena, men and women in this world see dreams pleasant and evil, things they have seen before and things they have not, things they have done before and things they have not, [298] dreams peaceful and terrible, dreams of matters near to them and distant from them, full of many shapes and innumerable colours. What is this that men call a dream, and who is it who dreams it?' 'It is a suggestion 1, O king, coming across the path of the mind which is what is called a dream. And there are six kinds of people who see dreams--the man who is of a windy humour 2, or of a bilious one, or of a phlegmatic one, the man who dreams dreams by the influence of a god, the man who does so by the influence of his own habits, and the man who does so in the way of prognostication 3. And of these, O king, only the last kind of dreams is true; all the rest are false.' 34. 'Venerable Nâgasena, when a man dreams a dream that is a prognostication, how is it? Does his own mind set out itself to seek the omen, or does the prognostication come of its own accord into the path of his mind, or does some one else come and tell him of it?' 'His own mind does not itself seek the omen, neither does any one else come and tell him of it. The prognostication comes of its own accord into his mind. It is like the case of a looking-glass, which does not go anywhere to seek for the reflection; neither does any one else come and put the reflection on to the looking-glass. But the object reflected comes from somewhere or other across the sphere over which the reflecting power of the looking-glass extends.'" ===== #67283 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:49 am Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! philofillet Dear Bhante and all Thanks for this. This is the sort of thing that really matters to worldlings. I'm sorry to always be picking at Acharn Sujin these days, but I simply have to comment on a talk in which she asks "ask someone to have energy - and then we'll see if they understand the teachings or not." The implication is of course that anyone who doesn't say that virya is a cetasika that usually but not always accompanies cittas, and one which rises beyond control unless there is lobha motivating the effort thereby turning it into akusala - oh, this sentence is out of control - anyone who doesn't it see it that way doesn't understand the teachings. Wrong. Personally, when I want to stir energy for wholesome endeavour I reflect on the 5 daily recollections that the Buddha urges all people to make - I will grow old, get sick and die, and so will all those that I love. The 5th recollection is the one where the energy jumps in. We are all heirs of our kamma. At this very moment there is the opportunity to stir energy for the wholesome, and to avoid evil. This is the teaching. To think that virya is only of value if it is accompanied by panna that understands present realities is a serious under-appreciation of the power of right effort, I'm quite sure. We are greed-addled, hate-driven worldlings. We need the nose to the grindstone aspects of right effort (ie the mundane path factor.) Unless we get our citta-stream houses in order through mundane right effort all talk of panna doing this or that is a fantasy. The Buddha makes this very clear in at least three suttas I ahve seen recently in which a moral virtue > guarding sense doors > concentration> wisdom progression is every-so-explicitly laid out. (In one case, the guarding the sense doors comes before the virtue. That is easier to understand for me.) Right effort is needed all the way along of course, but the right effort that accompanies the preliminary stages of the path is much closer to what is conventionally understood by effort - and Acharn Sujin should know that. Of course, there are some citta streams that are already in order. I think some people are born with citta streams in order. Mudita for those citta-streams and the folks that they are streaming through! However, I wish Acharn sujin and her students would acknowledge that what she teaches does not and should not apply to everyone, especially those whose citta stream houses are a serious mess. Metta, Phil p.s sorry for another hit-and-run post. That exchange in the recorded talk is one that has really bugged me for awhile so I just want to get it off my chest. Feel free to add your comment, anyone. I'm pretty sure once I get a few points off my chest I won't be harping at Acharn Sujin so much. I think there are two more recorded exchanges that have stuck in my mind and need to be vented on. I still think this is Acharn Sujin's students' turf, and she shouldn't be constantly attacked. I vow not to do it much longer. #67284 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Hi Kel, Howard & all, Always good to have your contributions: --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi All, > > After reading through the responses I looked through Dr. Mehm Tin > Mon's Abhidhamma book ... <...> > 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). .... S: In my case, I'd differentiate between smiles and laughter in that the smiles are sometimes with (somanassamaha)kusala citas, but more often with lobha, whilst the laughter seems to be invariably with lobha.... With regards to life losing its fun, I don't think we have to be concerned about this for a good long while:-). However, in the texts there is a suggestion of less happy feeling with a growth in wisdom due to a decrease in lobha naturally. Metta, Sarah ========== #67285 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 kinds of Progress (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Hi Andrew, --- Andrew wrote: > 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)? .... S: I liked your expression before of 'composite' terms. Pa.tipadaa can refer of course to 'path' as in 'Middle Path/Way' or to 'progress' as in our discussion (closely related of course). It's a concept as we use it, but one pointing to realties, I believe. In the first case, pointing to the eightfold path factors and in the second to the development of such, I believe. Sometimes we (or I) just don't understand clearly what paramattha dhammas are indicated. One thing for sure is that there are only 52 cetasikas, so usually what seem like composite or conventional terms are referring to one or more of these as discussed. While we were in Bkk this time, I asked a little more on samvegga and appamada in this regard. I was told that samvegga refers to viriya (rt effort) when accompanied by panna. Appamada, as I'd thought, refers to sati (rt awareness) when accompanied by panna and other wholesome factors. On one recent trip in India, you probably heard, we had a discussion about khanti (patience). Khanti isn't a listed cetasika, but we learnt it also refers to viriya (effort) and can be kusala or akusala! Sometimes different aspects of a cetasika, such as viriya, are being stressed. .... > > 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. ... S: We were sorry to hear this but very glad he's doing fine now. Pls give him our best regards and remind him to be careful of drivers who often don't see bikes. We've heard of a couple of serious motorbike accidents recently inc. the fatal one of our friend's son in Thailand. .... > 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. ;-)) .... S: Yes, in this regard the sutta reminder about the kind of progress with pain and sorrow etc are a good reminder. Many different accumulations and we all respond accordingly... Thanks for your other kind reminders in various threads. Metta, Sarah ========= #67286 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:09 am Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! rjkjp1 Dear Phil What do you make of this from venerable Chah? http://www.buddhanet.net/bodhiny2.htm Questions & Answers with Ajahn Chah question: I'm trying very hard in my practice but don't seem to be getting anywhere. Answer: This is very important. Don't try to get anywhere in the practice. The very desire to be free or to be enlightened will be the desire that prevents your freedom. You can try as hard as you wish, practise ardently night and day, but if it is still with the desire to achieve in mind, you will never find peace. The energy from this desire will be a cause for doubt and restlessness. No matter how long or how hard you practise, wisdom will not arise from desire. So, simply let go. Watch the mind and body mindfully but don't try to achieve anything. Don't cling even to the practice of enlightenment. _________________________________ Robert > . We need the nose > to the grindstone aspects of right effort (ie the mundane path > factor.) Unless we get our citta-stream houses in order through > mundane right effort all talk of panna doing this or that is a > fantasy. #67287 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... Dear Scott, I forget the exact context - I think it was for the growth of understanding of D.O.? --- Scott Duncan wrote: > 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. .... Sarah: Yes, well clarified. .... > Mahaanidaana Sutta, regarding the phrase "Because of not understanding > and not penetrating this Dhamma...": <..> > 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.' .... Sarah: When discussing the pari~n~naas (understandings), I forgot to stress that I understand them to refer to the recurrent or reinforced knowledge about what was understood directly at the stages of vipassana-nana for the first time. I think that 'mere first interpretation' here refers to direct penetrative understanding of such vipassana-nanas. .... > 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.'" .... Sarah: where it refers to 'enabling insight to acquire precision and lucidity', I think it is this reinforcement that is being referred to. If I come across some helpful notes I've jotted down before, I'll pass them on. Not an easy topic. Metta, Sarah ========== #67288 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:27 am Subject: Re: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? sarahprocter... Dear Joop, --- Joop wrote: > 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). ... S: Many thanks for all your good quotes. Even if the terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are not used, they are certainly implied everytime we read about lobha, dosa, moha and their opposites. Also, when we read about viriya (effort), phassa (contact) etc, we know from the context whether kusala or akusala states are being referred to. Metta, Sarah ===== #67289 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thanks for the recommendations... sarahprocter... Hi Bill Z (& James), I was glad to see James kindly giving you some recommended texts. I'm glad to hear you've ordered Majjhima Nikaya and like James, look f/w to any quotes/comments. --- Bill wrote: > I am going to start familiarizing myself with Pali to enhance my > studies. .... S: If you don't already have a handy link to Nyantiloka's dictionary, I recommend it: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic_idx.html Also, if you look at messages under 'Pali' in 'useful posts', you'll find more dictionaries referred to. You may like to take a look at Nina Van Gorkom's book 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' (available on several websites). She's currently quoting extracts and if you read the first chapter(s) slowly on your own, they'll make more sense. She'll also be delighted if you have any questions (queries!!) on her return too - about Monday or Tuesday. Another slim anthology of B.Bodhi's from Anguttara Nikaya is titled 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha'. It's inexpensive, very nicely produced and easy to carry around. Later, also consider his translation of 'Samyutta Nikaya'. Let us know how you go with your studies. Metta, Sarah p.s James, I was really impressed by the quality of your recent discussions with Jon on the Rahula sutta and other topics. Very interesting and enjoyable too. Thx. Many good points raised -even bhavanga cittas making an appropriate appearance!! ================= #67290 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Smiles & Laughs jonoabb Hi Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: >> On my reading, the cittas involved according to both sources >> are the same. > > Yea, the cittas enumeration is the same. If you can have kids and > be in householder life, why can't you laugh? Especially if laughter > can be kusala also ... More technically, I think the same cittas should > be capable of the same actions. Therefore, sekhas who are still > capable of maha-kusalas and some akusalas will laugh just like a > worldling with those cittas. Only arahats eliminate all those laughing- > capable cittas and kiriya cittas are of different nature. > Good points, and I can see the 'logic' in the idea that only the cittas of the arahant are sufficiently different to preclude laughter. However, let's take the case of the anagami who, as you know, has eradicated all attachment to sense-objects. It's difficult to see what s/he might get so happy about as to condition laughter. I don't have a particular view either way (it's a pity neither version gives the source(s) for their comments). Jon #67291 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > Thanks, Sarah, for your reply. It makes sense. But I wonder, do cittas > smile? :-) .... S: Cittas condition rupas, like when we blush, when we move our bodies, when we speak and when we smile :-) Metta, Sarah ======= #67292 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Teaching Method sarahprocter... Hi Andrew (& Jon) --- Andrew wrote: > 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. ;-)) ..... S: I'm sure this is right - that the teachings were for anyone who could benefit. However, I think we also read in various suttas about how the teachings are first given to those with faith and confidence rather than the reverse. (Ven Samahita referred to this in #65561) and I'm also thinking of suttas such as the one comparing the teaching of dhamma to the farmer planting seed in various fields. Most attention will be given to the fertile fields. ... > Not sure what the benefit is that arahants derive from discussing > Dhamma. .... S: Even for arahants, there are degrees of wisdom. The Buddha's wisdom was greater than Sariputta's whose wisdom was greater than other arahants. Some had patisambhidas, some didn't and so on. Of course, the task was done for all, but they in turn could help others according to their degree of wisdom, such as at the First Council, understanding others' accumulations, helping in other realms (like Maha Mogallana...). I think as Jon said, they also continue benefiting also and it has become their nature to listen to dhamma too just for the sake of the growth of wisdom. Just an idea. Metta, Sarah ====== #67293 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:50 am Subject: Meditation egberdina Hi all, What dsg lacks is a thread on meditation :) In all seriousness, I was recently asked whether I meditated, and this is my answer. I have been an avid meditator, but have stopped meditating. Why? Because it works. If you want to see the reality of anicca, anatta and dukkha, meditate. Meditate sincerely. I did, and found that what the Buddha says about the nature of reality is exactly true. But I haven't found that to be redeeming. I don't like any of it. On a good day I can live, more or less, with the reality of anicca. But I don't like the reality of anatta and dukkha at all. Truth be known, I don't even like mindfulness. So I have stopped meditating. Why remind yourself of what you don't want to know? Kind Regards Herman #67294 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Howard, James & all, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > I'm squeemish, because I don't like bigotry and unkindness. > .... > S: I think we should all 'mind our own cittas' in this (or any > other)discussion and be careful of suggesting unwholesome motives in > others when we may well be mistaken. It's okay to question the wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of Howard's innocent dream for days, yet it's not okay to question the same about obviously homophobic comments? (those of Connie, not of you). Sarah, I think you have your priorities all screwed up. But, Connie doesn't want to fess up to her hatred and ignorance (as I predicted) so there is really nothing more to say about it. Metta, James #67295 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:38 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? jwromeijn Hallo Scott A year ago I proposed a DSG-rule: when starting a discussion one first had to say if it is a discussion within the frame of reference of orthodoxy (I like the name Buddhaghosa-yaana OR about that frame of reference. I forgot to use this rule (in general I mostly prefer the latter) Metta Joop #67296 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:20 am Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! buddhatrue Hi Robert (and Phil), Are you aware that Ajahn Chah is a world-famous meditation monk? ;- )) He wasn't saying don't meditate or don't try at all, he is advocating balance in one's practice. The Seven Factors of Enlightenment must be in balance or there won't be progress. Ajahn Chah was addressing someone who was out of balance. Metta, James #67297 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:37 am Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > > > Are you aware that Ajahn Chah is a world-famous meditation monk? ;- > )) He wasn't saying don't meditate or don't try at all, he is > advocating balance in one's practice. The Seven Factors of > Enlightenment must be in balance or there won't be progress. Dear James Thank you. What do you make of this by Khun sujin.. http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/sujin1.htm VIRIYA-PARAMI by Sujin Boriharnwanaket Some might think it is unnecessary to gradually whittle away kilesa nor to develop and accumulate kusala. They might think that upon hearing the Dhamma and a little practice, one might be able realize the ariya-sacca-dhamma. But that is not so for those who would be able to do so must be conscientious, as was the bodhisatta during the path he took in the past. Fifth is viriya-parami, meaning relentless perseverance no matter the difficulties. Everyone who has been successful in other areas would see that there is nothing more difficult than endeavoring to abandon vice, perform good deeds and purify one's mind from akusala. In fact, all success, both worldly and in the Dhamma, cannot be achieved without perseverance. But between worldly endeavors, which are full of desire, and kusala endeavors, which gradually eliminate kilesa, the latter would always require more effort. Normally, we all persist in doing akusala, meaning endeavoring with attachment and desire in sight, sound, smell, taste and bodysense contact which anyone can prove has always been the case. That is we desire sight and we endeavor to get it. We also endeavor to have fortune, fame and happiness. It obviously takes a very long time to change from akusala to kusala perseverance, which is to abandon and not to possess, meaning to abandon attachment in sight, sound, smell, taste, bodysense contact, and the rest including fortune, fame and happiness. Consider the supreme perseverance of the bodhisatta when he was born as Mahajanaka. Mahajanaka took leave of his mother and boarded a ship to trade in the faraway land of Suwannabhumi. During the voyage there was a great tempest with Mahajanaka answered, "Perseverance is always useful. Even without seeing the shore, I shall continue to swim until the day I should reach it." Manimekhala said, "The ocean is so vast. No matter how you persevere in swimming you would not reach the shore. You will certainly die before that." Mahajanaka answered, "Those who persevere will not be criticized because they have done their duty to the utmost even though they should die during their endeavor." Manimekhala continued to ask him, "To endeavor without perceiving how to achieve the goal is wrought with difficulties and life threatening. What is the good of persevering?" Mahajanaka said, "We might not be sure that what we are doing will succeed, but if we do not persist but cease the endeavor, we would suffer the consequence of laziness and the desired goal will never be reached. One should have perseverance even in matters that may not succeed. Because I persevere, without wavering from my resolutions, I survive in this sea when others have perished. I shall try to the last of my strength to reach the shore." Having heard thus, Manimekhala praised his perseverance and carried him to the shore of the city of Mithila. This is one of the Buddha's lives in which we see the undaunted perseverance which is hard to achieve. If you cannot even persevere to swim across the ocean, how can you persevere to cross Ogha or the Ocean of Kilesa, which is far more difficult? Therefore, in everyday life, other than seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling bodily contact, there is always perseverance arising with thinking. But perseverance in daily life evolves with living, no matter in the worldly or in the professional sense. Perseverance from birth to death is about living, not only in this life but in numerous others throughout hundreds of thousands of lifetimes and countless kappa, perseverance that occurs after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, knowing bodysense contact occurs in matters of living in daily life. When one has heard the dhamma and seen the truth, one can slowly change or increase viriya or perseverance from endeavor in akusala to those in kusala, from those in wrong livelihood, wrong speech or wrong action and other akusala to perseverance in kusala-dhamma until it becomes perseverance in bodhipakkhiya-dhamma. We can see that all dhamma must be gradually developed. Dhamma of the akusala kind accumulated evolves according to the strength of the specific akusala as opposed to the accumulation on the kusala side. Since the akusala side would be very powerful, one must rely on great perseverance in kusala to gradually pare away at akusala and develop panna to eradicate completely. Each might examine oneself in real life whether, after hearing the dhamma in this very existence and not former ones, there