#68400 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Scott) - In a message dated 2/15/07 2:54:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Scott (and Herman) - > > > >In a message dated 2/14/07 11:03:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, > >scduncan@... writes: > > > >>Hi Herman, > >> > >>P.S. I don't exist. > >> > >------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Do you realize, Scott, that that sentence is entirely > meaningless??? > >-------------------------------------------- > > Hi Howard (and Scott), > > It has a lot of meaning for me. According to my Dhamma study there > are only dhammas - no people. I suppose it might be meaningless (or > self-contradictory, at least) to someone who had not heard the > Dhamma. > > To someone who had *misheard* the Dhamma it could be meaningful > and terrifying at the same time - perhaps leading to some sort > of psychosis. But not meaningless, surely.(?) > > Ken H > ======================= You misunderstand me, Ken. am not asserting atta. The sentence "I don't exist" is self-contradictory in an implicit way that redenrs it literal nonsense! If one said "There no existent thing called Scott," that would not be contradictory. But "I don't exist" is neither true nor false, implicitly asserting, but explicitly denying, and thus meaningless. That was main point. Don't you follow me? I will add something more, though. There has been, continues to be, and will be a stream of interrelated namas and rupas that Scott conceptualizes as a unity and refers to as "I" - namas and rupas distinct from, though in relationship with, namas and rupas of other streams. Do you maintain that there is no valid sense in speaking of streams of namas and rupas? I know you do not, else you wouldn't write to Scott. Do you maintain that "inheriting" one's own kamma, for example, was some nonsense that the Buddha was spouting? The Dhamma is not a theory of non-existence but of non-self, non-core, non-essence, non-soul, and emptiness. It is not that there are no persons at all, but that persons, like trees and television sets, are empty of essence in a manner that is even more thoroughgoing than that of paramattha dhammas. With metta, Howard #68401 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/15/07 3:58:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > I understand what Scott means and what you mean. It is hard to > formulate matters precisely. > You would be a person to help Lodewijk. Can you try to formulate again? > Nina. > ===================== I sent a reply to Ken that may be an adequate reformulation, though you may be uncomfortable with elements of additional material I put in my reply. With metta, Howard #68402 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Nina) - In a message dated 2/15/07 4:28:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Dear Nina, > > It will be an act of kindness if you leave Lodewijk. Do something nice > for him, and become a nun or something. > > No need to go to his funeral either, it is only seeing and hearing. > > =============== Herman! C'mon! With metta, Howard #68403 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing nilovg Hi Howard (and Herman), Very good. I sent it on to Lodewijk. I think you are the right person to help him. Well formulated. It is not the truth of anatta he stumbles over, but the way it is formulated sometimes. He needs a logical way of expression. With Howard I say to Herman: C'mon! I am used to herman's style, he makes me laugh. with appreciation to Howard, Nina. Op 15-feb-2007, om 15:16 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I sent a reply to Ken that may be an adequate reformulation, though > you may be uncomfortable with elements of additional material I put > in my reply. #68404 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing nilovg Dear Sukin, My understanding of anatta re everything is weak since insight is lacking. But the point you raise here is not what Lodewijk finds difficult. It is just the way it is formulated which he finds not logical. Howard expressed the matter very well. Nina. Op 15-feb-2007, om 13:50 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > As she has admitted many > times, her understanding of anatta re: "no Lodewijk", is quite > weak, being > mostly at the intellectual level and this arises much too rarely. #68405 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:09 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 24, no 6 nilovg Dear friends, The magga-citta cannot produce vipåka in the form of rebirth, such as the kusala citta of the other planes of consciousness. The phala- cittas are succeeded by bhavanga-cittas [1]. Some people do not need the moment of parikamma (preparatory consciousness) and in that case three moments of phala-citta arise instead of two moments. Summarizing the cittas in the process during which enlightenment is attained, they are the following: mano-dvåråvajjana-citta parikamma (preparatory consciousness; for some people not necessary) upacåra (proximity consciousness) anuloma (conformity or adaptation) gotrabhú (change of lineage) magga-citta phala-citta (two or three moments, depending on the individual) Nibbåna can be the object of kåmåvacara cittas which arise after the lokuttara cittas have fallen away. Before someone becomes an ariyan there can only be speculation about nibbåna. For the ariyan, however, it is different. Since he has directly experienced nibbåna, he can review his experience afterwards. We read in the Visuddhimagga (XXII, 19) that the person who attained enlightenment reviews, after the lokuttara cittas have fallen away, the path, the fruition, the defilements which have been abandoned, the defilements which are still remaining and nibbåna. He reviews these things in different mind-door processes of citta. Some people think that enlightenment could not occur in daily life, they believe that it is necessary to be in a solitary place in order to attain nibbåna. The development of vipassanå is the development of right understanding of all realities occurring in daily life. When paññå has been developed to the degree that enlightenment can be attained, enlightenment can occur in the middle of one's daily activities. As we have seen, the attainment of enlightenment is only a few moments of citta which arise and fall away within split seconds. --------- [1] The names of the cittas arising in the process during which enlightenment occurs are not only in the commentaries but also in the scriptures, in the Path of Discrimination and in the Book of Conditional Relations, the Patthåna. In the Patthåna, the “Feeling Triplet”, under Proximity Condition, are mentioned: anuloma, gotrabhú, magga-citta and two phala-cittas. Since different names are given to these javana-cittas we can know their number. The names parikamma and upacåra do not occur, but the Visuddhimagga (XXI, 130) states that the three first mahå-kusala cittas in that process can be called by one name; they can be called anuloma ( or repetition or parikamma or upacåra). The process where enlightenment occurs is not an ordinary process; it is a process with different types of citta performing the function of javana. Still, this example makes it clearer that the commentaries, when they stated that there are usually 7 javana-cittas in a process, based this on the canonical tradition. ******* Nina. #68406 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:11 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 7, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Sujin pointed out several times during the discussions that when one sees the value of right understanding it can condition instant awareness. We may say that we see the value of right understanding but do we really mean it? The following sutta can remind us of what is most valuable in life. We read in the "Dialogues of the "Buddha" (Dígha Nikåya III, The Recital, VI, 18): Six unsurpassable experiences, namely: certain sights, certain things heard, certain gains, certain trainings, certain ministries, certain recollections. This passage is short but deep in meaning and it will be explained further on. Unsurpassable experiences are experiences which are superior, most valuable. The Påli term used here is "anuttariya ". Khun Sujin explained the meaning of the six "anuttariyas" in the Bovornives Temple and quoted the "Manorathapúraní", the commentary to the Anguttara Nikåya (commentary to the Book of the Ones, Ch XIII). This commentary deals with the six anuttariyas. The first unsurpassable experience is the unsurpassable experience of sight (dassana). Ånanda had this experience because he saw the Buddha the whole day and he had developed right understanding and attained enlightenment. If someone sees the Buddha but he does not develop right understanding he does not have the unsurpassable experience of sight. He does not really value the Buddha and his teaching. The commentary states that the other enlightened disciples and also the "noble persons" (kaliyåna puggala), namely those who developed the eightfold Path, had the unsurpassable experience of sight. We cannot see the Buddha now but we can apply what he said to Vakkali who was attached to the sight of him (Theragåthå 205). The Buddha said: "Who sees the Dhamma sees me". As to the unsurpassable hearing (savana), Ånanda heard the Buddha preach and developed right understanding so that he could attain enlightenment. The same is said with regard to the other enlightened disciples and all those who developed the eightfold Path. They listened and developed satipaììhåna so that they could attain enlightenment. When we listen to the Dhamma now and we begin to develop satipatthåna we can have the unsurpassable hearing. We can come to realize that the explanation of the Dhamma is the most precious thing that can be heard. ******* Nina #68407 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects icarofranca Hi Larry! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Can you explain "negation of negation" a little further? ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Ol' Dialectics! (In Pali this is astounding simple) You begin on with a definition. Any one. "A "for example. The negation of "A" is "no-A". But "no-A" isn't a matter to put a "no" before an "A". "no-A" has a entirelly different definition. For example; Yama - Niyama: Niyama is not only a "no-Yama", but it has a clear definition of "Put on things properly". that's the "negation of negation" : "no-no-A", as an entirelly different definition beyond former definitions, hanging up then an another level - "Aufheben" in German. Hegel "in nuce"! ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > I would just add that the experience of paramattha sacca is the > experience of impermanence, dukkha, or not self. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Formally speaking...yes, it is! Mettaya, Ã?caro #68408 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:10 pm Subject: possible yahoo delay sarahprocter... All, We got this note from yahoo about possible delays in access to yahoo groups and mail today: >Yahoo! Groups will undergo scheduled maintenance from about 10 p.m. to 4 a.m. (Pacific time) Thursday, February 15 (http://www.timeandd ate.com/worldclo ck/converter. html ). Access to webmessages and email may be delayed during this time.< Sarah (& Jon) ========= #68409 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Tathagata, On 15/02/07, Tathagata wrote: > Hi Herman, > > P.S. I don't exist. That's great. Kind Regards Herman #68410 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' egberdina Hi errr, eeem, not sure what to call you, but Tathagata seems appropriate, On 14/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > I see a bit what you are saying here, I think. Sati can notice > craving. Craving (tanhaa) is root condition (at least) for many acts > of volition. Not to disappoint, I'd note, technically and not to > decry common usage, that 'need, lack, is fundamental to our being' > refers to this craving (tanhaa) being a root condition in existence. > 'Our being' is a series of moments of consciousness. > This last line is a statement in general about being in general. And that sort of statement proves to be very misleading for many. For there is no consciousness in general, there is only this consciousness of this object. And that is why folks who equate all moments of consciousness, in an effort to show how unattached they are, are just plain disingenuous. Allusions to hearing in general as though it is what is happening is a demonstration of being unmindful, because that is not what is happening. There is hearing of this sound and that sound, and combined with all the other specific consciousnesses, it is hearing a bird sing in the park, or people sobbing at a funeral. And that constititues our very specific being. > Action (such as communicating), considered as kamma, does in fact > 'change the way things are' since these actions serve as condition for > as yet unarisen states. 'Seeking to change' is, as I see it, is also > a state rooted in craving, and misunderstood to be a self seeking > something. > > If sati is aware of tanhaa this can be condition for further > 'beneficial' states to arise, so I agree that 'its better to see than > not to see' but don't postulate, as you know, any one who sees - it is > the function of certain of these mental factors. > There is nothing functionally different about the statement that a person sees, or seeing sees. Both statements suggest an object carrying out a function, and both are misleading in that regard. > 'Folks who practise' and 'folks who look down their noses', to be > technical again, don't exist ultimately. Dosa, tanhaa, wrong view - > these do exist. It would be good if you could tell me what it means to ultimately exist, and then explain why certain things that you can refer to do not ultimately exist and others do. I think we should be civil in discourse, tolerant of > others and all that but I think, to borrow from your own penchant for > dialectical discourse, if there is wrong view, there must be right > view. I'll stop the diaclectics now because there is no synthesis > possible of these two. > All views are views. The synthesis of right and wrong is no view. Kind Regards Herman #68411 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects egberdina Hi TG, On 14/02/07, TGrand458@... wrote: > > In a message dated 2/13/2007 5:57:58 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > LBIDD@... writes: > > > Hi Herman, Larry > > All conditions rise and fall through the course of interaction. Larry was > right earlier when he alluded that consciousness is not separate from the > object. In fact, without the object there is no consciousness. CONSCIOUSNESS IS > NOT SOMETHING "STANDING BY" WAITING TO EXPERIENCE PHENOMENA. CONSCIOUSNESS > IS GENERATED AND DEPENDENT ON THE VERY PHENOMENA IT EXPERIENCES. > > I don't disagree with you here, but I think there is an idea in some quarters that the object is also dependent on consciousness, and that is what I disagree with. Kind Regards Herman #68412 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects egberdina Hi TG, > I've never argued for the "momentariness" you speak of in my life. I am > opposed to this abhidhamma view. I basically agree with what you've said here. > What I don't understand is why you would think otherwise? > > Although various forms may be recognizable for various periods of time, they > are still changing within that framework. The rate of change just depends > on the conditions/formations. > Sorry for having misread you :-) Kind Regards Herman #68413 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects egberdina Hi Larry, On 15/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > I don't follow this (below). Are you asserting that ideas are eternal? I'd like to keep well away from Plato if I could :-). Ideas don't pre-exist consciousness, but to the extent that there is continuity of consciousness, there is continuity of ideas. But of course ideas change over time. The tectonic rate of change of the meanings of words (shared ideas) bears that out. Likewise, my idea of my mum now is quite different to how it was when I was 15, but it is still the idea of my mum. I > think I was going after conventional truth in the sense that even > conventionally permanence is untenable. The business about using a > keyboard as a plate or a hat was just my attempt at Brazilian esprit! No worries :-) An > attempt to show that there is no fixed limit to conventional objects > because their identities are relational. The furniture in this room > changes its nature with changes in the light, or even changes in my > mood. It is not only different every moment for me, it is different > every moment in different ways for everyone else. However, the chair is > better for sitting than writing, and the table is better for writing > than sitting. But the chair is not me, this body is not me, and this > thought is not me. > I like the way you write. And this writing is possible because we have shared, common ideas. Even though everything you say about the ever changing features of your room is true, you can meaningfully convey that to me by referring to the identity of that which is changing. And I am not this keyboard either :-) Kind Regards Herman #68414 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: About Mudita egberdina Hi Sarah, Thanks for your post. I appreciate the individual points you are making. > Let's link this to your other keyboard discussions: > > The purpose of discussions, however controversial they may be, is surely > to help each other develop understanding. The kind of speech always > depends on the cittas involved - kusala or akusala. If we don't appreciate > this, we go on thinking in terms of situations - other people and oneself > in particular. However, I get stuck immediately, because in one and the same paragraph you acknowledge "each other" and then deny them. I just don't get that, I'm sorry, and I don't feel any inclination to try and get that. To me, that is sufficient proof that what you say as a whole doesn't make sense, even though individual statements may be very worthwhile. > > Even when we read the same sutta here, it depends on our different > perceptions as to how we'll interpret it. As I was discussing with Joop, > we always think we live in the world with people, but actually, we live > alone with our own thinking about this and that. For example, we think > someone has criticised us or is acting without sympathy, but these are > just our ideas at that instant. Yes, of course. But you talk as though there is something else to contrast that to. Everybody is "trapped" in their thinking, in their web of views. > > We think we see a keyboard now, but seeing just sees visible object and > then we're thinking according to our perceptions. The goal of the path is > surely panna, right understanding. This is what enlightenment means - > developed understanding. It seems to me that you are describing a state of reduced association. I accept that state exists, and experience that state also. However, there are certainly degrees of not associating, and I do not see room for claiming to have arrived at a state of ultimate, total, absolute, non-association. Also, this state of reduced association is possible under certain circumstances only, and a little honesty suggests to me that life as we know it is not possible if we do not from time to time live an "associated" life. > > When we touch the keyboard, hardness is experienced. We don't need to use > any special terms to explain it, but understanding can know that hardness > for what it is. Each experience of hardness arises and falls away > instantly and gradually the characteristics of that experiencing and the > hardness itself can be known distinctly. It's the same when there is > touching of the body - hardness or softness, heat or cold or motion is > experienced. > > So is the hardness or the citta or the cetasikas a Self? Attachment, > aversion, feelings, perceptions - they all arise when there are conditions > and then fall away again instantly. Gone completely, so how can they be a > Self either ? They can never come back. Appreciating that there are only > these different realities arising and falling away is the goal, to be > known clearly known as such - as not Self in anyway. > > So understanding has to develop on and on until it is hardness which is > apparent, arising and falling away, not a keyboard. In a state of reduced association, there is no keyboard. In a state of association there is. That is the reality. To say that in an associated state the reduced association still holds is a denial of what is experienced, a not being with the moment. It seems to me that you equate enlightenment with an intention of non associating. > > This reminds me of the lovely discussion we had a few years ago in the > Botanic Gdns in Sydney. We discussed how there is only ever the world > appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind-door at any > moment. Briefly appearing and then gone for ever! Nothing to fear at all > and nothing robotic about it:-). > It is good that you paint a complete picture. Yes, we discussed that, against the backdrop of the Botanic Gardens, with the harbour in front of us. Those experiences were as real as the fleeting states of reduced association that interspersed themselves throughout our very pleasant conversation. And if there is nothing to fear, then my mentioning of the personal lives of others won't be a problem :-) Kind Regards Herman #68415 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing ken_aitch Hi Howard, When Scott or any of us use the shorthand 'I do not exist,' we all know what is meant. It might be better to use the more accurate, 'there are only dhammas; there is no I,' but that can lack dramatic effect. In the words of the bard: `If dramatic effect be the food of understanding, play on.' ----------- H: > You misunderstand me, Ken. I am not asserting atta. The sentence "I don't exist" is self-contradictory in an implicit way that redenrs it literal nonsense! If one said "There no existent thing called Scott," that would not be contradictory. But "I don't exist" is neither true nor false, implicitly asserting, but explicitly denying, and thus meaningless. That was main point. Don't you follow me? ------------- Yes and no. If we look a little more deeply into the matter we might ask, `Why is Howard making this semantic point?" I think it goes to the heart of DSG's discussions. That is, I think it goes to the question of `control vs. no control' `formal practice vs. no formal practice' and now (thanks to Herman), Really Serious Annataists vs. not Really Serious Anattaists. :-) There seems to be a campaign for the watering down of anatta. With the best of intentions, some people are saying, "Don't take anatta too far; leave just enough self to enable you to get the job done (to practice vipassana, attain enlightenment and follow the path). --------------------- H: > I will add something more, though. There has been, continues to be, and will be a stream of interrelated namas and rupas that Scott conceptualizes as a unity and refers to as "I" - namas and rupas distinct from, though in relationship with, namas and rupas of other streams. Do you maintain that there is no valid sense in speaking of streams of namas and rupas? -------------------- On the face of it, there is no harm in talking about `streams of namas and rupas.' I don't find it helpful to my way of understanding the Dhamma, but, if others do, that's fair enough. To my way of understanding, it is sufficient to know that there are only the presently arisen dhammas. Certainly, those dhammas have a cause, but the cause is to be found within them, not outside them. There is no past (nothing outside the present moment) that is somehow acting on the presently arisen dhammas. There is no future that is waiting to be acted upon by the past and the present. And so, to my way of understanding, the notion of a stream of dhammas is superfluous. ------------------------------ H: > I know you do not, else you wouldn't write to Scott. ------------------------------ Dhammas arise by conditions, and sometimes they create ideas of people and of writing. Is `belief in a stream of namas and rupas' a necessary condition for writing to Scott? (Is it a necessary condition for the dhammas that create those concepts)? I don't think so. -------------------- H: > Do you maintain that "inheriting" one's own kamma, for example, was some nonsense that the Buddha was spouting? --------------------- No, I am sure the Buddha never spouted nonsense. There are different ways of understanding the words he spoke, and some (most) of those ways are nonsense. We can't help that. We are ignorant. If we weren't ignorant we wouldn't need the Dhamma. `Inheritance of kamma' can be explained in terms of namas and rupas. It is happening now while seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, tasting consciousness (etc) are arising and falling away by conditions. If we have trouble understanding some aspect of nama and rupa then we can draw on examples from conventional reality. That is why the Buddha employed two ways of teaching – one that referred directly to dhammas, and one that referred directly to concepts (and indirectly to dhammas). Examples of people engaged in good and bad courses of action and incurring good and bad fortune as a result were given by the Buddha as descriptions of the kamma and vipaka dhammas that are arising now. However, if we were to insist that the Buddha's conventional way of teaching in some way affirmed a conventional reality - in which people and courses of action actually existed - then we *would* be talking nonsense. ------------------ H: > The Dhamma is not a theory of non-existence but of non-self, non- core, non-essence, non-soul, and emptiness. It is not that there are no persons at all, but that persons, like trees and television sets, are empty of essence in a manner that is even more thoroughgoing than that of paramattha dhammas. ------------------- I know this way of thinking is helpful to you - and to Lodewijk and others. But I have to respectfully disagree. I would argue there is no understanding of dhammas without understanding `there is no me, no you - no anybody.' Ken H #68416 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects TGrand458@... Hi Herman In a message dated 2/15/2007 3:02:38 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi Herman, Larry > > All conditions rise and fall through the course of interaction. Larry was > right earlier when he alluded that consciousness is not separate from the > object. In fact, without the object there is no consciousness. CONSCIOUSNESS IS > NOT SOMETHING "STANDING BY" WAITING TO EXPERIENCE PHENOMENA. CONSCIOUSNESS > IS GENERATED AND DEPENDENT ON THE VERY PHENOMENA IT EXPERIENCES. > > I don't disagree with you here, but I think there is an idea in some quarters that the object is also dependent on consciousness, and that is what I disagree with. Kind Regards Herman TG: I agree with you. I suppose in terms of "experience" it would be OK to say the object also depends on consciousness. But in terms of actually arising and falling due to conditions, I think that physical formations can "do there own thing" just dandy without consciousness. To say this goes beyond what can actually be known may be in the "strictest literal sense" true, but for practical purposes I think it is just "acting dumb." TG #68417 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 5:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "And I am not this keyboard either :-)" L: If you are 5 khandhas you may as well be everything, including all keyboards. Larry #68418 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:02 pm Subject: Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' scottduncan2 Hi Mephistopheles, Thanks for the ongoing discussion: H: "This last line is a statement in general about being in general. And that sort of statement proves to be very misleading for many. For there is no consciousness in general, there is only this consciousness of this object. And that is why folks who equate all moments of consciousness, in an effort to show how unattached they are, are just plain disingenuous. Allusions to hearing in general as though it is what is happening is a demonstration of being unmindful, because that is not what is happening. There is hearing of this sound and that sound, and combined with all the other specific consciousnesses, it is hearing a bird sing in the park, or people sobbing at a funeral. And that constititues our very specific being." Yeah, if I'm following you, consciousness is momentary, variegated, object-related and the 'next' moment is never the same as the last hence there can be no 'consciousness in general'. Also, I keep reading you to be mixing up 'mindfulness' with 'attention'. I think what are calling mindfulness is mere attention (manisikaara) and not actual mindfulness (sati). Just a technical point. I think you see it as attention and that without attending people are being sloppy. I think you might be speaking at a basic level here. There is sound, hearing, and then conceptualising giving rise to 'bird', 'park', 'singing', 'people', 'sobbing', and 'funeral'. I don't quite follow you when you say that this constitutes 'our very specific being'. Can you please elaborate? H: "There is nothing functionally different about the statement that a person sees, or seeing sees. Both statements suggest an object carrying out a function, and both are misleading in that regard." No, not 'an object carrying out a function', I don't think it is this way, from a technical standpoint. Person is concept. Dhammas carry out functions, or rather they are the function they 'carry out'. Saying 'a person sees', given the right view, can be a conventional way of saying 'there is a dhamma the function of which is seeing'. But with a wrong view of 'person' these two can be functionally quite different statements - one being wrong, if you know what I mean, like from a Dhamma point of view. Sincerely, Scott. #68419 From: connie Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:03 pm Subject: Re: What are the aggregets of Intellect? nichiconn hey, charles - about the "thinking aggregate", i guess what you're after is "sankhaara khanda" / 'mental formations': << This group comprises 50 mental phenomena, of which 11 are general psychological elements, 25 lofty (sobhana) qualities, 14 karmically unwholesome qualities. Cf. Tab. II. >> says our dictionary [= www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/g_m/khandha.htm ] and quotes: << "What, o monks, is the group of mental formations? There are 6 classes of volitional states (cetanaa): with regard to visual objects, to sounds, to odours, to tastes, to bodily impressions and to