is any increase in perseverance for kusala ways and to which degree. Each would know that should one prove lacking in perseverance it is impossible to abandon akusala. One would then see the power of perseverance gradually increase, from the kusala in matters of daily life to the development of panna, which is the dhamma favorable to the realization of ariyasacca-dhamma, which takes a very long period of time. One must begin by listening to the Dhamma, and persevere in listening and contemplating rightly, in developing and accumulating panna. For whenever panna arises, akusala is gradually abandoned, bit by bit. Kilesa cannot be eradicated if the perseverance is not yet evolved in the dhamma that are bodhipakkhiya-dhamma or the dhamma on the side, or in favor of enlightenment. None of the 37 bodhipakkhiya-dhamma, or seven kinds, are without perseverance or viriya, which reflects on diligence in life. Each should really deliberate upon whether the majority of assiduousness in daily life is in matters of akusala (unwholesomeness) or kusala (wholesomeness), or better still, beginning to persevere with regard to developing panna in order to realize the ariya-sacca-dhamma. The four sammappadhana are directly perseverance itself: perseverance in preventing akusala that has not yet arise to arise; perseverance in abandoning akusala that has already arisen; perseverance in making kusala that has not yet arisen to arise; perseverance in developing to perfection kusala that has arisen. But when it has arisen with akusala for such an eternity of time, one should see the beneficence of viriya-parami: for instead of assiduity in ways of akusala there should be perseverance to make viriya into viriya-parami. Therefore one should examine the characteristics of viriya that is arising in this precise instant also. In the Atthasalini Cittuppadakandha there is a passage saying: "The characteristic of viriya is diligence. Its rasa or function is to benefit its sahajata- dhamma [co-nascent dhamma]. Its paccupatthana is undauntedness, not disheartenment. Its padatthana is stability and equanimity of mind. To see relatively visible viriya it would be when there is diligence, as opposed to procrastination. But according to the Abhidhamma, it is a very intricate dhamma which is manifested as a cetasika that arises with the citta. One can observe that even in moments of laziness there must be viriya-cetasika arising concurrently, but of the kind that evolves with procrastination. No one wants to be diligent, to be lazy is more pleasant. Even in moments of procrastination there is viriya to continue to be lazy. This shows that Dhamma is truly intricate and should be carefully examined in its characteristics, rasa or function, paccupatthana or symptoms or appearance, as well as padatthana or immediate causes. Another characteristic of viriya cetasika that many may not have considered but which the Atthasalini Cittuppadakandha states as; "Braveness, bravery and dauntlessness are the characteristics of viriya-cetasika. When there are two people, one brave and one cowardly, even though the coward, according to the Abhidhamma, must also have viriya, the courageous one will show more clearly the characteristics of viriya because the person must have perseverance to succeed in doing certain things no matter the obstacles or perils involved. Courage is therefore a feature of viriya-cetasika and when it is one the side of kusala, it attains the status of indriya and becomes viriyindriya. When it arises concurrently with saddha, sati, samadhi and panna and it is developing satipatthana, it is samma- vayama, the right perseverance to be mindful, study and know the characteristics of realities appearing as usual in this moment. With increased panna it becomes viriya-bala, with unwavering strength to examine and know the characteristics of nama-dhamma and rupa-dhamma under any circumstances. There is never the thought that the characteristics of nama-dhamma and rupa-dhamma cannot be known at such and such a moment. A passage in the Atthasalini Cittuppadakandha explains the viriyindriya so that one might be able to examine the characteristics of viriya-cetasika as given in the book as follows: "The evolution of braveness is called viriya or the action of the brave is viriya." Is there any courage in anything from day to day in order to say what is right or to be honest without fear of trouble, hardships, penury or poverty? Or some might dare to explain the causes and results of Dhamma without caring that they may not be loved by the ignoramus. (There may be people who misunderstand the intention but Dhamma is still Dhamma.) Thus one might see that the brave dare do anything good both in the worldly and in Dhamma ways. Another aspect is that it is called viriya because it causes things to evolve in ways, method or upaya that indicates intelligence. Viriya is called an indriya because of its being adhipati [sovereign] by overpowering procrastination. Also called an indriya because it predominates in matters of supporting. Viriya is arising with each and everyone but if the Dhamma, the Buddha's teaching had not explained it, it would be impossible to recognize the characteristics of viriya according to its meanings and aspects, even in the definition "called indriya because it predominates in matters of supporting". Whenever kusala-citta arises or while one is doing something with persistence and diligence, one should know that because viriya-cetasika is supporting at that moment the deed is done without disheartenment. This very viriya is an indriya, thus it is called viriyindriya. Its characteristic is beneficence as well as support. Those who develop panna and benefit from viriya would not retreat from kusala-dhamma just as an old house would remain standing because of its support from the posts that are incorporated into its structure. At this moment, if one is bored, lazy, sleepy, or disheartened, one is like an old, decaying house because one cannot stand, remain or evolve with kusala. Viriya-cetasika is a reality characterized by beneficence and support like an old house needing posts for support to remain standing. To begin with, one must realize that viriya is characterized by beneficence. The Buddha manifested several similes to help understand the characteristics of viriya-cetasika, which is arising and evolving at this moment: "Like a small army and a great one at war, when the smaller retreats the king would be informed. He would then send troops and transport to his army which with those very support would defeat the enemy instead. Even so is viriya, which would not discourage or dishearten its sampayutta-dhamma but uplift or support them." As said earlier viriya is characterized by support. Viriya supports the interest in what one listens to so that one examines it and understanding arises. Towards the end of the Atthakatha Anumanasutta there is a passage saying that the preceptors of the past said that Bhikkhus should examine themselves three times a day. In the morning they should examine themselves whether such and so much kilesa is theirs. If so, there should be perseverance in order to abandon kilesa. If not, they should be heartened that they are well-ordained. In the afternoon they should do so again, as well as in the evening. When they cannot do so three times a day, they should twice a day. If not twice, then just once. But not to do so at all is improper. Those of the past are pundits who have a way of reminding themselves. In comparison do people today have the idea of self-examination as did the pundits of the past? Thus one can see that even to examine one's own akusala or kusala one must depend on viriya. Once in the morning, once in the afternoon and once in the evening, if not, twice, then at least once, which kusala did the ancient sages remind us to examine? A passage in the Majjhimanikaya Mulapannasaka 225 says the Venerable Moggallana once manifested the Dhamma about the obedience to the Bhikkhus, teaching them to examine themselves: "The Bhikkhus should self-examine." Then again the Bhikkhus should consider thus: "Am I easily angered, possessed by anger?" Upon examination should they know that, "I am easily angered, possessed by anger," he should try to abandon the bad akusala-dhamma. Should he know that he is not easily angered, nor possessed by anger he should dwell in that delight and happiness and study diligently day and night the kusala-dhamma. Problems caused by anger are common in daily life. Does one examine oneself to see if he is easily angered, possessed by anger. If so, try to abandon akusala-dhamma that are vile. One must be mindful, see that it is bad. But if today we do not examine ourselves at all in bad things that we have done, later on we will certainly repeat the action, and there will be no self- improvement at all. Those who wish to really relinquish kusala, eradicate it completely and truly realize the ariya-sacca-dhamma must have viriya or perseverance to see their own akusala. ____________ Robert #67298 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 1/21/07 2:17:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard, James &all, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > I'm squeemish, because I don't like bigotry and unkindness. > .... > S: I think we should all 'mind our own cittas' in this (or any > other)discussion and be careful of suggesting unwholesome motives in > others when we may well be mistaken. Otherwise it's easy to end up > disturbed or angered unnecessarily. > > I wrote a spelling typo - 'queery' and when queried on it, made a silly > joke about the spelling being a cross between 'query' and 'queer eye'. > > I was addressing a North American who I'd assume would be very familiar > with the very common and now common and mainstream expression 'queer eye' > after the run-away success round the world of the (American)series 'Queer > Eye for a Straight Guy'.(I watch little TV, but this is one of my > favourites and certainly not concerned with any bigotry or unkindness). ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, of course I'm familiar with the show, though it's not one I regularly watch. It does indeed involve homosexuals guiding straight guys in dress and grooming, already rather stereotypical. So raising that connection was not particularly sensitive to the feelings of others here, though certainly not mean spirited. But you will note, Sarah, that it wasn't your post to which I replied, but Connie's who took the ball you softly tossed and ran with it. -------------------------------------------------- > > I read Connie as merely picking up on the title with her quip about my not > being 'quite straight' and again the archaic use of language in > Theriigaathaa. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't find that as innocuous as you do, Sarah. Personal inclinations and preferences, especially those that frequently are met with disdain and even hatred, are not material for comic banter, particularly in a public venue. Connie didn't let the matter go, but, had some more "fun" with the topic, relating it to the text and writing to Scott "Sarah's not playing extractly straight with you, Scott. Queeries often describe typos of practices / pastimes of those reborn as fairies... " Now, one doesn't have to be a genius to see what this is about. Connie's playfully replying to your "Queer eye" TV-show reference with the terms 'queeries' (quite offensive, BTW), 'straight', and 'practices/pastimes' & 'faeries' (from the text) left little doubt. Connie is very bright, and she apparently couldn't resist an opportunity for clever wordplay despite the effects that this would have. IMO, it was thoughtless to do so, and careless. I see it as an error in judgement that calls for an apology instead of an attempt at defense, though Connie writes that she sees no reason for apology. ---------------------------------------------------- > > I certainly never expected the intro to the new series to be so > controversial!! > > In any case, I apologise for any misunderstandings (easy on the internet). ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm very pleased that you feel some sort of apology is appropriate. I often find myself in a position to need to apologize or statements of mine - making mistakes is awfuly easy for all of us. As for misunderstandings, I thought that your initial remark was unwise and ill considered though not deserving of a critical post to you. What you wrote was unwise but minor. Connie's not letting your quip drop, however, but embellishing it, in fact, was very wrong, IMO, and I thought that my silence would have been a less-than-moral response. It seems that while joking about racial and religious minority groups, especially using hurtful terminology, is generally viewed as inappropriate, though even that is regretfully changing these days with regard to Muslims, homosexuals seem to prominently remain "fair game" for mocking humor. Lovingkindness and compassion, and just plain good sense, however, should put an end to that, especially among followers of the Buddha. ----------------------------------------------- > > May we all rest this aspect of the thread here unless anyone particularly > needs to have a 'last word'. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I have nothing further to add. I appreciate your expressing regret for possible misunderstandings. Again, Sarah, I know that what you wrote was not intended to hurt. It was just, IMO, unwise. ======================= With metta, Howard #67299 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:32 am Subject: The dichotomy kusala versus akusala (Was:[dsg] Re: What is Meditation? scottduncan2 Dear Joop, J: "..I forgot to use this rule..." That's okay, I don't mind. I'll watch for it in the future. Scott. #67300 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) jwromeijn Hallo Request to the moderators to delete the whole thread "Re: [dsg] Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts)" I know they want such requests off-list but this has gone tofar to do such silent Metta Joop #67301 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:52 am Subject: existence precedes essence (abhidhammicly) lbidd2 Hi Herman, "Existence precedes essence" is the foundation of Sartre's philosophy. Here's my take on it using abhidhamma terminology: Volitional consciousness is who we are, our existence. Essence is this consciousness taken as the sign of who we are. Volitional consciousness is inescapable. There will always be volitional consciousness and it will always be either good or bad, virtuous or evil, kusala or akusala. However, every particular volitional consciousness is unnecessary. Hate is unnecessary and love is unnecessary. Because they are unnecessary we _must_ choose one or the other. No matter how many accumulations we have we still choose. This choice is the source of freedom and responsibility. I think that what Sartre missed is that sign gives the appearance of permanence to an impermanent phenomenon. With the awareness of impermanence the thrill and drama of freedom and responsibility is considerably diminished. However, sign is part of life as a manifestation of perception (sa~n~naa). So there is no reason to discount this thrill and drama. I think the recognition that particular volitional consciousnesses are unnecessary is a particularly valuable insight. Larry ps: here's an on-line source text for anyone interested: http://www.marxists.org/ reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm #67302 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:07 am Subject: Re: Meditation lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > I have been an avid meditator, but have stopped meditating. Why? > Because it works. If you want to see the reality of anicca, anatta and > dukkha, meditate. Meditate sincerely. I did, and found that what the > Buddha says about the nature of reality is exactly true. But I haven't > found that to be redeeming. I don't like any of it. On a good day I > can live, more or less, with the reality of anicca. But I don't like > the reality of anatta and dukkha at all. Truth be known, I don't even > like mindfulness. So I have stopped meditating. Why remind yourself of > what you don't want to know? > Hi Herman, This is a great question. I hope everyone responds. Mine is, there's no dukkha in mindfulness. Even in mindfulness of dukkha there's no dukkha. But there's always mindfulness because mindfulness is just mind. Larry #67303 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:31 am Subject: Re: Meditation scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Good question. L: "Mine is, there's no dukkha in mindfulness. Even in mindfulness of dukkha there's no dukkha. But there's always mindfulness because mindfulness is just mind." Mine is: Encountering Dhamma, really encountering Dhamma, can't help but condition all kinds of mental development such that one doesn't stop meditating. Sincerely, Scott. #67304 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Origin of Energy! renmercer Bodhicitta. Well said. RenKTN #67305 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi Kel and Scott, You have both made your points well. Thanks and Kind Regards Herman #67306 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:00 pm Subject: Identifying Wrong Views? antony272b2 Dear Group, I suspect the main part of overcoming Wrong View is to overcome confusion (does moha mean confusion?) and identify which Wrong View I have: Majjhima 131: "There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person... sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. "He/she sees feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling. "He/she sees perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception. "He/she sees thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as in thought-fabrications. "He/she sees consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.131.than.html +++ Antony: Wrong views are rarely articulated. People don't go around saying "I see thought-fabrications as in self". Examples of where people do articulate their wrong views are: Materialists say that form (the brain and body) is self. Some New Age websites say that consciousness is self (I've had that one, until I read that when you die you don't just lose your body, you lose your mind as well!). How do you identify which wrong views you have? Does one have the same wrong views over time or do they change from moment-to-moment? How many wrong views can you have at the same time? Thanks / Antony. #67307 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:31 pm Subject: Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) philofillet Hi all For what it's worth, I would say it was an "idle chatter" issue more than a hateful speech issue. (I find it really hard to beleive anyone was being homophobic.) People should remember that the Buddha discouraged idle chatter and that when posts are excessively clever in an intentional way the Dhamma-related meaning is lost and one loses an opportunity to communicate Dhamma, no matter how much fun it is to provide "zany relief" as a UP category has it. I include myself there, of course. We have our loved ones for zany relief and witty wordplay. I say strike out the zany relief category in UPs. Out with them all! Metta, Phil #67308 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] existence precedes essence (abhidhammicly) egberdina Hi Larry, Thank you very much indeed for your post. On 22/01/07, Larry wrote: > Hi Herman, > > "Existence precedes essence" is the foundation of Sartre's philosophy. Here's my take on it > using abhidhamma terminology: > > Volitional consciousness is who we are, our existence. Essence is this consciousness taken > as the sign of who we are. Volitional consciousness is inescapable. There will always be > volitional consciousness and it will always be either good or bad, virtuous or evil, kusala or > akusala. This dividing of consciousness into a/kusala is one of the major differences between Sartre and Buddhism. BN (Being and Nothingness) lacks any ethics whatsoever. And how could it be any other way? Phenomenology is descriptive, not prescriptive or explanatory. What is observed in BN is that no-one acts against their fundamental project, all actions are "good" in terms of it. However, every particular volitional consciousness is unnecessary. Hate is > unnecessary and love is unnecessary. Because they are unnecessary we _must_ choose one > or the other. No matter how many accumulations we have we still choose. This choice is > the source of freedom and responsibility. Yes, very well put. Sartre has some similarly nice descriptions for consciousness such as de trop and gratuitous. "Everything is gratuitous, this garden, this city and myself. When you suddenly realize it, it makes you feel sick and everything begins to drift...that's nausea." and "Man is a useless passion." > > I think that what Sartre missed is that sign gives the appearance of permanence to an > impermanent phenomenon. With the awareness of impermanence the thrill and drama of > freedom and responsibility is considerably diminished. However, sign is part of life as a > manifestation of perception (sa~n~naa). So there is no reason to discount this thrill and > drama. I am not sure that Sartre has missed impermanence. He certainly denies the notion of momentary existence a la Abhidhamma."