mind objects...." S. XXII, 56 >>. More in SPD & ADL, not to mention UPs. best wishes, connie #68420 From: connie Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:22 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (26) nichiconn dear friends, part one of: 8. Abhayamaatutheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 8. The commentary on the verses of Therii Abhayamaataa Uddha.m paadatalaati-aadikaa abhayamaataaya theriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave pu~n~naani upacinantii tissassa bhagavato kaale kulagehe nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa ekadivasa.m satthaara.m pi.n.daaya caranta.m disvaa pasannamaanasaa patta.m gahetvaa ka.tacchumatta.m bhikkha.m adaasi. The verses beginning [Mother,] from the soles of the feet upwards are Therii Abhayamaataa's. She too performed meritorious deeds under previous Buddhas and accumulated merit in various lives as [her] basis for release. At the time of the Blessed One Tissa, she was reborn in a [good] family, and when she came of age she saw the Teacher one day going on his alms round. With her mind favourably disposed [towards him], she took his bowl and gave him a ladleful of alms food. Saa tena pu~n~nakammena devamanussesu sa.msarantii imasmi.m buddhuppaade taadisena kammanissandena ujjeniya.m padumavatii naama nagarasobhi.nii ahosi. Through that meritorious deed she journeyed on among devas and men, and in this Buddha era, as a result of such a deed, she became the town prostitute in Ujjenii, and her name was Padumavatii. [RD: Reborn for that among gods and among men, she was born also for that, in this Buddha-dispensation, and became the town belle of Ujjenii, by name Padumavatii. *139 *139 I.e., she of the Lotus ]. Raajaa bimbisaaro tassaa ruupasampatti-aadike gu.ne sutvaa purohitassa aacikkhi- "ujjeniya.m kira padumavatii naama ga.nikaa ahosi, tamaha.m da.t.thukaamomhii"ti. King Bimbisaara heard of her good qualities begining with her beauty and told his chief minister, "It is said there is a prostitute named Padumavatii in Ujjenii. I want to see her." Purohito "saadhu, devaa"ti mantabalena kumbhiira.m naama yakkha.m aavahetvaa yakkhaanubhaavena raajaana.m taavadeva ujjeniinagara.m nesi. Raajaa taaya saddhi.m ekaratti.m sa.mvaasa.m kappesi. "Very well, O king," said the chief minister, and through the power of a charm, he brought forth the yakkha Kumbhira. By means of the yakkha, he took the king to the town of Ujjenii immediately. The king slept with her for one night. Saa tena gabbha.m ga.nhi. Ra~n~no ca aarocesi- "mama kucchiya.m gabbho pati.t.thahii"ti. Ta.m sutvaa raajaa na.m "sace putto bhaveyya, va.d.dhetvaa mama.m dassehii"ti vatvaa naamamuddika.m datvaa agamaasi. Saa dasamaasaccayena putta.m vijaayitvaa naamaggaha.nadivase abhayoti naama.m akaasi. She became pregnant as a result of that, and she told the king, "An embryo has been established in my womb." Having heard that, the king said to her, "If it is a son, raise him and then show him to me." He gave her a ring with a name on it and went away. She gave birth to a son at the end of ten [lunar] months, and on the day for giving a name, she had him named Abhaya. Putta~nca sattavassikakaale "tava pitaa bimbisaaramahaaraajaa"ti ra~n~no santika.m pahi.ni. Raajaa ta.m putta.m passitvaa puttasineha.m pa.tilabhitvaa kumaarakaparihaarena va.d.dhesi. Tassa saddhaapa.tilaabho pabbajjaa visesaadhigamo ca he.t.thaa aagatoyeva. And when her son was seven years old, she told him, "Your father is the great king Bimbisaara." Then she sent him to the king. When the king saw his son, affection for the son arose, and he raised him with all the attention appropriate for a prince. His attaining of faith, going forth, and special attainment have been already given. [RD: When he was seven years old she told him who was his father, and sent him to Bimbisaara. The King loved the boy, and let him grow up with the boys of his court. His conversion and ordination is told in the Psalms of the Elders. *140 *140 Abhaya's verses (Th., 26, 98) do not refer to his mother. ] Tassa maataa aparabhaage puttassa abhayattherassa santike dhamma.m sutvaa pa.tiladdhasaddhaa bhikkhuniisu pabbajitvaa vipassanaaya kamma.m karontii nacirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Tena vutta.m apadaane (apa. therii 2.1.60-70)- Afterwards, his mother heard the Doctrine from Abhaya, gained faith, and went forth among the bhikkhuniis. She devoted herself to the gaining of insight, and she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations after a very short time. As it is said in the Apadaana: "Pi.n.dacaara.m carantassa, tissanaamassa satthuno; ka.tacchubhikkha.m paggayha, buddhase.t.thassadaasaha.m. "Pa.tiggahetvaa sambuddho, tisso lokagganaayako; viithiyaa sa.n.thito satthaa, akaa me anumodana.m. "Ka.tacchubhikkha.m datvaana, taavati.msa.m gamissasi; chatti.msadevaraajuuna.m, mahesitta.m karissasi. "Pa~n~naasa.m cakkavattiina.m, mahesitta.m karissasi; manasaa patthita.m sabba.m, pa.tilacchasi sabbadaa. "Sampatti.m anubhotvaana, pabbajissasi ki~ncanaa; sabbaasave pari~n~naaya, nibbaayissasinaasavaa. Having offered a ladleful of alms food to the Teacher named Tissa as he was going on his alms round, I gave it to the Best of Buddha. After accepting it, the Fully Awakened One Tissa, the Supreme Leader of the World, the Teacher, standing in the street, rejoiced [in that good deed] of mine. "By giving a ladleful of alms food, you will go to the Taavati.msa realm. You will rule as the chief queen of thirty-six deva kings. "You will rule as the chief queen of fifty wheel-turning monarchs. You will always obtain evrything you wish for in your mind. "After experiencing success [of this sort], you will go forth, possessing nothing, and through full understanding of all the taints, you will be quenched, without taints." "Ida.m vatvaana sambuddho, tisso lokagganaayako; nabha.m abbhuggamii viiro, ha.msaraajaava ambare. "Sudinna.m me daanavara.m, suyi.t.thaa yaagasampadaa; ka.tacchubhikkha.m datvaana, pattaaha.m acala.m pada.m. "Dvenavute ito kappe, ya.m daanamadadi.m tadaa; duggati.m naabhijaanaami, bhikkhaadaanassida.m phala.m. Having said this, the Fully Awakened One Tissa, the Supreme Leader of the World, the Wise One, went up into the sky like the king of the geese in the sky. Well given was that excellent gift of mine; well sacrificed was the attainment of giving [that gift]. After giving that ladleful of alms food, I arrived at the unshakable place. In the ninety-two aeons since I gave that gift, I am not aware of [birth in] any realm of misery. This is the consequence of that gift of alms food. ======= to be continued, c. #68421 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' egberdina Yo, Tathagata On 16/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Mephistopheles, > > Yeah, if I'm following you, consciousness is momentary, variegated, > object-related and the 'next' moment is never the same as the last > hence there can be no 'consciousness in general'. Also, I keep > reading you to be mixing up 'mindfulness' with 'attention'. I think > what are calling mindfulness is mere attention (manisikaara) and not > actual mindfulness (sati). Just a technical point. I think you see > it as attention and that without attending people are being sloppy. I > think you might be speaking at a basic level here. If you want to tell me what you understand by mindfulness and attention, then I can certainly let you know which usage I am guilty of. Also, in using the word basic above, are you meaning basic as in fundamental, or basic as in simple? > > There is sound, hearing, and then conceptualising giving rise to > 'bird', 'park', 'singing', 'people', 'sobbing', and 'funeral'. I > don't quite follow you when you say that this constitutes 'our very > specific being'. Can you please elaborate? I am able to elaborate, but I have agreed to not mention your private life, and Jon has asked me to not be personal. But it is our private life that unfortunately is our specific being. Our specific being is our specific history, which happens to be the very specific history that RSA's are in denial of. Which is perhaps why some get a bit edgy when personal lives become the focus of discussion. > > H: "There is nothing functionally different about the statement that a > person sees, or seeing sees. Both statements suggest an object > carrying out a function, and both are misleading in that regard." > > No, not 'an object carrying out a function', I don't think it is this > way, from a technical standpoint. Person is concept. Dhammas carry > out functions, or rather they are the function they 'carry out'. > Saying 'a person sees', given the right view, can be a conventional > way of saying 'there is a dhamma the function of which is seeing'. > But with a wrong view of 'person' these two can be functionally quite > different statements - one being wrong, if you know what I mean, like > from a Dhamma point of view. > It sounds like a difficult way of saying what it isn't quite true :-) "There is seeing of this specific visible object" seems pretty straightforward. But a far more frequent event would be described as "there is perception of this percept" ( with not a hint of separation into different sense modalities, and time slots and elements, none of which can account for the meaning of the whole). Kind Regards Herman #68422 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects lbidd2 Hi Icaro! Icaro!: "You begin on with a definition. Any one. "A "for example. The negation of "A" is "no-A". But "no-A" isn't a matter to put a "no" before an "A". "no-A" has a entirelly different definition. For example; Yama - Niyama: Niyama is not only a "no-Yama", but it has a clear definition of "Put on things properly". that's the "negation of negation" : "no-no-A", as an entirelly different definition beyond former definitions, hanging up then an another level - "Aufheben" in German. Hegel "in nuce"! " L: I get it. Nondeath isn't a nothing, it's life! Or, nonrestraint is a parade! But yama is already a negative so niyama is a triple negative. Larry, aka Notnothing #68423 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Two-faced (Re: monkhood.) egberdina Hi Jon, > > The term 'Sangha' can mean either (a) the community of ordained monks or > (b) the community of enlightened ones, whether ordained into the order > or still householders. When the reference is to the third of the Three > Gems, the meaning is the latter (see Nyanatiloka extract below). > > In the passage you have quoted, Sangha has the meaning of the third of > the Three Gems, that is to say, all those disciples who have attained > enlightenment (including those who are still householders). > Does the Sangha, as community of enlightened ones, have any members? Kind Regards Herman #68424 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:57 pm Subject: All Embracing Kindness! bhikkhu5 Friends: Release of Mind by All Embracing Kindness! This was spoken by the Blessed Buddha, the Perfectly Holy One... Thus have I heard him saying it: Whatever, Bhikkhus and Friends, there are here of worldly things & merit making, all these are not worth 1/16 of the mental release & liberation of the heart reached through All-Embracing Kindness... The release of mind & the liberation of the heart by all-embracing kindness radiates, emanates, and shines, far surpassing it all... Just as the light from all the stars is not 1/16th of the moonlight, but the luminous light of the moon, radiating, beaming and shining, surpasses them all, exactly & even so; whatever there are of simple worldly and meritorious things, all these are not worth one 1/16th of the mental deliverance of the heart by All-Embracing Kindness... The release of mind & the liberation of the heart by all-embracing kindness radiates, beams, sparkles and shines, far surpassing it all... Just as in autumn, in the last month of the rainy season, on a clear, cloudless day the sun rises on the horizon & dispels all darkness of the entire surrounding space, bright and brilliant, even & exactly so: Whatever there are of worldly, meritorious, admirable, & attractive things, all these summed up are not worth even one sixteenth of the release of mind & liberation of the heart by All-Embracing Kindness! The release of mind and the liberation of the heart by outstanding All-Embracing Kindness radiates and shines, far surpassing them all... Source Text: The Itivuttaka 27: Thus what it Said: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=404214 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_ &_Bright.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_Friendliness.htm http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.1.024-027.irel.html Blazing and Bright is release by Universal Friendliness! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <....> #68425 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Two-faced (Re: monkhood.) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Jon) - In a message dated 2/15/07 11:22:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi Jon, > > > > >The term 'Sangha' can mean either (a) the community of ordained monks or > >(b) the community of enlightened ones, whether ordained into the order > >or still householders. When the reference is to the third of the Three > >Gems, the meaning is the latter (see Nyanatiloka extract below). > > > >In the passage you have quoted, Sangha has the meaning of the third of > >the Three Gems, that is to say, all those disciples who have attained > >enlightenment (including those who are still householders). > > > > Does the Sangha, as community of enlightened ones, have any members? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, but not many. The membership dues are exhorbitant, and they have to be paid anonymously. ;-) But think I get what you are driving at. A member of the ariya sangha would be a person, which some Buddhists deny existence to in any sense at all. Now, I do think that in a genuine sense, not only each enlightened person, but every person, while not an absolute nothingness, is indeed an ungraspable nonentity, truly empty of self, substance, identity, and self-existence, and the same is true of all the individual phenomena underlying the person. Each person, and every dhamma that underlies that person is, in-and-of-itself, nothing at all, and, at the same time, a person is in fact a "parametrization" of the all, which is not the opposite of lacking identity but is a partial explanation for that very lack. When I had my one striking no-self experience, all sense of personal self/identity was missing, but the entirety of "the world", mere empty appearance though it was, still flowed along. ------------------------------------------------- > > Kind Regards > > > Herman > ======================= With metta, Howard #68426 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects egberdina Hi guys, On 16/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > that's the "negation of negation" : "no-no-A", as an entirelly different > definition beyond former definitions, hanging up then an another level - > "Aufheben" in German. > Hegel "in nuce"! " > > L: I get it. Nondeath isn't a nothing, it's life! Or, nonrestraint is a > parade! But yama is already a negative so niyama is a triple negative. > In some logics, like intuitionist logic, a negation of a negation is meaningless. Ananatta would just be a case of stuttering :-) Kind Regards Herman #68427 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ouch, stubbed my toe. sarahprocter... Hi All, --- Phil wrote: > It doesn't really matter how hard your life is - if you get caught > up in thinking that this kind of violent intention (whether > metaphorical or not) towards other is helpful or cool you'll just be > harming yourself more and more, I think. > > You know all the lines up hatred not ceasing through hatred, etc. > > You seem so fascinated by the narrative of Colette against > society! Why not try to let go of it? Easier said than done, I > guess, but I think it would be good for someone to say that to you > once in awhile, in a friendly way. Becacuse as you know that society > is just a production of your cetasika factory run amok. > > Anguttara 8:6 is a wonderful sutta. Very calming, I think, helps > us get distance from the world and its distractions. The verse that > concludes it is: > > "This is the difference, this the distinction, this the > distinguishing factor between the well-instructed disciple of the > noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person." > > Gain/loss, > status/disgrace, > censure/praise, > pleasure/pain: > these conditions among human beings > are inconstant, > impermanent, > subject to change. > > Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, > ponders these changing conditions. > Desirable things don't charm the mind, > undesirable ones bring no resistance. > > His welcoming > & rebelling are scattered, > gone to their end, > do not exist. > Knowing the dustless, sorrowless state, > he discerns rightly, > has gone, beyond becoming, > to the Further Shore. ..... S: I sent a note to Phil (off-list) to thank him for this kind letter to Colette which I appreciated. I also mentioned that Colette had responded, but the response 'was not fit for public viewing on a family list' apart from the last line which was to thank Phil for his response! Phil asked if I would put his further comments to this on-list: ***** Phil: > I should have prefaced it better. But offering the wonderful sutta to someone is always good. <....> ... > ....Still, I think reflecting on that sutta could help her be less caught up in the Colette Saga. :) ... S: >....- praise and blame always. ... P:> Yes, it's really a wonderful sutta. It's easy to turn to that sort of thing for consolation when we're upset by blame, but a bit harder to remember to turn to it when everything's rosy - but that's where the real liberation lies! (well, you know what I mean.) <...> P:> I'll be back to reply to Jon's post in a couple of weeks. I really think that venting has cleared the need to criticise Acharn Sujin. Well, not completely. My response to Jon will be very thorough, laid out over many, many posts which feature suttas that lay out intentional practices the Buddha recommended to help us guard the senses and firm up our morality. This is what has to be done (not perfected, but progress has to be made) before we get too interested in panna that knows the characteristics of realities. I think my approach will be more focussed on quoting the BUddha's teaching rather than aiming at shortcoming's in Acharn Sujin. (I will have one more go at the exchange between Nina and Acharn SUjin about the person who was concerned about transgressions. I realize now that Acharn Sujin's response there led to my faith in her as a teacher collapsing completely.) Hi to Jon. Metta, Phil ========= #68428 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:06 pm Subject: What would you have written? sarahprocter... Dear All, Nina wrote a month or so ago: "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." .... S: As I mentioned in passing to Scott, K.Sujin asked Jon and I to help her write a) an acceptance speech (lasting about 20-30 mins) on the 7th March and also b) a talk on Buddhism, two days later (about 30 mins). When I spoke to her briefly, the only comment she gave us to work with was that in the talk she thought perhaps we might stress 'the importance of really considering and understanding, not just following the texts.' We also noticed from the program we were given for the 7th that the speakers and participants are a diverse group, including Mahayana bhikkhunis, Buddhist committee members and officials. The Swiss ambassador to Thailand is presenting the awards. The audience is likely to be very diverse for both occasions too. What would you have written? I'd be interested to hear. (Actually, we would have liked to ask for suggestions, but had to work on it straight away and get a first draft back to Thailand very quickly!). I'll post our first draft for both talks separately and look forward to any further discussion on the topics and suitability before adding K.Sujin's comments. Metta, Sarah ======= #68429 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:11 pm Subject: Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear All, This was the first draft of the Acceptance Speech we sent to K.Sujin at the beginning of the week. Comments welcome! Sarah & Jon +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Outstanding Women in Buddhism Award Acceptance speech [I am honoured to have been chosen to receive this recognition.] Many people associate Buddhism with Buddhist monks. Although the Buddha highly praised the monk’s life properly lived, he also made clear that his teaching was for everyone regardless of gender or status. Thus described his followers as comprising 4 categories of persons: • monks and nuns (bhikkhus and bhikkhuniis), and • male and female lay-followers. During the Buddha’ lifetime there was a large order of nuns (bhikkhuniis) and there were many eminent female lay-followers. Some of these women gained the highest levels of attainment, some were teachers of the Dhamma to other followers. Some attained enlightenment as nuns, some as lay-followers. Here is the story of one of them, Dhammadinnaa: During this Buddha era, she was reborn in the home of a good family in Raajagaha. When she came of age, she went to the house of the wealthy merchant Visaakha as his wife. Then one day, this wealthy merchant Visaakha went to the Teacher, and after hearing the doctrine became a Non-Returner. He went home and went up to the roof of the house where Dhammadinnaa was standing at the top of the stairs, but he did not take hold of her outstretched arm. Moreover, after going up to the roof, while eating, he ate in silence. Taking note of this, Dhammadinnaa said to him, "Dear husband, why did you not lean on my arm today? And even while eating you did not say anything. Is it indeed because of some fault in me?" Visaakha replied, "There is no fault in you, Dhammadinnaa. But beginning with today, to touch a woman's body or to be greedy for food is unworthy of me. Such is the Doctrine that has been realized by me. But if you wish, stay in this house. If you do not wish that, take as much wealth as you need and go to your family's house." "My dear husband," she replied, "I will not swallow what you have spat out. Permit me to go forth." Visaakha said, "Very good, Dhammadinnaa." And he sent her to the residence of the bhikkhuniis in a golden palanquin. She went forth, took a meditation subject, and after living there for a few days, wanting to live in seclusion, she went to her teacher and preceptor and said, "Venerable ladies, I do not delight in a place that is full of people, I shall go live in a residence in a village." The bhikkhuniis led her to a residence in a village. While she was living there, because in the past she had crushed the formations, she attained Arahatship together with the four discriminations after a very short time. Dhammadinnaa subsequently taught the Dhamma to her former husband Visaakha. This truly was an ‘outstanding woman in Buddhism’. *********** #68430 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:14 pm Subject: GENDER AND THE DHAMMA sarahprocter... Dear All, The draft for the Talk follows. Comments welcome! Jon & Sarah ============ Talk Chosen title: GENDER AND THE DHAMMA The name ‘Buddha’ comes from the word meaning ‘enlightened’. The Buddha was enlightened to the way things truly are. The way things truly are is called the Dhamma. From the time of his enlightenment until his death some 45 years later, the Buddha taught the Dhamma to those who were able to receive and understand it. Thus the word Dhamma means both • the way things are in reality, and • the teaching of the Buddha as a description of that. Another meaning of the word ‘dhamma’ is: anything that is real in the ultimate sense. Examples of things that are real in the ultimate sense include: • present consciousness, • present sense-door data, and • present mental states, and these are called ‘dhammas’ in the Buddha’s teaching. In essence, the Buddha’s teaching concerns the development of understanding of the truth about the presently occurring dhammas. This, he taught, is the path to liberation and enlightenment. But the development of an understanding of the truth about dhammas is a long and gradual process. It includes both intellectual understanding and direct understanding. • Intellectual understanding is the understanding gained from a study of the teachings, for example, by reading the texts, listening to talks, discussing the teachings with others. • Direct understanding is the understanding that comes from having perceived for oneself something that has previously been understood at an intellectual level only. Intellectual understanding is a necessary pre-requisite for direct understanding, not just at the beginning level but right throughout the development of the path. But to directly understand, we need to realise that the knowledge gained from hearing or reading about the teachings is just the beginning. It may seem obvious, but it’s easy to forget, that the *object* of the understanding that is to be developed – that is to say, what it is that has to be understood: the dhammas of the present moment – are not to be found in the description of the teachings, in the texts. We take these dhammas to be people and things, places and occasions; the world in general at this very moment. We are forgetful of the realities of this present moment. No amount of knowledge of the texts can remedy this lack of understanding. How does this relate to the subject of my talk, ‘Gender and the Dhamma’? Well, the Buddha taught in great detail about this understanding, how it is to be developed, what are the conditions for that development to occur. In a nutshell, those conditions are simply: • hearing the teachings, and • appreciating the value of gaining a better understanding of the teachings. If these two factors are present suffficiently often in a person’s life, there may be the ongoing development of the path. That development is independent of almost everything else: one’s age, education, occupation or livelihood, IQ, marital status, state of health, mode of living, personality. And yes, independent of one’s gender, too. All those things that we tend to see as being so important are really neither a help nor a hindrance when it comes to the development of the path. As the Buddha himself put it in a discourse from the Samyutta Nikaya: “Bhikkhus, these four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the obtaining of wisdom,…to the growth of wisdom,….to the expansion of wisdom,…to the realization of the fruit of stream-entry,…to the realization of the fruit of arahantship. What four? • Association with superior persons, • hearing the true Dhamma, • careful attention, • practice in accordance with the Dhamma…….” [SN 55, 55-61] *********** #68431 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:36 am Subject: Harmless is The Friendly One! bhikkhu5 The Way to Harmlessness: The Blessed Buddha said: I feel sympathy for the footless, for the bipeds too I have affection; I am kind to those with four feet, I take care of the many-footed too. Anguttara Nikaya II, 72 Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. Khuddakapatha 9 May all creatures, all living things, all beings one and all without exception, experience good fortune and joy only. May they not fall into any harm. Anguttara Nikaya II, 72 As I am, so indeed are others; as others are, so indeed am I. Having thus identified self and others, harm no one nor have them ever harmed. Sutta Nipata 705 Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <...> #68432 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] shell-shock, is there an explanation in the abhidhamma? sarahprocter... Dear Ben,(& Chris), --- Ben O'Loughlin wrote: > Dear Sarah > > Thank you for your kind words. I am familiar with sanna but, as I > mentioned in my first note, I have an elementary intellectual > understanding. Partly an artefact of my busy lifestyle where I will > rather devote any available time to meditation then study. I think > what is becoming clear to me is the need to do some Dhamma study. .... S: I think that even a little, well-considered is very, very useful. You might like to down-load chapter by chapter of Nina's 'Buddhism in Daily Life' to read slowly. There's also a section in "Useful Posts" in the files under 'Abhidhamma-beginners'. These past posts will be fairly short and helpful, I believe. If these are too basic, then try other headings such as 'sanna' for more there. .... > Unfortunately, I'm so time poor that my only time would be sitting by > the swimming pool when my kids were having lessons. I tried reading > the Vissudhimagga that way last year amongst prams, getting splashed > and a 100dB+ cacophany going on. ... S: If you were reading the Vism by the pool, sounds like you have studied and considered rather more than I read the last paragraph to be saying:-). Not an easy text even without all the distractions you mention. I also like to download posts from the list to take and read by a pool or on the beach -- anywhere outside really. .... >Its not so bad if one's samadhi is > strong but if I had missed my morning 'sit' it was impossible! > > Yes, I live in Australia. In the small central Victorian town of > Creswick which is 100km west of Melbourne and 15 north of Ballarat. ... S: Thx! As Chris may have told you, there are quite a few active Aussies here. Jon's from Adelaide, KenH, AndrewT and Chris are from Qld. Herman's from NSW. Others lurking.... I'll look f/w to reading any further questions/comments you care to share. Thx Chris for the additional links and for introducing Ben. Metta, Sarah ======== #68433 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Insects and the Precept Against Killing sarahprocter... Dear Bob, Welcome to DSG as well! --- Bob Hurley wrote: > > There are ways of getting rid of insect pests other than by killing. > > Takes more effort (and skill), but can be done I believe. > > > > Jon > > > > Do you have any access to some specific information on that? <...