....as for the instantaneous present, everyone knows that this does not exist at all but is the limit of an infinite division." He sees the being of consciousness (which he calls being for itself) as a negation of being in itself, of which can only be said that it is. Being in itself precedes the being of essence, which comes into the world as a negation of what is. So consciousness does not exist as impermanence, it exists as negation. > > I think the recognition that particular volitional consciousnesses are unnecessary is a > particularly valuable insight. > Right on. Kind Regards Herman #67309 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation egberdina Hi Larry, Scott and all, On 22/01/07, Larry wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: > > So I have stopped meditating. Why remind yourself of > > what you don't want to know? > > > > Hi Herman, > > This is a great question. I hope everyone responds. Mine is, there's no dukkha in > mindfulness. Even in mindfulness of dukkha there's no dukkha. But there's always > mindfulness because mindfulness is just mind. > I have been pondering on your reply, Larry. First I thought, yeah, that's very good, spot on even. Now I'm not so sure. In a mindful moment, there is freedom as to the object of consciousness, and as to what to do with it. So, in a mindful moment, one assumes responsibility for making one's life. And by whatever is chosen one is setting the context in which future choices are to be made. This makes the mindful moment an onerous, burdensome one, and it is little wonder that mindfulness is not pursued en masse. I would go so far as to say that quite the contrary happens, mindfulness is avoided. Kind Regards Herman #67310 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:09 pm Subject: Re: Psalms of the Sisters intro (was Extracts) buddhatrue Hi Phil and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hi all > > For what it's worth, I would say it was an "idle chatter" issue more > than a hateful speech issue. (I find it really hard to beleive anyone > was being homophobic.) Really, this is a Dhamma issue, this isn't a gay rights issue or anything like that. We have been discussing being aware of one's mind state in all circumstances- and determining if that mind state is kusala or akusala. For example, one may kill mosquitoes and believe it is being done for a good reason (to stop disease) such as I used to believe, but when the mind state is more closely examined it can be determined that the root of killing is hate and can never be compassion. True, this was a bit of idle chatter, and no big deal in that respect; but when the nature of the words are put together the reader can determine that they were probably written with an akusala mind state. Even if the writer wasn't aware of it, they were probably akusala in nature. As Buddhist friends, it is not inappropriate for us to point out obvious instances of akusala mind states to each other to allow for further introspection. This isn't to hold grudges, create controversy, or build more hate- it is just helping out a friend. Really, I don't know what everyone is getting so upset about. I am the only openly gay member who actively posts to this group, and I am not upset about this issue. I don't feel insulted and I don't hold any grudges against anyone. After all, I don't expect people to be perfect. But it is appropriate to point out akusala speech to dhamma friends for their further reflection. Connie refuses to see the connection now, and that's okay; maybe she will later. I think this has been a good experience and a chance for all of us to learn something. I will be very disappointed if the moderators delete this thread. Metta, James #67311 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:25 pm Subject: Re: Meditation buddhatrue Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > This is a great question. I hope everyone responds. Mine is, there's no dukkha in > mindfulness. James: Mindfulness from the unliberated mind is dukkha just like everything else. Even in mindfulness of dukkha there's no dukkha. James: Yes there is. But there's always > mindfulness because mindfulness is just mind. James: There isn't always mindfulness. If there was always mindfulness becoming enlightened would be a snap! Most of the time the mind is mired in delusion. > > Larry > Metta, James #67312 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:18 pm Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! buddhatrue Hi Robert, > What do you make of this by Khun sujin.. > > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/sujin1.htm > VIRIYA-PARAMI > by Sujin Boriharnwanaket I think it is very looooong and very repetitive. Is there anything in particular you want to draw my attention to? Metta, James #67313 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:26 pm Subject: Re: Meditation buddhatrue Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > I > can live, more or less, with the reality of anicca. But I don't like > the reality of anatta and dukkha at all. Truth be known, I don't even > like mindfulness. So I have stopped meditating. Why remind yourself of > what you don't want to know? James: This is a very good point! Meditation isn't for everyone because not everyone is ready to face their inner demons, face the suffering inherent to life, or relinquish their attachments- or, as the Buddha described it, doing battle with Mara. However, concentration meditation leading to jhana is supposed to be a much more pleasant journey. You must have been practicing Vipassana meditation??? Regardless of the type, however, there comes a point when the practicioner must do battle with Mara and "die before you die". Herman, just because you feel overwhelmed by the direct realization of the First Noble Truth, that doesn't mean that enlightenment isn't possible. It may seem very far away to you now, but it is reachable. The Buddha wouldn't send people on a fool's errand. Metta, James #67314 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Roots ken_aitch Hi Herman, ------------- H: > Hi KenH, > It is good to hear from you. -------------- And it's good to hear from you too. Sorry I didn't mention that the first time. :-) ----------------------- <. . .> KH: > But I wonder if you are making progress of your own. H: > This is a good and useful question. I have come to realise all notions of progress, in terms of becoming this or that, as being delusional. I accept that I will never progress to become anything. In the meantime, I just gress, like everyone else. ------------------------ I agree. I also agree that mine was a good and useful question. IMO, the best questions are those that make us consider how a conventional view of reality can be understood in an unconventional, Abhidhamma, way. And I feel sure that the Buddha frequently asked that type of question. E.g., "How does a monk practise mindfulness of the body?" "How does a monk exert right effort?" "How does a monk practise mindfulness of breathing?" "How does [Herman] make progress along the Path?" As for your answer, I agree a notion of progress is delusional as soon as it is seen as "my" progress. By all means we should study the Dhamma and learn about progress, but as soon as it becomes "my" progress we have lost the plot. While we're on the subject, I might add that true progress in the course of one lifetime is a scarcely observable thing. We might change our habits for the better, but our underlying tendencies have been built up over countless aeons. We may act as if butter wouldn't melt in our mouths, but who knows what akusala (or kusala) we may be capable of? The purpose of the Dhamma is to understand the way things are; it is not to make things the way they aren't (if you know what I mean.) ------------------- KH: > > Are you learning any Abhidhamma? H: > I think I am. But I need to qualify that. Abhidhamma covers very broad ground. I think I am learning those aspects of Abhidhamma which correspond with what is possible to be experienced. On the other hand, I am realising that some of Abhidhamma can never be experienced, such as the Patthana. The Patthana is very much explanatory, and the reality of an explanation cannot be experienced. ------------------- Yes, that sounds like a good "first things first" policy. --------------------------------- KH: > > You will have heard countless times that > alobha, adosa and amoha are not 'nothings' - they are paramattha dhammas (absolutely existent realities). H: >You are no doubt 100% correct. But it is also true that if these things were said, they did not register with me previously. And that's just the way things go. ---------------------------------- Yes, this time I am correct. It would be very hard to read DSG for any length of time without being told there are only namas and rupas. :-) --------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > What would be the purpose, Ken, in building up this knowledge? (Not that I deliberately act dumb, it is just that you seem to have a goal in mind, and I wonder what that is?) -------------------- Well, the goal is enlightenment, but as we have both been saying, there is no "my goal" in Abhidhamma. Ultimately, there is only the present moment. If there is an ultimate goal it must be to understand the namas and rupas that are arising now. And those dhammas are so fleeting - they have been and gone before "we" can do anything about them. Ken H H: > PS I do hope to catch up with you, Ken, in the next thirty years or so. I think we have much in common. I hope so too - while we are still young. :-) #67315 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:16 pm Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" <> > What do you make of this by Khun sujin.. > > > > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/sujin1.htm > > VIRIYA-PARAMI > > by Sujin Boriharnwanaket > > I think it is very looooong and very repetitive. Is there anything > in particular you want to draw my attention to? > Dear James No, just wanted your comments. Thanks Robert #67316 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:03 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) sarahprocter... Dear All, (Re-post) 'Psalms of the Early Buddhists - Psalms of the Sisters' (Theriigaathaa, translated by Mrs Rhys Davids, first pub. 1909, PTS) http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/davids/psalms/psalms.html .... CANTO I -- PSALMS OF SINGLE VERSES I -- Verse uttered by a certain Sister, a Bhikkhunii 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, *78 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 Vesaalii. 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 Vesaalii, she was convinced by his teaching, and became a lay-disciple. Anon, hearing the Great Pajaapatii 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 Visaakha brought Dhammadinnaa, *79 with a large following, to Great Pajaapatii the Gotamid, and said: 'Let the reverend Sisters give her ordination.' And Pajaapatii 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. *** *78 Ko.naagamana and Kassapa successively preceded Gotama as Buddhas. *79 See Ps. xii. ***** Metta, Sarah (with Connie's help) ========= #67317 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Dreaming and Seeming [Re: [dsg] Meditation (again)] sarahprocter... Hi Howard, (Ren & all), Just a brief note to say that I think your letter (to Ren & all0 on dreams was well-written and I agree with your conclusions: --- upasaka@... wrote: > Also, in MN 22, the Buddha mentioned "I have compared sensual > pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing > embers... a dream... > ." So, there is ample evidence, I would say, of the Buddha pointing to > the > dreamlike quality of all dhammas, their impermanence and not-self > characteristics alone justifying such a perspective. While it is false > that all is a dream, > it is quite true that all is dreamlike. .... S: We constantly crave after and pursue these dhammas, when really they are just like ephemeral dream-like bubbles etc. I heard a reminder today that without sa~n~naa (perception), nothing would seem important at all. It was a good reminder for me. (Btw, did you have a chance to listen to that recording we briefly discussed?) (Ren, you referred to some interesting encounters in Nepal and Tibet and further questions/comments off-list to Jon & I - would you care to share these on-list so we and others may respond?) Metta, Sarah ======== #67318 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:36 pm Subject: Re: Meditation ken_aitch Hi Larry, Herman and all, Everybody meditates. Flop into your favourite chair, put your feet up, and wait for stressful feelings to be replaced by pleasant ones. That is meditation. Eat your favourite snack food, wear your favourite shirt, switch on the TV . . . these are all things we do to alter our current state of consciousness. People say the Buddha taught the same sort of thing as the Way out of Samsara, and that (when you understand it properly) is a terrible slander against the Buddha. I'm sorry for being a little bit controversial, but that is the Dhamma as I see it. Ken H #67319 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 1/21/07 11:05:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > 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. ====================== Interesting. What she noted was impermanent was the food that burned up, and that was pa~n~natti. Yet that is what she was mindful of, leading to the insightful understanding of it as impermanent, and when the insight into the impermanence of that conventional object, the food, arose, it was sufficient to lead to a contemplation of ("rapt meditation on") impermanence in general, and to anagami phala. This seems to fly in the face of a couple points often raised on DSG: the non-arising & non-ceasing of pa~n~natti, and the application of wisdom only to paramattha dhammas, not pa~n~natti. Is there a way to see this differently? With metta, Howard #67320 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:03 pm Subject: Re: Dreaming and Seeming [Re: [dsg] Meditation (again)] upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 1/21/07 11:28:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard, (Ren &all), > > Just a brief note to say that I think your letter (to Ren &all0 on dreams > was well-written and I agree with your conclusions: --------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Sarah. :-) --------------------------------------- > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > > Also, in MN 22, the Buddha mentioned "I have compared sensual > >pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing > >embers... a dream... > >." So, there is ample evidence, I would say, of the Buddha pointing to > >the > >dreamlike quality of all dhammas, their impermanence and not-self > >characteristics alone justifying such a perspective. While it is false > >that all is a dream, > >it is quite true that all is dreamlike. > .... > S: We constantly crave after and pursue these dhammas, when really they > are just like ephemeral dream-like bubbles etc. > > I heard a reminder today that without sa~n~naa (perception), nothing would > seem important at all. It was a good reminder for me. (Btw, did you have a > chance to listen to that recording we briefly discussed?) ------------------------------------------- Howard: A good point about sa~n~na. I expect, though, that without attachment to sa~n~na, and without its operation beset by avijja, any problems associated with it would disappear. We needn't "fear" that cognitive operation, but only its ill functioning and any attachment to it. As regards the recording, I did listen to one or two from February. Please tell me again, which exact date and which number wree you particularly suggesting I listen to. ------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #67321 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] existence precedes essence (abhidhammicly) lbidd2 Hi Herman, Thanks for your reply. One thing I couldn't really get my head into is the sense of nausea. This seems to be slightly different from dukkha, which seems to me is cleansing in a way, while nausea seems like resentment. But maybe I've got it wrong. Another interesting point you brought up: H: "What is observed in BN is that no-one acts against their fundamental project, all actions are "good" in terms of it." L: I think this means that everyone always thinks they are choosing good. Not only that, everyone always thinks their choices are exemplary, regardless of what they may say. But what about guilt and remorse? Perhaps that only applies to the past. But they are present choices. Good ones ;0) Larry #67322 From: connie Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:06 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) nichiconn Hi Howard, > 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. ====================== H: Interesting. What she noted was impermanent was the food that burned up, and that was pa~n~natti. Yet that is what she was mindful of, leading to the insightful understanding of it as impermanent, and when the insight into the impermanence of that conventional object, the food, arose, it was sufficient to lead to a contemplation of ("rapt meditation on") impermanence in general, and to anagami phala. This seems to fly in the face of a couple points often raised on DSG: the non-arising & non-ceasing of pa~n~natti, and the application of wisdom only to paramattha dhammas, not pa~n~natti. Is there a way to see this differently? ========== Pruitt's translation might help: << Then one day, a great flame arose when the curry was being cooked in the kitchen. That great flame burnt up the whole dish with a hissing sound. She observed it, and making this her support [for contemplation], she thoroughly considered the arising of the characteristic of impermanence. Then she established there the concept of misery, impermanence, and no-self. She made her insight grow, eagerly practised, and in due course was established in the paths, one after the other, including the fruition stage of a Non-Returner. >> connie #67323 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation lbidd2 Hi Herman and all, H: "In a mindful moment, there is freedom as to the object of consciousness, and as to what to do with it. So, in a mindful moment, one assumes responsibility for making one's life. And by whatever is chosen one is setting the context in which future choices are to be made. This makes the mindful moment an onerous, burdensome one, and it is little wonder that mindfulness is not pursued en masse. I would go so far as to say that quite the contrary happens, mindfulness is avoided." L: I agree something funny (odd) is going on, what exactly I'm not sure. But I think you have to look at mindfulness and see if there is a problem. On one level mindfulness is a choice so there is the drama about making a choice which becomes one's identity that is subject to attack so you have to explain and defend it, but mindfulness itself, on a more basic level, is really just a consciousness that is different from its object, having practically no qualities at all. In mindfulness of a pain, for example, the pain is painful but the consciousness of it isn't. On an even more basic level this is the nature of all consciousnesses, the medium of experience. Whether you buy this or not I think we have to look at the experience of mindfulness and see what exactly is unsatisfactory and why it is avoided. Larry #67324 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Memory & Attentiveness antony272b2 Dear Group, MN53:16 "He has mindfulness: he possesses the highest mindfulness and skill. He recalls and recollects what was done long ago and spoken long ago" Bhikkhu Bodhi notes: "Here the text explains sati mindfulness by reference to its original meaning of memory. The relationship between the two senses of sati – memory and attentiveness – may be formulated thus: keen attentiveness to the present forms the basis for an accurate memory of the past." ++++ Antony: I thought that, when the mind was lost in bad memories, that those memories were still the truth. Another incentive to be mindful. with metta / Antony. #67325 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:29 am Subject: Re: Meditation philofillet Hi Herman Welcome back. As Larry said, this was a very good question. I guess my answer would be that if you "found what the Buddha says about the nature of reality is exactly true" there would by necessity also be an understanding of why this knowledge is liberating. There would be a joyful sense of liberation, or a taste of that liberation. So I would guess that you are being a little overconfident about having "found what the Buddha says about the nature of reality is exactly true." One thing I can say for sure is that taking a break from meditation for 2 or 3 years was the best thing I ever did, because now that I am back at it I have a much better idea of what it is and what it isn't - no longer doing it just because that's what Buddhists do, as I did when I started. Now I have a better understanding of why the Buddha urged people to do it with such fervour. ("Meditate, or you will regret it later.") So I feel confident that a break from meditation will refresh your experience if you get back at it. But I guess you're not so keen on Buddhist liberation, which is fine. I enjoyed what you wrote about existentialism. Your posts are always interesting. Metta, Phil p.s Sorry to hear your wife hasn't been feeling well. #67326 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:00 am Subject: Re: The Origin of Energy! philofillet Hi Robert Thanks for this and the Ajahn Chah passage. I would agree with James on that one, but say that it was about balancing the indriyas rather than the factors of enlightenment. I have a talk that the Vnerable gave to a dying parishioner, and it is one of the strongest urgings to meditation that I have read. He was so deep that he could probably see into the needs of the person he was talking to. You're right to suggest that there is a tilting out-of-balance toward energy/striving on my part. An adjustment period after having swung out of Acharn Sujin's sphere of influence, I would guess. The Acharn Sujin passage is too long to comment on detail. But I will see how far I get. > Some might think it is unnecessary to gradually whittle away kilesa > nor to develop and accumulate kusala. They might think that upon > hearing the Dhamma and a little practice, one might be able realize > the ariya-sacca-dhamma. Only a fool would think this. I don't think people who are drawn to the Pali canon are this foolish. I certainly have no aspirations in this department. > > > Fifth is viriya-parami, meaning relentless perseverance no matter the > difficulties. Everyone who has been successful in other areas would > see that there is nothing more difficult than endeavoring to abandon > vice, perform good deeds and purify one's mind from akusala. In fact, > all success, both worldly and in the Dhamma, cannot be achieved > without perseverance. I've listened to Lodewijk reading The Perfections and the chapter on virya is very stirring. Doesn't sound at all like the Acharn Sujin I hear in recorded talks, who for some reason hesitates to urge her students toward anything except the understanding of the characteristics of present realities. I would love to hear her urge people toward wholesome deeds the way she does in such books as Deeds of Merit. I wouldn't be surprised if there is more of that in her Thai talks. I have a feeling she worries too much about Westerners' tendency to expect fast results, and the result is setting up a different kind of expectation about panna arising without the necessary conditions. (From what I have heard about khanica samadhi from Bhikkhu Bodhi, the Burmese sayadaws, and an article on various Thai Forest monks approach to vipassana vs. jhanas, it is the bare minimum for the arising of insight, and despite the usual translation "Momentary concentration" it is not momentary in the sense of being the samadhi that arises with every citta. It runs over successive objects.) But I don't meditate with the expectation of samadhi. It is intersting enough to become better acquainted with defilements. (Especially the hindrances - I really have trouble understanding how one can become as familiar with them just by staying open to them in daily life as one becomes familiar with them under the beautiful microscope meditation provides.) But between worldly endeavors, which are full > of desire, and kusala endeavors, which gradually eliminate kilesa, > the latter would always require more effort. I don't understand this anymore. Worldly endeavours are not by necessity akusala desire. I put a hell of lot of sincere hard work and care and patience into my teaching. It is worldly but I am very confident that it is wholesome a lot of the time. (Except when I get caught up in checking out cleavages.) Normally, we all persist > in doing akusala, meaning endeavoring with attachment and desire in > sight, sound, smell, taste and bodysense contact which anyone can > prove has always been the case. I do appreciate having learned from Acharn Sujin how immediately lobha arises with the object. The dome of lobha. I wouldn't have understood that without her. But I disagree that we all persist in doing akusala. I find quite often that akusala is stamped out, unwholesome proliferation if cut off in the way the Buddha says is possible in so many suttas. Now, is there lobha, self-concern involved in that? Technically speaking, I suppose there would be. I don't know. If that is the case, I don't care about "techincally speaking" because the reality of evil that is avoided and good that is done is what matters to me. Oops, maybe not a reality. Well, whatever. I am a thick beginner drenched in unwholesome desires. When they are not acted on, when I "don't go there", they lose power. I am 100% sure of this, and feel joy for this process that is at work in me in the light of the Buddha's teaching. Oh, Naomi's calling for dinner. I'll leave it there Robert. Please add any comments if you'd like, but I will leave it at this. I really respect your passion for Dhamma. I'll never forget taking the train home from our first meeting at the airport, feeling amazingly inspired and energized about Dhamma thanks to you. Say hi to Alex and ...Yuko? I forget her name. Metta, Phil #67327 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane jonoabb Hi Howard Thanks for the sutta reference. There is a similar passage in the Samannaphala Sutta (Fruits of Recluseship) DN 2. The same phenomenon of the mind-made body is also discussed in Vism Ch XII, 25 etc. It seems to be one of the products of very highly developed jhana (and insight). As I understand it, the body created by these powers has no consciousness. I don't know if this is what JC has in mind by 'astral body' Jon upasaka@... wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > > There is the following reference to what I think is the astral body in > DN 11: > _______________ > "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free > from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he > directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates > another body, endowed with form, made of the mind, complete in all its parts, > not inferior in its faculties. ... #67328 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 1/22/07 2:07:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@... writes: > Is there a way to see this differently? > ========== > Pruitt's translation might help: < the curry was being cooked in the kitchen. That great flame burnt up the > whole dish with a hissing sound. She observed it, and making this her > support [for contemplation], she thoroughly considered the arising of the > characteristic of impermanence. Then she established there the concept of > misery, impermanence, and no-self. She made her insight grow, eagerly > practised, and in due course was established in the paths, one after the > other, including the fruition stage of a Non-Returner. >> > > connie > ======================= Thank you for this. :-) Actually, though, this translation only seems to make the "problem" more acute. So, if there is to be a solution, I think it may have to lie in an explanation/analysis rather than an alternative translation. With metta, Howard #67329 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Herman) - In a message dated 1/22/07 5:32:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi Herman > > Welcome back. > > As Larry said, this was a very good question. > > I guess my answer would be that if you "found what the Buddha says > about the nature of reality is exactly true" there would by > necessity also be an understanding of why this knowledge is > liberating. There would be a joyful sense of liberation, or a taste > of that liberation. > > So I would guess that you are being a little overconfident about > having "found what the Buddha says about the nature of reality is > exactly true." ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mmmm, yes & no, IMO. From my experience, I can offer the following - One can see the nature of reality, but that seeing can be deficient in the following way: The insights may not go deeply enough, or the mind may not be fertile enough, for the knowing to "push one through". In that case, there may be an attenuation of ignorance and a subsequent calming of "reactivity", but no actual uprooting of defilements, and the mind, if untrained in jhana, will react at the time with fear instead of joy. But limited insights, even ones that result in aversion instead of joy at the time, can, if considered carefully, encourage further practice and ultimately prove fruitful. This reminds me a bit, to use a very trivial example, of what happens when one attempts board breaking in a martial art: When the kick or punch is executed perfectly in form, speed, and power, one will plunge right through with grace and ease, but when any of form, speed, or power is inadequate, impact with the board can occur but with there being no going through and with pain resulting instead of grace and ease. Still, if strong contact was made, one *can* gain a sense of what the proper experience would be and gain encouragement sufficient to continue practice, especially practice which introduces missing elements. ---------------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #67330 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/22/07 6:23:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard > > Thanks for the sutta reference. There is a similar passage in the > Samannaphala Sutta (Fruits of Recluseship) DN 2. The same phenomenon of > the mind-made body is also discussed in Vism Ch XII, 25 etc. It seems > to be one of the products of very highly developed jhana (and insight). > > As I understand it, the body created by these powers has no consciousness. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure where that idea came from. I haven't come across it. But in the sutta I quoted, the Buddha described that mind-made body as "not inferior in its faculties." Also, in other suttas where the Buddha speaks of lying through the air, touching the sun & moon, and so on, I've always suspected that if there is anything to that at all it ight well involve the action of a subtle body, the mind-made body. =========================== With metta, Howard #67331 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:28 am Subject: TYPO Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi again, Jon - In the followingI've inserted two missing letters in parenthesis. My writing "lying" instead of "flying" makes me laugh! I hope it doesn't represent an unsuspected scepticism on my part! LOLOL! > Also, in other suttas where the Buddha speaks of (f)lying through the > air, touching the sun & moon, and so on, I've always suspected that if there > is > anything to that at all it (m)ight well involve the action of a subtle body, > the > mind-made body. > ====================== With metta, Howard #67332 From: connie Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:51 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (2) nichiconn II -- Verse wherewith the Exalted One frequently exhorted Muttaa while a Student. Get free, Liberta, *80 free e'en as the Moon From out the Dragon's jaws *81 sails clear on high. Wipe off the debts that hinder thee, *82 and so, With heart at liberty, break thou thy fast. (2) This is the verse of a student named Muttaa. She, too, being one who had made a resolve under former Buddhas, went on heaping up good of age-enduring efficacy in this and that state of becoming. Finally, she was reborn in this Buddha-dispensation as the child of an eminent brahmin at Saavatthii, and named Muttaa. And in her twentieth year, her destiny being fully ripe, she renounced the world under the Great Pajaapatii the Gotamid, and studied the exercises for ecstatic insight. Returning one day from her round for alms, she discharged her duties toward her seniors, and then going apart to rest, and seated out of sight, she began to concentrate herself. Then the Master, sitting in the 'Fragrant Chamber' *83 of the Vihaara, sent forth glory, and revealing himself as if seated before her, uttered the verse above. And she, steadfast in that exhortation, not long after attained Arahantship, and so attaining, exulted in the words of that verse. Completing her studies and promoted to full rank, she yet again uttered it, when about to pass away. ***** *80 Muttaa = freed (woman). *81 Cf. the 'Ford' Jaataka (Buddhist Birth Stories, 253): 'He has gained freedom - as the moon set free, When an eclipse has passed, from Raahu's jaws.' *82 Cf. Dialogues of the Buddha, i. 82-84. *83 Gandha-kuu.ti, the traditional term for the Buddha's own room, especially that at the Jetavana Vihaara, Saavatthi. ::::::::::::::::: #67333 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:40 pm Subject: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal continued jwromeijn Hallo all, The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal: Compassion and merit Continuing of 67224 and 67232 A Theravadin can go the arahant-path or can go the bodhisattva-path, as Gotama the Buddha did in his former lives. An important detail: a Buddha-to-be had in His bodhisattva-career (in earlier lives) to prevent getting sotapanna or arahant because when that happens then it's over (after max seven lives) This preventing ability of a bodhisattva / Buddha-to-be is one of the skills of a bodhisattva. This theme is not mentioned in the Tipitaka, as far as I know. Compassion to other sentient beings is the central theme (to me) of the bodhisattva-path; compassion (karana) here used as a concept; I think the term used as a paramattha dhamma is a cetasika arising and falling away in an individual is is for that reason not concretely to other beings. I compare compassion withy another central other-directed attude and action: merit. First looked at Useful Posts of course otherwise Sarah will mention them. I have not studied all messages indicated in UP but I haven't found a text relating compassion and merit: strange. My prejudice is that (a) merit belongs mainly to popular buddhism in Theravada countries, done by laypeople in the hope to get a better rebirth. (b) compassion is a more general attitude, practiced pure altruistic; without any hope or wish to get something back in the future: no gratitude and no rebirth. To me giving dana (generosity) is out of compassion and not for merit- making. Metta Joop #67334 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:38 pm Subject: Re: Meditation philofillet Hi Howard and all Thanks. I had heard this sort of thing before but had forgotten. I also heard that practicng vipassana as I do (of course while it is called "vipassana meditation" because that is the goal, it is not actually vipassana until there are some rare attainments, and all teachers make that clear) is more dangerous in this sense than jhanas, because jhanas provide a safe refuge, or something like that. Insight that arises without having developed jhanas (i.e "dry insight") would leave one more vulnerable or soemthing like that. This is just theoretical for me. I am not seeking insight of that degree. Very content to have a look at some very coarse stuff - I hope it stays that way for a good little while. Metta, Phil > In that case, there may be > an attenuation of ignorance and a subsequent calming of "reactivity", but no > actual uprooting of defilements, and the mind, if untrained in jhana, will react > at the time with fear instead of joy. But limited insights, even ones that > result in aversion instead of joy at the time, can, if considered carefully, > encourage further practice and ultimately prove fruitful. #67335 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Jon, My used books arrived and so, regarding: J: "Thanks for the sutta reference. There is a similar passage in the Samannaphala Sutta (Fruits of Recluseship) DN 2. The same phenomenon of the mind-made body is also discussed in Vism Ch XII, 25 etc. It seems to be one of the products of very highly developed jhana (and insight). As I understand it, the body created by these powers has no consciousness. Howard: "I'm not sure where that idea came from. I haven't come across it. But in the sutta I quoted, the Buddha described that mind-made body as "not inferior in its faculties." Also, in other suttas where the Buddha speaks of lying through the air, touching the sun & moon, and so on, I've always suspected that if there is anything to that at all it ight well involve the action of a subtle body, the mind-made body. From Bh. Bodhi's translation of the Saama~n~naphala Sutta and Commentaries (pp.171-172): "Knowledge of the Mind-made Body (manomay'iddhi-~naa.na) 87. He creates another body having material form, mind-made, complete in all its parts, not lacking any faculties. CY. 'Mind-made' (manomaya): produced by mind. 'Not lacking any faculties': not deprived of any faculties by way of figure. For if the possessor of supernormal power is white, then the form he creates will also be white. If his earlobes are unpierced, the form will also have earlobes which are unpierced. Thus it is similar to him in all respects. N. SUB. CY. 'Not deprived of any faculties by way of figure (sa.nthaana): it is completely by way of figures of the eyes, ears, etc. For the created form has no sensitivity (to sense objects). This statement shows that there is also no life faculty, etc. in the created form. 'By way of figure': by way of the mere figure (in the case of the eye) is similar to a lotus petal, not by way of the sense faculty which (in the case of the eye) is the sensitivity capable of receiving the impact of forms. 88. CY. ...But he method of creation here and the following five kinds of direct knowledge - the modes of supernormal power etc. - have been explained in full detail in the Visuddhimagga (Chapters XII and XIII)..." I can add the Visuddhimagga if you are interested. Sincerely, Scott. #67336 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:56 pm Subject: Re: Identifying Wrong Views? ksheri3 good Day Antony Woods, You force me to ask: does WRONG VIEW need to fit your strict definition of REQUIREMENTS before it actually personifies WRONG VIEW? Lets look at organized religion in the USA. It was and still is seen as the apitome of godliness or perfection and to attain this perfection is to adhere to it. Many neophytes, in my case, can only below that I must join an order, I must wear blinders in order to see the light that they advocate and pay their high priced bills from. But Wrong View and the attainment of buddhahood is the subject here, so, in maintaining the mantra of the corporation or the mandela of the corporation that supplies the needs of this organized religion, is it wrong view to allow the priests of this secret society to abuse, malest, etc. the children that openly submit to this orgaization of religious theocracy? but remember now that it was Right View to submit to the priests of the catholic church. Is it Wrong View that the priests used to satisfy their personal desires by means of the organization? Would you even consider the thought of Wrong View in relation to this eclesiatical organization if it was not for the publicity? What is Wrong View? Is it only Wrong View as long as it conforms to your definition? Please don't go into the splitting hairs that the said actions are not Wrong View because it is only because they abused the illusions of life to manifest a wrong understanding, and an even more perverse wrong illusion of their existance that I can certainly state that THEY POSSESS WRONG VIEW. Does the people you work with, your peers, your family, your friends, have any part in CONDITIONING your response and your judgement? here I get into the rationale of attending a monastic life since in that way an individual can try to gain RIGHT VIEW but even then it is still subject to the whims and influeces of the teacher etc. I view the entire concept of Buddhism as a World View that REQUIRES TIME IN POSITION or TIME IN IMMERSION in the psychology, philosophy, of Buddhism. "You can only step in the same river once." toodles, colette > How do you identify which wrong views you have? Does one have the > same wrong views over time or do they change from moment-to-moment? > How many wrong views can you have at the same time? > #67337 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - Thanks for the following! One wonders what the purpose of a mind-made body is! LOL! With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/22/07 9:03:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: #67335 #67338 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:58 pm Subject: The Arising of the Ability of Energy! bhikkhu5 Friends: What is the Arising of the Energy Ability? The initiation of deliberately directing mind for the sole purpose of exertion, is the very first sprouting arising of the energy ability. The growing of keen eagerness and enthusiasm under the influence of the exertion itself, expands this arising of the energy ability. Occurrence of focused attention and consideration conditioned by the guided control of exertion, is the arising of the energy ability. The unification in one-pointed concentration under the condensing influence of the exertion, adds to the arising of the energy ability. Non-appearance of laziness is the advantage of the energy ability. Absence of the frustration of laziness is the charm of this ability. Entering mental absorption is the motive behind the energy ability. Assured firmness of effort is the rapt power of the energy ability. Enthusiastic pleasure & joy is the fascination of the energy ability. The emergence of laziness is the danger for the ability of energy. Through bold striving the ability of energy escapes from laziness. Source: The Path of Discrimination: Patisambhidamagga IV http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=133494 For details on the Enthusiastic Ability of Energy see: Energy is the 6th factor of 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 * <...> #67339 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane buddhatrue Hi Howard and Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Scott - > > Thanks for the following! One wonders what the purpose of a mind-made > body is! LOL! The Buddha used a mind-made body to appear before monks who were meditating in seclusion. In this way, he was able to give them any instructions which he felt they needed without having to travel to them in person. The Buddha appeared before Maha-Moggallana in a mind-made body while Maha-Moggallana was meditating in seclusion. This mind-made body delivered a discourse on the various ways to stay alert during long periods of meditation. Metta, James #67340 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Scott) - In a message dated 1/22/07 11:24:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > > Hi Howard and Scott, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Scott - > > > > Thanks for the following! One wonders what the purpose of a > mind-made > >body is! LOL! > > The Buddha used a mind-made body to appear before monks who were > meditating in seclusion. In this way, he was able to give them any > instructions which he felt they needed without having to travel to > them in person. > > The Buddha appeared before Maha-Moggallana in a mind-made body while > Maha-Moggallana was meditating in seclusion. This mind-made body > delivered a discourse on the various ways to stay alert during long > periods of meditation. > > Metta, > James ========================= If that was, indeed, via mind-made body, and not by teleporting his physical body, then that would indicate that consciousness can be associated with such a subtle body as well as the physical body. With metta, Howard #67341 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Identifying Wrong Views? TGrand458@... Hi 1) Wrong Views are merely views that will generate or potentially generate affliction. 