> > Thanks for any help anyone can offer. ... S: I can't give any assistance of the kind you're looking for, having lived in apartments without any garden of our own for well-over 20 years. Actually, one reason we live in an apartment is to be free of these concerns as much as possible! We sometimes think of moving to a small,old house by the waves in a sub-tropical garden (here in Hong Kong), but I know there'd be all these problems to deal with. I used to have large pot plants, but got rid of these too when they seemed to attract insects! My mother's always been a keen gardener and always had very large gardens - I'll see what she says. I know she's never used any sprays at all. She used to curse at the snails and destroy them, but now, at least when I'm around, she gathers them up and takes them somewhere else. she lives in England. Where do you live? Metta, Sarah ======== #68434 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] gentle wisdom, 2. sarahprocter... Dear Joel & Nina, I liked the quotes of K.Sujin's you both heard and shared. I liked the way you presented the first ones too. Joel> "....When thre is no understanding of citta, cetasika and rupa, right now, > its impossible to have it grow any other time. If we wait we keep on > waiting, while right now citta and cetasikas, rupa arise and fall > away." > -------- Nina: >"... Sati arises when there is understanding. Nobody can do anything. At > this moment there is dhamma, but we do not understand this. If we do > this or that, if we believe we have to think in this way of that way, > we do not understand that there is dhamma now." > ---------- ... Sarah: "...One is enslaved by the idea of self - trying to do this and that. Even if it's not by sitting or doing something different from daily life, there's still the idea of 'what should I do, what is the pattern of my life'. It's like trying to do (something)...." KK, 2002 .... S: The idea of self can sneak in anytime at all! ... Also, from the same session: "If we die with no understanding of reality at this moment, we would forget everything we talk about, because it's only the story of reality". ... S: Again the reminders about how book knowledge is of no use without the development of understanding. Metta, Sarah ======= #68435 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pa~n~natti and cohesion. sarahprocter... Dear James & Joel, > James: > During the Buddha's time there were also monks and nuns who > disrobed and returned home. Does this mean the Sangha is a complete > waste of time? ... S: Btw, none of those who followed the teachings and became ariyans disrobed. As Joel and I have both said, moments of developing understanding and following the path are not any waste of time. Moments of akusala could be said to be a waste of time, regardless of the situation. ... > Joel : > What is Sangha? What is not Sangha? .... S: I think it was a good question. I believe the meaning of Sangha is 'group' as you said. So do we not have a Sangha we communicate with here? Then as Jon said, in many, many suttas and when we take refuge in the Triple Gem, it is the Sangha of ariyan disciples that is referred to. When we pay our respects to the Sangha of bhikkhus, it is to the ariyan Sangha (which they represent) to whom we pay respect, I believe. Hope this answers your question better, James (if you're reading!). Metta, Sarah ===== #68436 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Tathagatas Sangha is a Guide to Happiness!!! sarahprocter... Hi Ramesh, --- Ramesh Patil wrote: > Once you realize that it is possible to be happy under any > circumstances it's not difficult to train your mind. Any one can follow > the > simple directions found in this Buddhas teaching and acquire mental > peace if > they make the effort. .... S: How do you interpret these verses from the Dhammapada (Narada transl.)suggesting rather more difficulty, I think: "The flickering, fickle mind, difficult to guard, difficult to control - the wise person straightens it as a fletcher straightens an arrow." 33 "The mind is hard to check, swift, flits wherever it listeth: to control it is good. A controlled mind is conducive to happiness." 35 "The mind is very hard to perceive, extremely subtle, flits wherever it listeth. Let the wise person guard it; a guarded mind is conducive to happiness." 36 ***** Metta, Sarah ====== #68437 From: "Annapureddy Siddhartha Reddy" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:02 am Subject: Introduction arsr_1 namO Buddha, I am a new member and here's my introduction. I am Annapureddy Siddhartha Reddy, and have been interested in Buddhism for a while. I have been reading the sUttas from the dIgha and the majjhima nikAyas, mostly in translation. I would like to improve my knowledge of the abhidhamma terminology so as to better understand the sUttas. Thanks. A.Siddhartha. #68438 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: About Mudita sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > > This reminds me of the lovely discussion we had a few years ago in the > > Botanic Gdns in Sydney. We discussed how there is only ever the world > > appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind-door at > any > > moment. Briefly appearing and then gone for ever! Nothing to fear at > all > > and nothing robotic about it:-). > > > > It is good that you paint a complete picture. Yes, we discussed that, > against the backdrop of the Botanic Gardens, with the harbour in front > of us. Those experiences were as real as the fleeting states of > reduced association that interspersed themselves throughout our very > pleasant conversation. ... S: This relates to the rest of the discussion as well - we have to use terms like 'computer keyboard' and the 'Botanic Gardens' as a kind of shorthand and for easy communication. But as I stress above, at any moment there is only ever the world appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind-door. ... > > And if there is nothing to fear, then my mentioning of the personal > lives of others won't be a problem :-) ... S: When we truly appreciate there is only visible object, sound and other rupas experienced through the senses momentarily, there is nothing to fear as we agree. However, we've also discussed a lot on compassion recently on the list, led by Joop. Just as we live in ignorance and attachment most the time, so do our good friends. Knowing the foibles and sensitive points of other travellers on the path, just like those we* experience as well, we can have compassion and show kindness, don't you think? *i.e the cittas taken for you and I. Metta, Sarah p.s with regard to another post to me: 'ultimate reality' refers to 'reality - what is real!' Cittas are real, 'you' and 'I' are not real:-) ========== #68439 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Thanks for the following: H: "If you want to tell me what you understand by mindfulness and attention, then I can certainly let you know which usage I am guilty of. Also, in using the word basic above, are you meaning basic as in fundamental, or basic as in simple?" I guess I mean 'basic' as in ordinary, mundane, non-specific - like the way the anyone would use the word - anyone not familiar with the particular connotations the Dhamma places on meanings. Manasikaara (attention), for example, is defined in the Atthasaaliini (pp.175-176) as: "...a mode of work, working in the mind. It makes the mind, so to speak, different from the previous mind. It is of three kinds: Attention which regulates the object, attention which regulates process-consciousness, attention which regulates apperception. Of these, (a)that which regulates the object is called attention because it makes [the object] in the mind. It has the characteristic of driving associated states towards the object, the function of joining associated states to the object, the manifestation of facing the object. It is included in the aggregate of mental coefficients, and should be regarded as the charioteer of associated states because it regulates the object. (b)Attention which regulates process-consciousness is a synonym for the adverting mind at the five doors; and (c)attention which regulates apperception is a synonym for mind-door adverting. These two(b)(c)are not intended here." Is this what you intend by 'mindfulness'? Manasikaara accompanies each moment of consciousness and is one of the sabbacitta saadhaara.naa cetasikas. As such it will be of the same jaati as the citta; whether kusala, akusala, vipaaka, or kiriya. Dhammasa"nga.ni(p. 14) defines the faculty of mindfulness (satindriya.m) as: "...recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness..." Atthasaaliini clarifies (pp. 159-161): "Sati - by this they remember the object, or one remembers the object, or the mere remembering of the object - this is mindfulness. From overcoming confused memory, it is a faculty in the sense of predominance. It exercises government (over associated states) by the characteristic of 'being present in', hence it is a controlling faculty, and hence the compound 'mindfulness-faculty' [satindriya.m]...Mindfulness has 'not floating away' as its characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding, of the state of facing the object, as its manifestation, firm perception or application of mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause. It should be regarded as the door-post from being firmly established in the object, and as a door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses." Sati is one of the sobhana cetasikas. It is kusala. It does not arise with every moment of consciousness. Its arising is not under anyone's control but it can be developed. This is why I suggest you might be referring to manasikaara rather than sati. S: "...I don't quite follow you when you say that this constitutes 'our very specific being'. Can you please elaborate?" H: "I am able to elaborate, but I have agreed to not mention your private life, and Jon has asked me to not be personal. But it is our private life that unfortunately is our specific being. Our specific being is our specific history, which happens to be the very specific history that RSA's are in denial of. Which is perhaps why some get a bit edgy when personal lives become the focus of discussion." Well, you could just use an example from your own life and then everything's cool. I think people get edgy, not necessarily directly due to an attachment to their own personal lives but more to a basic protective reaction to perceived hostility. This is why I think care ought to be taken. As in any group of people, too much hostility strains at the boundaries of the group and alters the emotional tone of the interactions. Too much strain ruptures the boundary and when something gives something goes. I think its better to take care, protect the boundaries, and remain rather than create the emotional situation from which one must inevitably flee. Which history? The one related to this particular life? The infinite 'history' contained in every moment of consciousness that arises conditioned by the last? Confidence in the Dhamma allows a great reduction in fear by opening one up to wider vistas of 'existence'. A narrow focus on 'my history' leads to problems with understanding based on a belief in 'my beginning' and, in particular, 'my end'. S: "... Saying 'a person sees', given the right view, can be a conventionalway of saying 'there is a dhamma the function of which is seeing'. But with a wrong view of 'person' these two can be functionally quite different statements - one being wrong, if you know what I mean, like from a Dhamma point of view." H: "It sounds like a difficult way of saying what it isn't quite true :-)" What do you mean? Sincerely, Scott. #68440 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Tathagatas Sangha is a Guide to Happiness!!! rameshat27 Hi Sarah, I had used the realize word here! The script had written is very short ways..I had not make it more elaborate. Realization of what?? Following Precepts- bcz of which Mind becomes calm and quite.. Do the Vippassana Regularly..Bcz of that tranquility can be attained.. And once u realize that It is attainable by following these things then under any circumstances U can be happy.. Can u give me now ur introduction!! U r from where..what u r doing now...??? How u get introduced with dhamma??? I am from India...Mumbai..S/W professional Thanks & Regards Ramesh Patil Mumbai,India On 2/16/07, sarah abbott wrote: <...