2) Right Views are views that will not generate or potentially generate affliction. View based on ignorance and attachment is Wrong View. View based on wisdom/insight and non-attachment is Right View. This is merely a fact of natural law. It is not something that can be imposed or altered by belief systems. Ignorance is a weak/shallow understanding of cause and effect (conditionality) in relation to the human condition. Wisdom is a strong/deep understanding of cause and effect (conditionality) in relation to the human condition. TG In a message dated 1/22/2007 7:12:32 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, ksheri3@... writes: good Day Antony Woods, You force me to ask: does WRONG VIEW need to fit your strict definition of REQUIREMENTS before it actually personifies WRONG VIEW? #67342 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > If that was, indeed, via mind-made body, and not by teleporting his > physical body, then that would indicate that consciousness can be associated > with such a subtle body as well as the physical body. I'm not sure what you mean. The mind-made body IS consciousness. Metta, James #67343 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane lbidd2 Hi Howard et al., In "Identity and Experience" Sue Hamilton suggests that in creating a subtle physical body with the mind, mind and body are mixed or "identified" (made of the same stuff) and this has a reciprocal effect on the gross physical body or on how the gross physical body is viewed. SH: "Johansson states of this passage (SN V 282,283) that it illustrates the way "a material body may become less heavy and solid through meditation and by not identifying oneself with it:. He goes on to state that "the idea is probably that the mind (citta) is thin and light; by mixing it well with the body the combination will become less heavy. Concentration in itself is a force, and concentration on lightness is apt to reduce the weight of the body". The Iddhi.paada Sa.myutta itself does not state that the lighter body comes about because one does not identify oneself with it, but this is implicit in the fact that the subtle body is acquired at a certain level of spiritual insight: one can assume that it follows from this that progress has been made in the liberating task of ceasing falsely to identify with one's empirical body. Johansson's second and third sentences miss this point, however. It is not a question of mixing light mind with heavy body and producing something in between. The point is that greater degrees of insight correspond to less dense levels of reality, so one no longer exists at the more dense levels. At the more dense levels of ruupa, the mind is correspondingly dense or ignorant; as one progresses, _both_ one's mind and one's body become less dense. Concentration is indeed a force, but its task is to clarify (lighten) the _mind_: and the state in which one has bodily existence follows from this. When one has consciously understood this fact through spiritual progress, and crucially through the attainment of advanced stages of meditation, one is able to direct the mind to manipulating the more dense levels of reality. The tathaagata is Enlightened, and his complete understanding of the process enables him to identify body and mind in meditation and have mastery over both." ("Identity and Experience" p. 158) Larry #67344 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) sarahprocter... Hi Howard & Connie, (& Scott) Howard, very glad to see you joining us in this study corner. It's the first time I've seen any of Pruitt's translation work and this is very interesting. Thx for adding it, Connie. I'll look forward to seeing anymore on key parts of the commentary. .... > > Pruitt's translation might help: < when > > the curry was being cooked in the kitchen. That great flame burnt up > the > > whole dish with a hissing sound. She observed it, and making this her > > > support [for contemplation], she thoroughly considered the arising of > the > > characteristic of impermanence. Then she established there the concept > of > > misery, impermanence, and no-self. She made her insight grow, eagerly > > > practised, and in due course was established in the paths, one after > the > > other, including the fruition stage of a Non-Returner. >> ..... S: The other translation just referred to 'impermanence'. I think the word 'concept' here could fool us. Clearly, it's referring to the understanding of impermanence (and other characteristics) of dhammas. There is never a direct understanding of impermanence as insight without it being 'of a nama or rupa' as we know. This is why we cannot just read one text in isolation, otherwise we might think it is the common knowledge about impermanence that everyone knows about that leads to stages of enlightenment. Also of interest here is the reference to being established in the paths 'one after the other' up to anagami phala - the 'one after the other' is not referred to in the R-D transl. 'In due course' could mean anytime whereas 'thereby' in the other text clearly refers to the enlightenment to this stage being right then and there. At the end it says that after becoming an arahant, she repeated the verse and this way it became 'her' verse. In one of the intros, it explains that often/usually the verses were given originally by the Buddha and then repeated in this way. ..... > ======================= > Thank you for this. :-) Actually, though, this translation only > seems > to make the "problem" more acute. So, if there is to be a solution, I > think it > may have to lie in an explanation/analysis rather than an alternative > translation. .... S: As I said above, it's always an understanding of the anicca/dukkha/anatta *of dhammas* currently appearing. Only at higher levels of insight are the characterisitics apparent. I understand this to always be implied, how about you? Metta, Sarah p.s Scott, do you have any comment on the (subtle) difference in meaning of the translations referred to? (Don't worry if you're busy). ======== #67345 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (2) sarahprocter... Hi All, --- connie wrote: > > II -- Verse wherewith the Exalted One frequently exhorted Muttaa while a > > Student. > > Get free, Liberta, *80 free e'en as the Moon > From out the Dragon's jaws *81 sails clear on high. > Wipe off the debts that hinder thee, *82 and so, > With heart at liberty, break thou thy fast. (2) .... S: Norman translation of this verse: "Muttaa, be freed from ties, as the moon (is freed) from the grasp of Raahu; with mind completely freed, without debt, enjoy your alms-food." ***** S: The footnote to the R-D transl above refers us to DN, Samannaphala Sutta, 68ff and the abandoning of the hindrances: "Abandoning worldly desires, he dwells with a mind freed from worldly desires, and his mind is purified of them. Abandoning ill-will and hatred....and by compassionate love for the welfare of all living beings, his mind is purified of ill-will and hatred.....etc" "Just as a man who had taken a loan to develop his business and whose business had prospered, might pay off his old debts, and with what was left over could support a wife, might think: 'Before this I developed my business by borrowing, but now it has prospered....', and he would rejoice and be glad about that." ***** > > This is the verse of a student named Muttaa. She, too, being one who had > > made a resolve under former Buddhas, went on heaping up good of > age-enduring efficacy in this and that state of becoming. Finally, she > was > reborn in this Buddha-dispensation as the child of an eminent brahmin at > > Saavatthii, and named Muttaa. And in her twentieth year, her destiny > being > fully ripe, she renounced the world under the Great Pajaapatii the > Gotamid, and studied the exercises for ecstatic insight. .... S: From Dict of PPN: " Muttā Therī. She belonged to an eminent brahmin family of Sāvatthi and, in her twentieth year, renounced the world under Pajāpatī Gotamī. One day, as she meditated after her return from the alms round, the Buddha appeared before her in a ray of glory and exhorted her in a verse. Not long after she became an arahant. In the past, she had seen Vipassī Buddha walking along the street and, gladdened by the sight, had rushed out and thrown herself at his feet (Thig.vs.2; ThigA.8f). She is evidently identical with Sankamanattā of the Apadāna. Ap.ii.514." ***** >Returning one > day > from her round for alms, she discharged her duties toward her seniors, > and > then going apart to rest, and seated out of sight, she began to > concentrate herself. .... S: I assume this refers to being skilled in jhanas - different accumulations to the first 'unknown' bhikkhuni. .... >Then the Master, sitting in the 'Fragrant Chamber' > > *83 of the Vihaara, sent forth glory, and revealing himself as if seated > > before her, uttered the verse above. And she, steadfast in that > exhortation, not long after attained Arahantship, and so attaining, > exulted in the words of that verse. Completing her studies and promoted > to > full rank, she yet again uttered it, when about to pass away. .... S: Does anyone know what 'completing her studies and promoted to full rank' means? Pataisambhidas? Metta, Sarah ======== #67346 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Identifying Wrong Views? jonoabb Hi Antony The question you've raised (how wrong view can be known) is a good one, and is one that interests me a lot, partly because wrong view must be completely eradicated if the first stage of enlightenment (stream entry) is to be attained and partly because of the inherent characteristic of wrong view of taking itself as being right, thus making the task of knowing it for what it is that much more difficult. The short answer is that, as with any other dhamma, it can be known only as and when it arises, which means that it cannot be known by going looking for it. I would say that it's likely that more than one, and quite possibly all, of the 4 kinds of wrong view mentioned in MN 131 manifest at times in one form or another. I don't think it's a matter of deciding by analysis that we are a Type A wrong view person but not a Type B wrong view person. I agree with you that wrong view is unlikely to manifest as an explicitly held view such as "I believe such and such to be self". It's influence is much more subtle than that. More likely I believe, it will manifest as ideas about the way of practice in some form or another, such as thinking if I do such and such there'll be more kusala dhammas arising, or thinking that instead of doing what I'm now doing I should be doing X then there'd be more awareness, etc. Does this make sense? Jon Antony Woods wrote: > Dear Group, > > I suspect the main part of overcoming Wrong View is to overcome > confusion (does moha mean confusion?) and identify which Wrong View I > have: > > Majjhima 131: > "There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person... > sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or > self as in form. ... > > +++ > Antony: Wrong views are rarely articulated. People don't go around > saying "I see thought-fabrications as in self". Examples of where > people do articulate their wrong views are: Materialists say that > form (the brain and body) is self. Some New Age websites say that > consciousness is self (I've had that one, until I read that when you > die you don't just lose your body, you lose your mind as well!). > > How do you identify which wrong views you have? Does one have the > same wrong views over time or do they change from moment-to-moment? > How many wrong views can you have at the same time? > > Thanks / Antony. > #67347 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation jonoabb Hi Herman Welcome back! Herman Hofman wrote: > Hi all, > > What dsg lacks is a thread on meditation :) > Indeed ;-)) ;-)) > In all seriousness, I was recently asked whether I meditated, and this > is my answer. > > I have been an avid meditator, but have stopped meditating. Why? > Because it works. If you want to see the reality of anicca, anatta and > dukkha, meditate. Meditate sincerely. I did, and found that what the > Buddha says about the nature of reality is exactly true. I've been asking others lately, so I might as well ask you, too: What do you understanding by the term 'meditation' (or 'to meditate')? By this I don't meant to ask what your particular meditation practice is (or was), but what is the meaning of the term generally, when used in the context of something taught by the Buddha. How would you define the term? I've not had a clear answer from anyone to date. Hoping you can enlighten us (relatively speaking, of course). Jon PS I know this is not really to the point of your post, so feel free to ignore ;-)) #67348 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' sarahprocter... Hi Scott, Antony & all, --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Dear Dreamers, > > I thought of something else. All groan now, please. .... S: I certainly didn't groan, but was very interested, knowing the significance dreams have meant to you in the past (as to most of us trained in psychology/psychotherapy). ... > Significant experience - experience that effects change in the flux of > consciousness, change that accumulates kusala - is intense, momentary, > and can come as a shock. The main problem with such events is that > they become subject to clinging and can condition reams of wrong view, > the most devastating, in my opinion, being to claim it as one's own > and to identify with it: 'This is my experience and, because of it, I > am a certain kind of individual.' ..... S: I think this understanding is very 'brave' (for lack of a better word). Having clung so dearly to our experiences for aeons and aeons (or even just in this life-time), to appreciate the insignificance, 'the bubble', and the strong attachment as being unhealthy rather than healthy takes a lot of courage. Anumodana (mudita) in this! .... > I think, in truly adverting to and 'analysing' such 'events', it can > take months and months if not years of Dhamma study, moment after > moment of akusala and wrong view, and, finally, only through the > 'intervention' of pa~n~na - a true kusala dhamma - to sort out what > had arisen. .... S: or rather 'has' arisen now? I was listening to a reminder about how 'firm remembrance' (sa~n~naa) of dhammas is the proximate condition for sati (of satipatthana) to arise. Now there are dhammas, is the (kusala) sanna firm enough to condition sati? I understand there has to be such firm remembrance of dhammas on and on and on, otherwise there's more forgetfulness and we're back to taking this moment for someone or something, rather than just visible object or whatever is appearing. This is why talking more about seeing, visible object and other dhammas can condition sati now. As we read in the Atth. and Vism (XIV, 141), sati has 'the characteristic of not wobbling' and the function 'not to forget'. '...like a pillar because it is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on.' note 64: "'Apilaapana' ('not wobbling') is the steadying of an object, the remembering and not forgetting it, keeping it as immovable as a stone instead of letting it go bobbing about like a pumpkin in water'(Pm 487). (Nina wrote a good elaboration on this section of the Vism and Tiika before, I recall). ***** Metta, Sarah ======= #67349 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:50 pm Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation philofillet Hi all I thought it would be fun to dig up some old posts of mine and see just how wrong I was at the time. Correction of views is one of the deeds of merit, if I recall correctly. So I went back to January 2005. > ph05 (to jon) I remember a post in which you reminded me that concepts in > themselves are nothing to be concerned about. They are essential to > get around in life. And no doubt that thinking the absence or > reduction of conceptual thinking necessarily implies the presence of > more awareness is a mistake. I can see that now. Awareness, if and > when it arises, arises due to conditions. Thinking otherwise is an > easy mistake to make. ph07: Yes, everything there is rises due to conditions, phil'05, that's true. But thankfully, conditions can become very consistent and reliable. This is the only way the first baby steps toward liberation can be taken. And you should take note that the Buddha *never* warned (as far as I know - perhaps someone will point it out where he did) about the danger of having too much mindfulness. I have nbever seen any sutta or heard any teaching other than Acharn SUjin and her students warn about attachment involved in mindfullness. The Buddha taught that energy, concentration, wisdom and faith, the other four spiritual faculties, can be excessive at times and need to be balanced (and he *did* teach to do so, explicitly, you were misled into thinking that he didn't.) YOu've been reading suttas in Samyutta Nikaya 35, I know, so you know about the suttas in which he warned about the "calamity" that ensues when the senses are not guarded. So how could you fail to see the danger of having a relaxed attitude toward the danger of conceptual thinking that runs free where it goes? Wake up, Bud. Don't become uptight about it, no one need know but you, but at any moment in which you are not mindful of where your thoughts are running, you are inviting calamity. It doesn't seem cool to talk about unremitting mindfulness. People who talk about "detachment from the beginning" (you will come to see that is a dangerous teaching) will see you as a person who is panicky, uptight, fearful, greedy, deluded. So be it. You will come to hear the Buddha's teaching in a much clearer way, and stop ignorning how often expressions like "unremitting" and "in all watches of the day and all watches of the night" appear when referring to awareness. Awareness that arises now and then when conditions are right for it is not the awareness that the Buddha taught. The Buddha's last words were to be heedful, appamada. Is appamada something that arises now and then when the conditions are right for it? If that's what you think, you're leaving yourself open to disaster. > > jon Any idea > > that there is more awareness when such and such is done (i.e., > > reading/not reading the list, following/not following a particular > > routine) is likely to lead us into a wrong practice of some kind as > we seek to 'maximise' the chances of having more awareness. > > ph '05 Yes, that " seek to maximize the chances of having more awareness" > sounds like something that has gone on in my head a lot. I think this > phrase will be one of those that sticks with me as a helpful reminder > of what to be aware of. Thanks! ph 07: Dude, you're thanking him for encouraging you to ignore the Buddha's parting message! You're thanking him for encouraging you to allow the mind to be soiled in the way it is soiled in all those SN 35 suttas when the bhikkhu fails to be mindful about guarding the sense doors. Whatever were you thinking? Don't feel bad. It was a fruitful learning experience. And I guess studying those suttas as you did eventually led to becoming unable to continue to rationalize ignoring what they explicitly teach. (Now I am no longer to play the "the suttas were given to wise people so people in this day and age cannot understand them" game - you were quite good at that form of dodging clear teachings of the Buddha in order to maintain faith in your teacher.) Now I know that daily meditation does wonders for increasing mindfulness in daily life. I don't know why this is, but there's no doubt about it. Perhaps the concentrated attention to the meditation object that goes on during morning meditation conditions more attention during the day that follows. I don't know what it is. But no doubt whatsoever that it happens, and it is a cause for joy to know that the door to calamity is closed more often as a result of following the instructions provided in general terms by the Buddha and more specific terms by modern teachers who have followed his Way. Metta, Phil p.s I don't mean this as a passive aggressive attack on Acharn Sujin or her students. It is a fair exercise for me to work the bugs out. Feel free to comment if you'd like, anyone. But I won't add anything more. #67350 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Memory & Attentiveness sarahprocter... Dear Antony & all, Thanks for your helpful questions and comments as usual - they always help me to reflect further. --- Antony Woods wrote: > MN53:16 > "He has mindfulness: he possesses the highest mindfulness and skill. He > recalls and recollects what was done long ago and spoken long ago" .... S: As I just mentioned, the proximate cause of sati is firm remembrance/perception (thira sa~n~naa). By listening, considering and reflecting over and over again 'he recalls and recollects' (saritaa anussaritaa), so that there can be such firm remembrance of the dhamma which can condition sati to be aware of dhammas at the present moment, instead of being lost in the world of things and people as usual. (This of course also relates to your question about wrong views arising in daily life too). This is why hearing and considering dhamma are given such weight in the texts. Two paragraphs earlier in the text (Sekkha Sutta), it says: "He has learned much, remembers what he has learned, and consolidates what he has learned. Such teachings as are good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, with the right meaning and phrasing, and affirm a holy life that is utterly perfect and pure - such teachings as these he has learned much of, remembered, recited verbally, investigated with the mind and penetrated well by view." Of course, it's not referring to book knowledge or memorization as we know it, but to understanding and being aware of a nama or rupa now. So there has to be this kind of remembrance over and over again until it's really been absorbed and we're not forgetful of present dhammas, at least in theory. Then sati can be aware, conditioned by such firm understanding. This is why, I believe, we have to consider, discuss and study on and on until it really is firm and until we're not forgetful that now it's just sound or visible object or another dhamma appearing - not an ambulance siren, a computer or other 'thing'. Discussing and considering more about these dhammas can condition sati without a special effort or concentration. So back to the text. I read it as referring to how previous wholesome deeds and states and reflection on these is the condition for mindfulness now. A long time ago, we discussed these lines. See the following which include some of Nina's notes from the commentary to these lines: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16113 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16190 The commentary clarifies that words said long ago (caribhaasita.mpi) refer to words someone has spoken or others have spoken long ago. Also see Nina's further explanatory detail on the section in Vism on sati which I referred to in my other note: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/42882 .... > ++++ > Antony: I thought that, when the mind was lost in bad memories, that > those memories were still the truth. > > Another incentive to be mindful. .... S: I thought the BB note you included (below) was somewhat misleading. As for when the mind is lost in bad (or even good) memories, it's sanna vipallasa - perversion of sanna, indicative of a lack of sati. The memories may be 'true' conventionally, but dwelling on them has nothing to do with the development of the path. Of course, even when so dwelling, there can be awareness of the thinking and attachment/aversion for what they are. [Recollection of manifold past lives and so on by the Buddha and great disciples (see Vism X111) is another matter entirely]. Any further comments? (btw, Have you tried listening to any of the discussions (www.dhammastudygroup.org) - I think you'd find them interesting/helpful.) Metta, Sarah ======== --- Antony Woods wrote: > Bhikkhu Bodhi notes: "Here the text explains sati mindfulness by > reference to its original meaning of memory. The relationship between > the two senses of sati – memory and attentiveness – may be formulated > thus: keen attentiveness to the present forms the basis for an accurate > memory of the past." #67351 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Han's post, and Kh Sujin's award. nilovg Dear Han and all, I am just back and not quite ready with all the cores in the house, my house. You wrote a lovely post, very useful for Lodewijk. We were so delighted meeting you. I like the Dhammapada verse. I could not read all the post, and in case some people do not know yet, on March 7, Kh. Sujin will on the occasion of U.N. Women's day, receive an award because of being one of the most outstanding women in Buddhism. We all were delighted with this news. She receives this award together with three other Asian leading woman. The letter: "You have been chosen by an international committee of scholars and Buddhist clergy as an Outstanding Woman in Buddhism. You will be honored at an awards ceremony in recognition of the United Nations International Women’s Day. Your presence as a positive role model will serve as an inspiration to countless women in South and Southeast Asia and the rest of the world." Warmest regards, Nina. Op 18-jan-2007, om 6:28 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: >> >> “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 deta #67352 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi KenH, Thanks for your post. > > While we're on the subject, I might add that true progress in the > course of one lifetime is a scarcely observable thing. We might change > our habits for the better, but our underlying tendencies have been > built up over countless aeons. Jon made a point along these lines a long time ago which has stuck in my mind. He said something like that not all seeming progress has anythng to do with path, because there is a natural mellowing with age, which has nothing to do with acquiring wisdom or insight. As an example of this (mine, not Jon's) you could look at prison populations. There is an overrepresentation of younger men, and very few old men. This is not because old men are wiser, they are just less driven to risky behaviours. > > Well, the goal is enlightenment, but as we have both been saying, > there is no "my goal" in Abhidhamma. > If you have no problems in answering, I wouldn't mind reading what enlightenment means to you. > Ultimately, there is only the present moment. If there is an ultimate > goal it must be to understand the namas and rupas that are arising > now. And those dhammas are so fleeting - they have been and gone > before "we" can do anything about them. > I think you just answered that question. Thanks. Kind Regards Herman #67353 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Roots ken_aitch Hi Herman, --------------- <. . .> H: > If you have no problems in answering, I wouldn't mind reading what enlightenment means to you. > Ultimately, there is only the present moment. If there is an ultimate > goal it must be to understand the namas and rupas that are arising > now. And those dhammas are so fleeting - they have been and gone > before "we" can do anything about them. > I think you just answered that question. Thanks. ----------------- My pleasure. I don't expect much agreement outside of DSG, and even here most people reject that way of seeing reality - sometimes vehemently. But logically, it is flawless, isn't it? Ken H #67354 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:30 am Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation rjkjp1 In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > I thought it would be fun to dig up some old posts of mine and > see just how wrong I was at the time. ____________________ Dear Phil And who knows when our ideas may alter again. 'My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.' Ashleigh Brilliant ________________. > > So I went back to January 2005. . I > have nbever seen any sutta or heard any teaching other than Acharn > SUjin and her students warn about attachment involved in > mindfullness. ______________ There is no attachment during actual moments of mindfulness,(assuming it is genuine sati). However, I think it is standard Dhamma that mindfulness can be an object for attachment. In the Patthana (Narada translation PTS Conditional relations) p13 First paragraph of the Question chapter ""25. Faultless section ii)Dependent on faultless state, may there arise faulty state by root condition?"" What is the answer? p.159 Faultless triplet ii. "Faultless state is related to faulty state by strong dependence condition. " It gives exampes "..after having offered the offering, having undertaken the precept, having fulfilled the duty of observance (one)esteems, enjoys and delights in the faultless acts forrmely well done. Taking it as estimable obect arises LUST, arises wrong views.." Robert #67355 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] existence precedes essence (abhidhammicly) egberdina Hi Larry, On 22/01/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Thanks for your reply. One thing I couldn't really get my head into is > the sense of nausea. This seems to be slightly different from dukkha, > which seems to me is cleansing in a way, while nausea seems like > resentment. But maybe I've got it wrong. > I'm not sure if I have this right, but the not getting what you want, and the getting what you don't want, is that a description of dukkha or something else? If it is a description of dukkha, then I see resentment in all dukkha. If not getting what you want, and getting what you don't want is not a problem, then it wouldn't be dukkha. In the case of realising the absurdity (as in lacking explanation or sufficient cause) of being in whatever situation one finds oneself, for someone who expects their life to be meaningful by some absolute standard, this realisation would certainly be undigestible (hence the nausea :-)) > Another interesting point you brought up: > > H: "What is observed in BN is that no-one acts against their fundamental > project, all actions are "good" in terms of it." > > L: I think this means that everyone always thinks they are choosing > good. Not only that, everyone always thinks their choices are exemplary, > regardless of what they may say. But what about guilt and remorse? Good question. Allow me to ruminate some more on that. > Perhaps that only applies to the past. But they are present choices. Yes, and for the benefit of others, as all emotions are. > Good ones ;0) > > Larry > Kind Regards Herman #67356 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi KenH, On 23/01/07, ken_aitch wrote: > Hi Herman, > > > --------------- > <. . .> > H: > If you have no problems in answering, I wouldn't mind reading > what enlightenment means to you. > > > > Ultimately, there is only the present moment. If there is an ultimate > > goal it must be to understand the namas and rupas that are arising > > now. And those dhammas are so fleeting - they have been and gone > > before "we" can do anything about them. > > > > I think you just answered that question. Thanks. > ----------------- > > My pleasure. I don't expect much agreement outside of DSG, and even > here most people reject that way of seeing reality - sometimes > vehemently. But logically, it is flawless, isn't it? > The present moment, as a reality, is not so much a matter of logic. Ontologic, perhaps, but not logic. But that may be only a matter of words. The reality of a present moment, or any other moment, can only be established by experience. And frankly, the present moment has always escaped me, so I cannot regard it as anything other than an inference. The past is there, rock solid and unalterable, and expectation is there, and movement from past to expected future, but alas, there is no present moment. On the matter of there only being namas and rupas, that would translate to all events being members of one category or another. And that would in itself be a denial of the proposition, because if the proposition were true , then there would also be, besides namas and rupas, categories. How would you react to my counter proposition, that all events are unique, and that it is not a characteristic of any event that it is a member of a class/group/catagory? Kind Regards Herman #67357 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:01 am Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation philofillet Hi Robert (and Jon and ps to nina) > And who knows when our ideas may alter again. > > 'My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.' > Ashleigh Brilliant You're right. I'm probably just as wrong now as I was 2 years ago. Developing understanding takes a long, long time. Many lifetimes. No, that's not true. I'm not as wrong as I was two years ago, but I am still wrong. > > > > So I went back to January 2005. > . I > > have nbever seen any sutta or heard any teaching other than Acharn > > SUjin and her students warn about attachment involved in > > mindfullness. > ______________ > > There is no attachment during actual moments of mindfulness, (assuming > it is genuine sati). However, I think it is standard Dhamma that > mindfulness can be an object for attachment. OK, I will stay open to this. I must admit I am paying less attention to Abhidhamma these days and am studying Anguttara Nikaya, so am out of balance a bit. I will stay open, hopefully. But for now it's best for me not to worry about whether there is attachment involved in sati. There will perhaps come a time when I can develop a more refined understanding. Time will tell. I think that was the last broadside attack I will write for awhile. They are fun to write and probably entertaining to read and not taken seriously by students of Acharn Sujijn, hopefully. But still something to grow out of. Actually it was triggered by Jon's rather ridiculous question to Herman about meditation. He is pretending that he doesn't know what meditation is for some doctrinary reason, no doubt inspired by being asked "what is meditation?" by Acharn Sujin. It's very fair and possibly wise to decide that meditation doesn't suit one, and possibly doesn't suit modern laypeople, but to pretend that one doesn't know what it is is a bit naughty, I think. Cripes, Visudimaggha (sp?) is an incredibly detailed meditation manual. Has Jon only read the chapters that tie in nicely? OK, that was like a little after-dribble of dosa rooted bitchery. I will cease and desist now and become like my current Dhamma- discussion hero....HAN TUN! :) Metta, Phil p.s welcome back Nina #67358 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Han's post, and Kh Sujin's award. philofillet HI Nina and all >and in case some people do not know > yet, on March 7, Kh. Sujin will on the occasion of U.N. Women's day, > receive an award because of being one of the most outstanding women > in Buddhism. Wow, this is wonderful news. Congratulations to her. Metta, Phil #67359 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation egberdina Hi Larry, On 22/01/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman and all, > > > L: I agree something funny (odd) is going on, what exactly I'm not sure. > But I think you have to look at mindfulness and see if there is a > problem. > > On one level mindfulness is a choice so there is the drama about making > a choice which becomes one's identity that is subject to attack so you > have to explain and defend it, but mindfulness itself, on a more basic > level, is really just a consciousness that is different from its object, > having practically no qualities at all. In mindfulness of a pain, for > example, the pain is painful but the consciousness of it isn't. On an > even more basic level this is the nature of all consciousnesses, the > medium of experience. I could be wrong, but it almost sounds like you are equating all consciousness with mindfulness? Perhaps I am off on a non-Buddhist tangent, but for me mindfulness includes an awareness of the voluntary nature of the act of attending to whatever is being attended to. As opposed to what I would call non-mindfulness, where one is on auto-pilot, as a bunch of unconsidered reactivity, much like a conditoned response a la Pavlov and his canines :-). > > Whether you buy this or not I think we have to look at the experience of > mindfulness and see what exactly is unsatisfactory and why it is > avoided. > I'm up for it. I'm happy for you to lead the way, if you wish. Kind Regards Herman. #67360 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation egberdina Hi Phil, On 22/01/07, Phil wrote: > > Hi Herman > > Welcome back. > > As Larry said, this was a very good question. Thank you on both counts. > > I guess my answer would be that if you "found what the Buddha says > about the nature of reality is exactly true" there would by > necessity also be an understanding of why this knowledge is > liberating. There would be a joyful sense of liberation, or a taste > of that liberation. Does that translate into the following? The Third Noble Truth is true. Therefore, if there is no liberation from dukkha, you're doing something wrong. I don't have a problem with the suggestion, it is just that reasoning like that stands or falls on the validity of the initial premise. I would be very happy indeed if the Third Noble Truth was true, but it isn't, for me, and I would certainly like to hear from anyone for who it is true. I may well have completely misread those bits of the Canon that I have read, but I have never understood it to be the case that a realisation of the Buddha's teachings will result in, or is for the purpose of having a blissful existence. It seems to me rather the opposite, that the pursuit of existence, happy or otherwise, is at least one major cause of suffering. > > So I would guess that you are being a little overconfident about > having "found what the Buddha says about the nature of reality is > exactly true." I did restrict myself to anicca, and anatta and dukkha in what I said. > > One thing I can say for sure is that taking a break from > meditation for 2 or 3 years was the best thing I ever did, because > now that I am back at it I have a much better idea of what it is and > what it isn't - no longer doing it just because that's what > Buddhists do, as I did when I started. Taking a break from dsg is pretty amazing too. The changes that have occured are breathtaking. Now I have a better > understanding of why the Buddha urged people to do it with such > fervour. ("Meditate, or you will regret it later.") So I feel > confident that a break from meditation will refresh your experience > if you get back at it. But I guess you're not so keen on Buddhist > liberation, which is fine. I see nothing anywhere that suggests that a life without craving is even remotely possible. So, the end of craving must coincide with the end of existence. To be honest, I don't see any Buddhists keen on being liberated from craving, and all that that implies. I enjoyed what you wrote about > existentialism. Your posts are always interesting. > Thanks Phil, I hope to have many a fine discussion with you. And, unashamedly, that requires a future you and me. Bring them on, I say, and let them not cease to be anytime soon :-). Kind Regards Herman #67361 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:48 am Subject: What is "genuine sati ?" philofillet Hi Robert and all (ps to Herman) Robert, in the last post you wrote to me you wrote "as long as it is genuine sati" This is something I'm confused about. As you know, I really liked that thing the Ven. Dhammadaro said - "One moment of sati in a lifetime - wealthy man" or words to that effect. I remember hearing Sukin in a talk say he thought he had never had a moment of sati and I would think "me neither." When listening to Burmese Sayadaws, I have heard them say "mindfulness of the characteristics of realities" so I know that this teaching is not unique to Acharn Sujin. On the other hand, Ajahn Chah said that at every moment there is no sati, we are crazy people. (Or some word like that -and I don't think he meant crazy people in the metaphorical sense that the aggregates are thieves, deceitful servants, diseases etc - he meant it more literally, I think.) If sati only occured once in a fortunate man's liftime, it seems to me, that man would be lost in evil deeds a lot of the time and I don't think the Buddha wanted to teach us in a way that would leave us lost in evil deeds. I think there is sati when I remember to sit up straight and be attentive to what my students are saying, I think there was sati when I was washing a potato a short time ago and I paused to reflect on a sutta that I like, a sutta that I have reflected on several dozen times today alone. I think there was sati when I remembered to put my key in a certain place so there wouldn't trouble when rushing to find it. I think there is sati hundreds and thousands of times a day. So I don't understand this "genuine sati" that is so rarefied. It sounds more like one of the penetrative insight knowledges to me. Thanks in advance if you could shed some light on this for me. Metta, Phil p.s Herman, thanks for your post. I will be away until my next days off, will respond then. #67362 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Roots ken_aitch Hi Herman, ------------- <. . .> KH: > > Ultimately, there is only the present moment. If there is an ultimate > > goal it must be to understand the namas and rupas that are arising > > now. And those dhammas are so fleeting - they have been and gone > > before "we" can do anything about them. > > > >I don't expect much agreement outside of DSG, and even > here most people reject that way of seeing reality - sometimes > vehemently. But logically, it is flawless, isn't it? H: > The present moment, as a reality, is not so much a matter of logic. Ontologic, perhaps, but not logic. But that may be only a matter of words. ------------------------------ What did I tell you? It is actually hard (even at DSG ) to get agreement on the undeniable (AKA the bleeding obvious)! :-) The past has gone, and the future has never existed. What does that leave? My point is that this truth - extraordinarily simple though it may be - is too great for people to bear. In the case the Dhamma, it robs people of their dreams of being a great sage. There can be no sage in the conventional sense. There can only be momentary mental and physical phenomena, and who wants that? ----------------------------------------- H: > The reality of a present moment, or any other moment, can only be established by experience. And frankly, the present moment has always escaped me, so I cannot regard it as anything other than an inference. The past is there, rock solid and unalterable, and expectation is there, and movement from past to expected future, but alas, there is no present moment. On the matter of there only being namas and rupas, that would translate to all events being members of one category or another. And that would in itself be a denial of the proposition, because if the proposition were true , then there would also be, besides namas and rupas, categories. How would you react to my counter proposition, that all events are unique, and that it is not a characteristic of any event that it is a member of a class/group/catagory? ------------------------------------------ You're not going to like my reaction. It is the same as before: are you learning any Abhidhamma? :-) In terms of the Abhidhamma (as I understand it) the proposition "all events are unique" is true in so far as no two moments could ever be identical. The conditions leading up to the present moment include all the moments that led up to it. So, logically (there I go again!) no two moments can be conditioned in precisely the same way. On the other hand, "all events are unique" is false if it means that, according to the Dhamma, individual realities (namas and rupas) cannot be identified and categorised. Do you agree or disagree? (Give your answer any way you like, of course, but I would prefer it in terms of the Dhamma as you see it.) Ken H #67363 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation buddhatrue Hi Jon and Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I've not had a clear answer from anyone to date. Jon, you must be bloody joking!! Herman, if you attempt to answer this question, it will be a complete waste of your time. Metta, James #67364 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Roots egberdina Hi KenH, > >I don't expect much agreement outside of DSG, and even > > here most people reject that way of seeing reality - sometimes > > vehemently. But logically, it is flawless, isn't it? > > > H: > The present moment, as a reality, is not so much a matter of > logic. Ontologic, perhaps, but not logic. But that may be only a > matter of words. > ------------------------------ > > What did I tell you? It is actually hard (even at DSG ) to get > agreement on the undeniable (AKA the bleeding obvious)! :-) > > The past has gone, and the future has never existed. What does that leave? > > My point is that this truth - extraordinarily simple though it may be > - is too great for people to bear. My point was that the present moment isn't so much a truth as an inference. :-) Riddle me this, Batman, if there only is a present moment, what is it for something to be past? What distinguishes past from present if there is only present? In the case the Dhamma, it robs > people of their dreams of being a great sage. There can be no sage in > the conventional sense. There can only be momentary mental and > physical phenomena, and who wants that? > I accept fully what you are saying about the drivers of consciousness (which for discussion purposes is identical with people). Consciousness, as the filling of a lack of being this or that, is perpetually moving from the past to the future, it is not conceivable in a present. Craving is not possible without a future. > ----------------------------------------- > H: > The reality of a present moment, or any other moment, can only be > established by experience. And frankly, the present moment has always > escaped me, so I cannot regard it as anything other than an inference. > The past is there, rock solid and unalterable, and expectation is > there, and movement from past to expected future, but alas, there is > no present moment. > > On the matter of there only being namas and rupas, that would > translate to all events being members of one category or another. And > that would in itself be a denial of the proposition, because if the > proposition were true , then there would also be, besides namas and > rupas, categories. > > How would you react to my counter proposition, that all events are > unique, and that it is not a characteristic of any event that it is a > member of a class/group/catagory? > ------------------------------------------ > > You're not going to like my reaction. It is the same as before: are > you learning any Abhidhamma? :-) > > In terms of the Abhidhamma (as I understand it) the proposition "all > events are unique" is true in so far as no two moments could ever be > identical. The conditions leading up to the present moment include all > the moments that led up to it. Yeah, but. How can there be moments leading up to the present moment if there is only the present moment? So, logically (there I go again!) no > two moments can be conditioned in precisely the same way. > > On the other hand, "all events are unique" is false if it means that, > according to the Dhamma, individual realities (namas and rupas) cannot > be identified and categorised. An individual reality is a concept, it is a product of analytical thought, not a matter of experience. But, if it were possible for there to be an individual reality of pure, irreducible red, and that this was also known as being redness, then that means that somehow, somewhere redness coexisted with red, and therefore the experience wasn't irreducible at all. It is just like you imply above, but probably didn't want to, the entire history of seeing red is present in the supposed individual reality that is supposedly occuring in a present moment only. For this to be the case, the present must incorporate all pasts. > > Do you agree or disagree? (Give your answer any way you like, of > course, but I would prefer it in terms of the Dhamma as you see it.) > > Ken H > I think the upshot of the above is that, no, I can't agree :-) But I do like disagreeing with you :-) And I certainly intend to continue to consider Abhidhamma and it's implications. Cheers Herman #67365 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation jwromeijn Hallo James, Jon, Herman The answer is already given: "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 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Jon and Herman, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > > I've not had a clear answer from anyone to date. > > Jon, you must be bloody joking!! > > Herman, if you attempt to answer this question, it will be a complete > waste of your time. > > Metta, > James > #67366 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:57 am Subject: Re: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal The End jwromeijn Hallo all, interested in the path One of the sources I used in 67224, 67232 and 67333 was: A few good men The Bodhisattva path accoording 'The inquiry of Ugra' by Jan Nattier (University of Hawai Press, 2003) 'The inquiry of Ugra' is a text composed after the Tipitaka was completed but before the first Mahayana Sutta appeared. It suggests that in monasteries there were monks who 'did' the arahant-path and a few monks who 'did' the arahant-path. Of special interest however is that in 'The inquiry of Ugra' it's also described how a layman could go this path; that was not easy because the lay bodhisattva should be detached from people and things. My short series of messages about the bodhisattva-path, related to the path of the arahant is finished now. My impression is that nearly all DSG-participants only think about the arahant-path, or even not that far, most will think this is not possible for a wordling, for a layperson and that it's not possible at all in this degenerated time as Buddhaghosa has fantasized. I have been looking for a path in which compassion does play a central role and have created my bodhisattva path. Of course I have just started it. There is much more to say about this topic; I hope so because it's the only one I want to discuss about now, beginning with the Bhikkhu Bodhi essay. Metta Joop #67372 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation nilovg Hi Phil, Thanks. I am trying to read up. I shall think about genuine sati. Of course many discussions in Bgk. Nina. Op 23-jan-2007, om 12:01 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > p.s welcome back Nina #67373 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na nilovg Dear Scott, Since I was away I do not know whether you had further discussions on this subject? I am interested to discuss this subject. But I need some time. Nina. > Op 5-jan-2007, om 22:13 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > > > What exactly is naama? What exactly is ruupa? Ruupa doesn't > > experience anything. Naama is experience. Or something. Anyone want > > to discuss this? #67374 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:53 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 5, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Visuddhimagga that jhåna can be a base for the development of vipassanå. However, we should stress again and again that this can only be so when someone has the five masteries (vasís, Vis. XXIII, 227): mastery of adverting and of entering jhåna at any time, at any place, resolving on its duration, emerging at any time, at any place and reviewing the jhåna-factors, at any time, at any place. Only then the jhånacitta can arise so naturally, that it is a reality of one's life and can thus be object of awareness. It can be a proximate cause or a base for insight. But even those who have such skill cannot omit being aware of paramattha dhammas, nåmas and rúpas appearing one at a time. The three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattå of nåmas and rúpas have to be realized, no matter one develops jhåna or not. We often read in the scriptures about people who developed jhåna and insight and then attained arahatship. Also before the Buddha's enlightenment people developed jhåna. The attainment of jhåna is not specifically Buddhist, but the Buddha taught that one should not take jhånacitta for self. Therefore for those who could attain jhåna the jhånacitta should be object of satipaììhåna. The Buddha spoke about jhåna because he included everything in his teaching, for completeness, for the beautifying of the teaching. He took account of all kinds of temperament. I have noticed that people are inclined to stress concentration in the practice of vipassanå, also when they do not intend to develop jhåna first. They think that there must be a purified concentration by suppressing the hindrances first and that this would lead to uninterrupted mindfulness. However, defilements should be known as they are, as not self, that is the only way leading to their eradication. Seeing should be known as only a nåma, and also akusala citta which is likely to follow seeing immediately should be known as a kind of nåma. Is there not time and again like or dislike of the different objects appearing through the six doors? Should these not be known as they are? We should not stay ignorant of the akusala arising on account of the objects appearing through the six doors. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(V, Mahåvagga, Kindred Sayings on the Way, Ch VIII, par. 7, Hindrances): Monks, there are these five hindrances. What five? The hindrance of sensual desire, the hindrance of malevolence, the hindrance of sloth and torpor, the hindrance of restlessness and worry and the hindrance of doubt and wavering. These are the five hindrances. It is for the full comprehension, realization, wearing down and abandoning of these five hindrances that the ariyan eightfold Path must be cultivated. ****** Nina. #67375 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:58 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 22, no. 6. Aruupajhaana. nilovg Dear friends, This section is on the aruupajhaanacittas, the first one of which is the ``Sphere of Boundless Space''. -------------- As regards the ``Sphere of Boundless Space'', the Visuddhimagga (X, 8) explains about the ``removing'' of the kasina: And when the kasina is being removed, it does not roll up or roll away. It is simply that it is called ``removed'' on account of his non-attention to it, his attention being given to ``space, space''. This is conceptualized as the mere space left by the removal of the kasina (materiality)... In this way he can surmount the materiality of the kasina and attain the first arúpa-jhåna, the ``Sphere of Boundless Space''. There are three more stages of arúpa-jhåna, and each one of these is more subtle and more peaceful than the preceding one. The second stage of arúpa-jhåna is: the ``Sphere of Boundless Consciousness'' (viññå.nañcåyatana). The meditation subject of this stage of arúpa-jhåna is the consciousness which is the first arúpa- jhånacitta. This citta had as its object ``Boundless Space''. The person who wants to attain the second stage of arúpa-jhåna should first achieve ``mastery'' in the ``Sphere of Boundless Space''; he should see the disadvantages of this stage and end his attachment to it. We read in the Visuddhimagga (X, 25): ... So having ended his attachment to that, he should give his attention to the base consisting of boundless consciousness as peaceful, adverting again and again as ``Consciousness, consciousness'', to the consciousness that occurred pervading that space (as its object)... The third stage of arúpa-jhåna is the ``Sphere of Nothingness'' (åkiñcaññåyatana). We read in the Visuddhimagga (X, 32) that the person who wants to attain this stage should give his attention to the present non-existence of the past consciousness which pervaded the ``boundless space'' and which was the object of the second stage of arúpa-jhåna, the ``Sphere of Boundless Consciousness''. We read (X, 33): Without giving (further) attention to that consciousness, he should (now) advert again and again in this way, ``There is not, there is not'', or ``Void, void'', or ``Secluded, secluded'', and give his attention to it, review it, and strike at it with thought and applied thought. Further on (X, 35) we read: ... he dwells seeing only its non-existence, in other words its departedness when this consciousness has arisen in absorption. ****** Nina. #67376 From: connie Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:11 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (2) nichiconn Hi All, S: Norman translation of this verse: "Muttaa, be freed from ties, as the moon (is freed) from the grasp of Raahu; with mind completely freed, without debt, enjoy your alms-food." ***** c: Thanks for the alternate translation(s), Sarah. Pruitt's intro states that he relied quite heavily on Norman for the verse portions and it's interesting to see the minor differences. If we come upon any that are radically different, I'll add Pruitt's as well. :::::::::: S: The footnote to the R-D transl above refers us to DN, Samannaphala Sutta, 68ff and the abandoning of the hindrances: "Abandoning worldly desires, he dwells with a mind freed from worldly desires, and his mind is purified of them. Abandoning ill-will and hatred....and by compassionate love for the welfare of all living beings, his mind is purified of ill-will and hatred.....etc" "Just as a man who had taken a loan to develop his business and whose business had prospered, might pay off his old debts, and with what was left over could support a wife, might think: 'Before this I developed my business by borrowing, but now it has prospered....', and he would rejoice and be glad about that." ***** c: more from the extended commentary: << Be freed (muccassu) from ties (yogehi) means: be freed (mucca) from the four ties beginning with sensual pleasure through attaining the paths one after the other; free your mind from these. In what way? As the moon [is freed] from the grasper Raahu (Raahu-sa"nkhaatato), be freed from all impurities. With mind completely freed (vippamuttena) means: with a mind quite freed (su.t.thu vimuttena), with the freedom that is cutting off (samuccheda-vimuttiyaa) by means of the noble path. And this is the instrumental case in the modal sense. Without debt (ana.naa), enjoy (bhu~nja) alms food (pi.n.daka.m) means: you should enjoy (bhu~njeyyaasi) the kingdom's alms food (ra.t.tha-pi.n.da.m) after you are without debt and have abandoned the debt of defilements. For he who enjoys [the use of] the requisites permitted by the Teacher without having eliminated the defilements, he indeed enjoys [them] as one in debt. As Venerable Baakula said, "Indeed, my friend, I enjoyed the kingdom's alms food for seven days as [one who was] in debt." Therefore, for one who has gone forth in the teaching, the use of [what is] given in faith is to be enjoyed after becoming free from debt by abandoning the debts beginning with the desire for sensual pleasure. Alms food is only the first [of the list] in the teachings, but the meaning is: the four requisites. Constantly instructed means: [he] often gives instruction causing the purifying of impurities by the attainment of the noble paths. She made a support of that instruction and soon attained Arahatship. >> ::::::::: S: From Dict of PPN: {snip} One day, as she meditated after her return from the alms round, the Buddha appeared before her in a ray of glory and exhorted her in a verse. Not long after she became an arahant. {snip} ***** c: '(Ray of) glory' and '(his) radiance' being a couple terms for 'mind-made body', I believe. :::::::: > Returning one > day > from her round for alms, she discharged her duties toward her seniors, > and > then going apart to rest, and seated out of sight, she began to > concentrate herself. .... S: I assume this refers to being skilled in jhanas - different accumulations to the first 'unknown' bhikkhuni. .... c: dunno... Pruit again: << she went forth at the age of twenty in the presence of Mahaa-Pajaapatii Gotamii. A meditation subject was explained to her, and she devoted herself to the gaining of insight when she was only a trainee. >> ::::::::: S: Does anyone know what 'completing her studies and promoted to full rank' means? Pataisambhidas? c: Pruitt once again: << When she completed her training, she was fully ordained, and later on, at the time of her final quenching, she also repeated that same verse again. >> Through-out the longer text, there's also the recurring refrain, usually just pe'd in: << My defilements are burnt out, {all [future] births are completely destroyed. Having severed my bonds like an elephant, I live without taints. Welcome indeed was the presence of the Best of Buddhas to me. I have attained the three true knowledges. I have done the Buddha's teaching. The four discriminations and also the eight liberations are mine. I have realized the six direct knowledges.} I have done the Buddha's teaching. >> apologies for the length of this post! c. #67377 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation egberdina Hi Jon, On 23/01/07, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Herman > > Welcome back! > Thank you. It is nice to be back. > > I've been asking others lately, so I might as well ask you, too: What > do you understanding by the term 'meditation' (or 'to meditate')? > Under meditation I would include any act that is a deliberate holding of and attending to any objects in mind. Kind Regards Herman #67378 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal The End egberdina Hi, Joop, On 23/01/07, Joop wrote: > Hallo all, interested in the path > Yes, I am very interested in the path. Well, perhaps not quite like that, but I'm interested in paths in general for sure. You have written about the arahant-path and the boddhisattva path. I read these as being choices that people have made, as in "I will be this" or "I will be that". Of course, everyone has paths, not only Buddhists. We all also have negative paths, they are the things we do not want to be, or avoid. And there are also the destinations that everyone arrives at, but nobody pursues, as in "I will be dead". But what interests me is how a Buddhist would reconcile the belief in paths they are able to choose, and beliefs in anatta which they must confess if they are to be Buddhists? My observation is that no-one acts as though they do not have the freedom to choose. Does this mean that Buddhists are insincere, or is anatta a statement of hope, like the Third Noble Truth? > There is much more to say about this topic; I hope so because it's > the only one I want to discuss about now, beginning with the Bhikkhu > Bodhi essay. > I realise now that my last question was more about anatta, and you prefer to talk about path, so please feel free to focus on path only in answering about the seeming incompatibility between path and anatta. Kind Regards Herman #67379 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) egberdina Hi Howard, The burning food was but a trigger for a ready mind to be turned > topsy-turvy, a breeze that shook the ripe fruit off the tree. > That is a very nice turn of phrase Kind Regards Herman #67380 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (2) egberdina Hi Connie and all, On 24/01/07, connie wrote: > > Hi All, > > S: Norman translation of this verse: > > "Muttaa, be freed from ties, as the moon (is freed) from the grasp of > Raahu; with mind completely freed, without debt, enjoy your alms-food." > ***** What is the meaning of the moon beign free from the grasps of Raahu? Cheers Herman #67381 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:45 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 5, no 5. matheesha333 Hi Nina, > We read in the Visuddhimagga that jhåna can be a base for the > development of vipassanå. However, we should stress again and again > that this can only be so when someone has the five masteries (vasís, > Vis. XXIII, 227): mastery of adverting and of entering jhåna at any > time, at any place, resolving on its duration, emerging at any time, > at any place and reviewing the jhåna-factors, at any time, at any > place. Only then the jhånacitta can arise so naturally, that it is a > reality of one's life and can thus be object of awareness. M: Vasi means mastery ie- adverting to the jhana when one wishes - there is intention there. Why this is a qualification for doing vipassana, when even without jhana, vipassana is possible, is not clear. with metta Matheesha #67382 From: connie Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:30 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (2) nichiconn Nice seeing you again, Herman, 2. Muttaa, be freed from ties, as the moon is freed from the grasper Raahu. With mind completely freed, without debt, enjoy your alms food. H: What is the meaning of the moon beign free from the grasps of Raahu? c: I don't know whether you'd seen #67376 when you asked, but to supplement that, here's a short quote from www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/r/rahu.htm: The seizure of the Moon by Raahu {{c: eclipsing/swallowing}} and the escape from him is often used as a simile (E.g., SN. vs. 465; J.i.183, 274; iii.364, 377; iv.330; v.453; DhA.iv.19, etc.). Raahu is one of the four "stains" (upakkilesaa) of the Sun and the Moon, preventing them from shining in all their glory (A.ii.53; Vin.ii.295; cp. J.iii.365). peace, connie #67383 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] existence precedes essence (abhidhammicly) lbidd2 Hi Herman, L: "One thing I couldn't really get my head into is the sense of nausea. This seems to be slightly different from dukkha, which seems to me is cleansing in a way, while nausea seems like resentment. But maybe I've got it wrong." H: "I'm not sure if I have this right, but the not getting what you want, and the getting what you don't want, is that a description of dukkha or something else? If it is a description of dukkha, then I see resentment in all dukkha. If not getting what you want, and getting what you don't want is not a problem, then it wouldn't be dukkha." ------------------------- L: Right, all conditioned arising is dukkha. My thought was that the realisation of dukkha is purifying in the sense of relinquishing misconceptions. Therefore resentment isn't the realisation of dukkha because there is the thought, "I'm not getting my due". Larry #67384 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "I could be wrong, but it almost sounds like you are equating all consciousness with mindfulness? Perhaps I am off on a non-Buddhist tangent, but for me mindfulness includes an awareness of the voluntary nature of the act of attending to whatever is being attended to. As opposed to what I would call non-mindfulness, where one is on auto-pilot, as a bunch of unconsidered reactivity, much like a conditioned response a la Pavlov and his canines :-)." L: Yes, I am. My only quibble is that I would say mindfulness (consciousness) is unconsidered in the sense that it couldn't care less. As a vehicle for all kinds of considerations there are problems, but they aren't consciousness's problems. They're problems' problems. This is obviously an unconventional view so feel free to chuck it into the circular filing cabinet. Larry #67385 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ====================== > That wasn't my understanding. I understood 'mind-made' to mean "made > BY mind" rather than "made OF mind". Well, I am not really an expert in this regard. I am just offering some conjecture. The mind-made body is created when consciousness is projected to a certain location and that consciousness creates the body form. As the texts state, this body form can't see, feel, hear, taste, smell, or cognize on its own because it isn't a separate living being, it is a form created by the consciousness. Jon said that this mind-made body doesn't have consciousness, and in one sense he is correct and in another sense he isn't correct. The mind-made body doesn't have a separate consciousness but that doesn't mean that no consciousness is present (like it is a statue or holographic image). People can converse with this mind-made body and it will respond. It is the projected consciousness that is aware of the surroundings, not the apparent sense organs of the mind-made body. The unfettered, concentrated mind is capable of many wondrous things. When I wrote that the mind-made body is consciousness what I meant is that it cannot exist separate from consciousness- so for all practical purposes it is consciousness. Just as the mind creates a thought- the thought isn't really the mind, yet the thought can't exist without the mind. I think the same goes for the mind-made body. And, Howard, if I am ever able to create a mind-made body, I will be sure to pop over to New York and pay you a visit! ;-)) Metta, James #67386 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation buddhatrue Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo James, Jon, Herman > > The answer is already given: > > "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) Yes Joop, this passage most clearly defines what meditation is. Now, what the practitioner does with his mind after he sits and crosses his legs, and brings mindfulness to the fore, is going to be different for different people. The Vism. describes 40 different meditation subjects and different ways to approach them. However, it is all meditation. I have to hand it to Ken H. At least he is straightforward in his opposition to meditation. He doesn't play any games about "Oh, what is meditation?" "What is the Pali word for meditation?" "We must look at the context of how the term is used…" blah, blah, blah…. All nonsense!! Ken H. says that meditation is nothing different than flopping down in an easy chair with a cold beer watching a football game, or having a good wank to a porno movie- anything to make the person feel good. And who can really argue with that? Meditation is that way for millions of practitioners. For them, meditation is simply escapist pleasure. Ken H. feels disgusted by such a hedonist display in the guise of Buddhism, and I can't blame him. It doesn't exactly thrill me either. But, of course, meditation doesn't have to be that way. Anyway, at least Ken H. doesn't pretend like he doesn't know what meditation is! That type of "I don't know what meditation is" argument against meditation is truly asinine. Metta, James #67387 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:51 pm Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > . Actually it was triggered by Jon's > rather ridiculous question to Herman about meditation. He is > pretending that he doesn't know what meditation is for some > doctrinary reason, no doubt inspired by being asked "what is > meditation?" by Acharn Sujin. _________ Dear Phil and James, I not sure why this question is considered wrong. Earlier this month Howard said he doesn't consider Buddhanusati to be meditation. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/66455 The more I think I about it, the more suspect I am of the > >"recollection of the Buddha" as a practice that can itself lead > >to awakening or as a form of meditation. It sounds an awful lot > >like a later Brahmanical influence, an importing of devotionalism. And yet James said >>I am a little lost also because Recollection of the Buddha is a form >>of meditation. From the Vism.: And of course Buddhanusati is one of the objects for samatha detailed in the Visuddhimagga. Robert #67388 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation corvus121 Hi James & Phil Your criticisms of Jon's request for a definition of "meditation" are IMO unfair. All he is doing is repeating the words of Socrates: "if you will converse with me, first define your terms." Pretty sensible, wouldn't you say?? To quote another ancient Greek, Demosthenes: "A definition is the beginning of knowledge". James has already acknowledged that: > what the practitioner does with his mind after he sits and crosses > his legs, and brings mindfulness to the fore, is going to be > different for different people. So, quite clearly, a definition is called for in relation to each person. IMO poor old Jon is being hectored on this issue, but I know that he is a big boy and can look after himself. ;-) I make the observation that many Buddhist meditation books I've seen use the terms "meditation" and "contemplation" interchangeably and I have found it hard to put a finger on exactly what is being said. I have attended meditation retreats and found "meditation teachers" to be somewhat idiosyncratic in "their" techniques. Good on Jon for putting his hand up and asking for some clarity! Not to do so would IMO be a bit ... well, asinine (if I may borrow your word, James). Best wishes Andrew #67389 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Astral Plane upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 1/23/07 9:13:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > And, Howard, if I am ever able to create a mind-made body, I will be > sure to pop over to New York and pay you a visit! ;-)) > ======================= Sounds good! (And sure saves on air fare! LOLOL!) With metta, Howard #67390 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/23/07 10:03:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Earlier this month > Howard said he doesn't consider Buddhanusati to be meditation. > ======================= I don't think I ever put it quite so baldly. I do consider it to be an efficaceous contemplation practice, and I also suspect that it could "lead into" meditative states, for example if the attention then shifts to peasure and joy rsulting from such contemplation, but the contemplation itself I consider to be simply useful thinking. With metta, Howard #67391 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:21 pm Subject: Re: What is "genuine sati ?" rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Robert and all (ps to Herman) > > > Robert, in the last post you wrote to me you wrote "as long as it > is genuine sati" This is something I'm confused about. As you know, > I really liked that thing the Ven. Dhammadaro said - "One moment of > sati in a lifetime - wealthy man" or words to that effect. I > remember hearing Sukin in a talk say he thought he had never had a > moment of sati and I would think "me neither." When listening to > Burmese Sayadaws, I have heard them say "mindfulness of the > characteristics of realities" so I know that this teaching is not > unique to Acharn Sujin. > .... __________ Dear Phil The Venerable Dhammadharo was talking about sati of the eightfold path, leading out of samsara. This type of sati, even at the very beginning, is the province only of the Buddhas and their disciples. Anguttara Nikaya Chapter XIII Suttai(124)p 165 Gradual sayings V "Monks these ten states not yet arisen, arise not save in the discipline of the Wayfarer. What ten? Right view, ..RIGHT MINDFULNESS..." Sutta (127) Ending in Restraint Monks these ten states end in restraint of lust, malice and delusion, but only in the discipline of the Wayfarer.What ten? Right view, ..RIGHT MINDFULNESS..." Sutta v(127)CONDUCIVE Monks these ten states conduce to downright revulsion, to fading, ending, calming, comprehension..to nibbana. But only in the disciplne of the Wayfarer. What ten? Right view, ..RIGHT MINDFULNESS..." There is also sati when we give gifts, pay respect to monks etc. But the sati in the suttas above and what ven. Dhammadharo meant is that associated with panna that knows, correctly, to some degree, the charateristic of an element. The word mindfulness may make people think that when they are very aware of what they are doing that this is sati. However it is usually only sanna. Sati of the path is always wearing away the idea of self and control, it is different from what we usually mean by 'being aware'. Robert #67392 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:59 pm Subject: Re: Dreaming and Seeming [Re: [dsg] Meditation (again)] sarahprocter... Hi Howard, (& Phil), --- upasaka@... wrote: > > S: We constantly crave after and pursue these dhammas, when really > they > > are just like ephemeral dream-like bubbles etc. > > > > I heard a reminder today that without sa~n~naa (perception), nothing > would > > seem important at all. <...> ..... > Howard: > A good point about sa~n~na. I expect, though, that without > attachment > to sa~n~na, and without its operation beset by avijja, any problems > associated > with it would disappear. .... S: Yes, it is the sanna arising with attachment and ignorance (and aversion) that is the problem - i.e the akusala sanna which marks, remembers and finds important what is not important. .... >We needn't "fear" that cognitive operation, but > only > its ill functioning and any attachment to it. .... S: Only the 'perversion' and underlying attachment which accompanies it. Sanna has its own khandha because of its great importance in marking and remembering all the time what has been experienced, felt, found important and so on. ... > As regards the recording, I did listen to one or two from > February. > Please tell me again, which exact date and which number wree you > particularly > suggesting I listen to. ... S: I don't have the dates to hand (I'm a bit tied up as have a patient (Jon) just home after v.minor surgery) - but remember it was either the very last or last but one track that Betty reads out from one of your posts (2nd week, Feb 2006). Each track is only 20mins, so if you listen to an extra one, no harm:-). The other set I think you'd enjoy/find interesting (probably more so) are the controversial tracks with Vince about mid-way through the 2nd week. Perhaps if KenH or Connie or Scott remember where this starts, they can let you/us know. I'll look forward to your comments. I personally think that any comments on dhamma made by K.Sujin or anyone else are 'fair-game' in terms of discussion. This is after all a 'dhamma study group' and it's dhamma, not the person we're discussing. So Phil, I personally don't have any issue with your raising of points/disagreements with what she or anyone else says here. We're all just sharing our understandings and reflections to date. Metta, Sarah =========== #67393 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Identifying Wrong Views? sarahprocter... Hi Antony & all, --- Antony Woods wrote: > Majjhima 131: > "There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person... > sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or > self as in form. > > "He/she sees feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or > feeling as in self, or self as in feeling. > > "He/she sees perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or > perception as in self, or self as in perception. > > "He/she sees thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing > thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as > in thought-fabrications. > > "He/she sees consciousness as self, or self as possessing > consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in > consciousness." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.131.than.html > +++ > Antony: Wrong views are rarely articulated. People don't go around > saying "I see thought-fabrications as in self". .... S: let's be clear that here 'thought-fabrications' or sankhara khandha refers to the 50 cetasikas apart from vedana and sanna (feeling and perception). Don't we take any mindfulness or wisdom for being mine or in me? Don't we take the worries and anxieties, the hopes and regrets, the likes and dislikes for mine in some way or other? I think it's very common to do so, but of course, when we say 'I was/am so miserable/happy', only right understanding can know at the time whether there is any wrong view of self or not. .... > How do you identify which wrong views you have? Does one have the > same wrong views over time or do they change from moment-to-moment? > How many wrong views can you have at the same time? .... S: As Jon said, it's not a question of trying to 'work it out', but rather when wrong view arises, it can be known. If it didn't arise, it could never be known or eradicated, perhaps like in small children or animals. There can only be one wrong view at a time, but of course, depending on conditions, many different wrong views can arise. Like now, is there a taking what is seen or heard for being something in reality, such as a computer or car? Metta, Sarah ======== #67394 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal The End jwromeijn Hallo Herman Your question forced me to reflect on my position. Thanks. It's about path, compassion and anatta. "Path" is a general term for "spiritual development", more specific is it in "The Noble Eightfold Path" My central topic was not "path" but "compassion" You remember a week or so ago the DSG-dicussion about laughing and crying, one of the aspect was that arahants don't laugh (they can smile) or cry. The arguments for that statement braught me to the conclusion: arahants don't have compassion. But the Buddha did have compassion ! Many on DSG, many Theravadins do have being an arahant as (far) ideal; but I have the Buddha as ideal. "Anatta" can in my opinion only be understood in relation to anicca and dukkha; for some reason many on DSG don'nt mention the other two. "Anatta" primary means: having no (transmigrating) soul, no self, no core. "Anatta" doesn't mean: be passive, don't want anything. "Anatta" and "compassion" can be combined very good; an aspect of "anatta" is: being altruistic, UNSELFISH. I hope this does help you on your path. Metta Joop #67395 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] whatever jwromeijn Sarah, Do you know that you have not yet responded on this message? Joop #67396 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience sarahprocter... Hi Larry, Apologies for the delay on this one: --- LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Could you clarify? .... > S: "Rupa is never an experience, it is the dhamma which is only ever > experienced." > > L: "...can we agree that rupa is not an experience? ...." > > S: "Simply put, the visible object has to impinge on the eye-base > (sensitive matter)and eye-consciousness (resulting from kamma) has to > arise also immediately, otherwise visible object data cannot appear and > there is no 'visual experience'. <...> > L: I'm more interested in what experience is in itself. If it is a three > part combination then experience is asabhava (no self nature). This is > what the madhyamikas say. Is that your view? ... S: I think that 'experience' like 'meditation' means different things to different folks. My view is that there is a citta, say seeing consciousness, which experiences an object (in this case visible object)and that both these dhammas have particular characteristics (sabhava or lakkhana). In conventional language, I may refer to an experience which is some kind of concept, but I think that when discussing dhamma, we need to be very precise. I also am very confident that namas and rupas have to be directly and precisely known and I don't see the madhyamika theory as helping in this regard. .... >If so, then experience must > be non-arising because whatever is asabhava does not arise. .... S: Exactly and this is clearly nonsense because seeing consciousness and visible object both arise and fall away, as does eye-base and all other conditioned dhammas. .... > A simpler view might be that experience is only consciousness and > consciousness is a reflection of the object. As a reflection an object > of consciousness is an experience. ... S: Sorry, this makes no sense to me and I think that such an idea takes us away from directly knowing realities. .... >Objects aren't known directly in the > sense of _being_ experience. And sense organs (the six doors) are only > known inferentially. Inference is valid insight knowledge if it is based > on experience and faultless reason, imo. .... S: Sense objects such as visible object can definitely be known directly for what they are - just that which is seen etc. Sense-bases, such as eye-sense can only be known through the mind-door with developed wisdom. I think we can make very valid inferences about them, but I wouldn't call this insight knowledge, but correct theoretical knowledge. .... > > One experience (consciousness) arises after another due to conditioning. > Visible data is one experience; feeling is one experience; desire is one > experience; wisdom (panna) is one experience. All these experiences are > consciousnesses. .... S: Again, you are conflating or blending namas and rupas together and calling them all kinds of experience or consciousness. In this way I am sure the understanding of 'nama' and 'rupa' can never be known. As we know, without the clear and precise understanding of namas and rupas and the clear distinction between them being apparent, higher insights can never be obtained. I think that in the same way. I understand where you're coming from here, but my approach or rather the way I read the teachings is very different. If we leave aside words like 'experience' and 'consciousness', do you distinguish between seeing and visible object as different kinds of dhamma arising and falling away at this moment. What is the distinction, would you say? Metta, Sarah ======= #67397 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (1) ken_aitch --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > The burning food was but a trigger for a ready mind to be turned > > topsy-turvy, a breeze that shook the ripe fruit off the tree. > > > > That is a very nice turn of phrase > > > Kind Regards > > > Herman > Hi Howard and Herman, Yes, it was very nicely said. I just hope no one is going to intentionally burn food in the name of vipassana practice. Ken H #67398 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal sarahprocter... Hi Ren & Joop, --- Rendal Mercer wrote: > It is impossible to reach the stage of Arahanto with compassion. ... S: This doesn't make any sense to me. The more understanding develops, the more defilements are eradicated, the greater the compassion. The arahant has no more ignorance, no more defilements at all. ... > Joop wrote: <...> > The question (my question) that I have not seen answered by BB, is: > CAN AN ARAHANT - as Sariputta in the Upatissa Sutta quote - HAVE > COMPASSION ? > Compassion (karuna) here is: compassion TOWARDS sentient beings. ... S: Of course! No sorrow, no grief, no attachment towards oneself or others - only great metta, compassion and so on towards others. After Sariputta's parinibbana, Ananda says (Cunda Sutta) that Sariputta was to him 'a mentor, a teacher, an instructor, one who rouses, inspires and gladdens, untiring in preaching the Dhamma, a helper of his fellow monks. And we remember how vitalizing, enjoyable, and helpful his Dhamma instruction was.' The Buddha often praises his great wisdom too as in AN 5s, 132: "Sariputta, O monks, knows what is beneficial, knows the Dhamma, knows the right measure, knows the right time, and knows the assembly (he is to address)." **** S: I highly recommend 'Great Disciples of the Buddha' by Nyanaponika and Hellmuth Hecker (BPS), maybe also available from Pariyatti Books? I believe it's on-line too. I also like a post of Swee Boon's (#65501) in which he said: "Because of this depth of understanding of kamma and vipaaka, sotapannas have a higher degree of compassion for living beings. They will not even kill a hornet bee or a fiery ant that gives them a sharp painful sting or bite." Thx for all the posts in your recent series, Joop. Metta, Sarah ====== #67399 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: naama-ruupa-pariccheda-~naa.na sarahprocter... Dear Joop & all, Just buying into a little controversy here - --- Joop wrote: > Hallo Scott, all > > For meditators more useful is the paragraph about nama-rupa- > pariccheda-ñana of "The Progress of Insight; A Modern Treatise on > Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation" by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw > (In: www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html) > Below > > BTW > I don't agree with Ken's suggestion "Nama experiences an > object," or, "Nama is the experiencing of an object." " > > Joop: To me nama=the experience > Saying 'nama experiences an object' is a kind of dualism: there is > (1) nama and there is (2) the object. And that is not correct (and > this discussion is not new) .... S: Not new, but let's look at the beginning of the Mahasi text as it's been quoted a few times recently: > 1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind > Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of > noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically > as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one > process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is > another; touching is another," etc. <...> S: I don't think you'll find anything like this in any of the Tipitaka or ancient commentaries. First of all, nama-rupa pariccheda-~nana is not about analytical knowledge. It's not about noticing, it's not about the abdomen.... It's about the clear and distinct understanding of namas and rupas - what you refer to as 'dualism'. I appreciate that you are a Mahasi-style meditator and I am familiar with the methodology and also his books. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I just don't agree with the message. Metta, Sarah =========