> > S: How do you interpret these verses from the Dhammapada (Narada > transl.)suggesting rather more difficulty, I think: > > "The flickering, fickle mind, difficult to guard, difficult to control - > the wise person straightens it as a fletcher straightens an arrow." 33 > > "The mind is hard to check, swift, flits wherever it listeth: to control > it is good. A controlled mind is conducive to happiness." 35 > > "The mind is very hard to perceive, extremely subtle, flits wherever it > listeth. Let the wise person guard it; a guarded mind is conducive to > happiness." 36 <...> #68441 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:34 am Subject: about mudita nilovg Hi Herman, That is strange. Yesterday, when I read your mail about me becoming a nun I thought of what Sarah quoted to you: Botanic Gdns in Sydney. We discussed how there is only ever the world > appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind- door at any > moment. Briefly appearing and then gone for ever! Nothing to fear at all > and nothing robotic about it:-). --------- You gave us a very nice report I really enjoyed. When people do not know you and they read the post you wrote to me yesterday they may misunderstand you, not realizing what is behind it. --------- H to Sarah: It is good that you paint a complete picture. Yes, we discussed that, against the backdrop of the Botanic Gardens, with the harbour in front of us. Those experiences were as real as the fleeting states of reduced association that interspersed themselves throughout our very pleasant conversation. And if there is nothing to fear, then my mentioning of the personal lives of others won't be a problem :-) --------- N: It is helpful to know more personal background info sometimes, otherwise people may think: Herman is provocative, or, does he mean this, is he serious? You are searching the truth and you find it difficult (understandable) from the time you were a pastor. You write in a provocative style sometimes, because you hope that you will get nearer to the truth when reading different answers. It happened that you were disappointed several times and then you left the list for a while. Am I too personal here? But I do not like others to misjudge you. Your questions are also subtle and Howard understands what is behind it and he gets your point, very clever of him. These are just a few remarks I hope can straighten out things when some people. especially newcomers, misunderstand you. Nina. #68442 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:41 am Subject: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, all - As I see the matter, persons are no less real and no more real than any other conventionally existent complex-entities. They are simply more important, as the belief in their existence as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of sentient beings. Persons, just as all complexes, are unreal as individual phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or delimitable. However, complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not *fully* illusion. Why? For the same reason that they are erroneously grasped as entities to begin with: 1) There are manifold paramattha dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways, that underlie the perceived entity, and 2) the perception of that aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of grasping the relations involved. Persons and other complexes, while not nothing at all, are empty of self, not only in that, like paramattha dhammas, they depend on prior and co-occurring conditions, but also in that they depend on their "parts", and, more finely, on their paramatthic "constituents", and, moreover, they depend on extensive sankharic processing for being perceived at all. The matter is complicated and subtle, and requires much more detail than is given in simple assertions to the effect that there are no persons, trees, and Dhamma-discussion lists. With metta, Howard #68443 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:57 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 133, 134, and Tiika nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 133, 134 Intro: In the following sections (133, 134) the Visuddhimagga deals more in detail with the different kinds of rebirth-consciousness. ----------- Text Vis.: 133. But what was said above, namely, 'as to the remaining nineteen, there is none that does not occur as a rebirth-linking appropriate toit' (par.130), is hard to understand since it is too brief. Hence, in order to show the details it may be asked: (i) How many kinds of rebirth-linking are there? (ii) How many kinds of rebirth-linking consciousnesses? ------- N: This question may seem superfluous but here we have to take into account the rebirth of beings without citta, according to the Tiika. Those who cultivate ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage of citta may be reborn in the plane of non-percipient beings (asa~n~nasatta). Thus there are twenty kinds of rebirth, and there are nineteen types of rebirth-consciousness. ---------- (iii) Where and by what means does rebirth-linking come about? (iv) What does rebirth-linking [consciousness] have as its object? ----------- N: As to the expression by means of what and where, this means, according to the Tiika, by which citta and in which kind of birth. The objects will be dealt with later on. ----------- Text Vis. 134: (i) Including the rebirth-linking of non-percipient beings there are twenty kinds of rebirth-linking. (ii) There are nineteen kinds of rebirth-linking consciousnesses, as already described. ---------- N: As we have seen in section 132, these are: the two types of investigating-consciousness, santiira.nacitta (accompanied by upekkhaa, one being akusala vipaakacitta and one ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta), eight mahaa-vipaakacittas, five ruupaavacara vipaakacittas and four aruupaavacara vipaakacittas. Thus, there are nineteen kinds of rebirth-linking consciousnesses. ---------- (iii) Herein, rebirth-linking by means of the unprofitable-resultant root-causeless and mind-consciousness element (56) comes about in the states of loss. -------- N: Only one type of citta, santiira.nacitta which is akusala vipaaka, accompanied by upekkhaa, can perform the function of pa.tisandhi in woeful planes, but there are many varieties and intensities of this type of rebirth-consciousness. The unhappy planes are: the hell planes, the animal world, the plane of the ghosts (petas), and the demons. --------- Text Vis.: Rebirth-linking by means of the profitable-resultant comes about in the human world among those blind from birth, born deaf, born mad, born drivelling (see M.i.20; MA.I,118), the sexless, and so on. ---------- N: Rebirth with ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta is the result of kusala kamma that is weaker than kusala kamma that produces rebirth with sahetuka vipaakacitta, vipaakacitta with sobhana (beautiful) hetus. The Tiika remarks that by the expression ‘in the human world’ a distinction has been made with the devas who do not have rebirth- consciousness which is ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta. The expression ‘and so on’ (aadi) refers to those who cannot speak coherently but stammer. But some teachers, according to the Tiika, refer to those who have defective faculties and who are by nature slow in understanding. The Abhidhamattha Sangaha mentions that also the earthbound, fallen devas are born with this kind of vipaakacitta. The Co. (to the Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma, T.A. p. 167) explains: a deva dependent on the earth (bhummassita), who has fallen from the happy multitude. Elsewhere it is explained that they do not live in the unhappy planes, that they live in trees, etc. ------------ Text Vis.: Rebirth-linking by means of the eight principal resultant consciousnesses with root-cause ((42)-(49)) comes about among deities of the sense sphere and the meritorious among men. --------- N: Beings born with sahetuka vipaakacitta are born with two or with three roots. When they are born with two roots, they are born without pa~n~naa, and when they are born with three roots, they are born with pa~n~naa. Only those born with pa~n~naa have the capacity to attain jhaana or to attain enlightenment, if the right conditions have been cultivated. --------- Text Vis.: That by means of the five fine-material resultant kinds comes about in the fine-material Brahmaa-world. That by means of the four immaterial-sphere resultant kinds comes about in the immaterial world. So rebirth-linking [consciousness] conforms to the means by which, and the place in which, it comes about. -------- N: As to the means by which means: by which kind of citta. It is in conformity with the kamma that produces rebirth-consciousness at the place, in the surroundings and circumstances that is in conformity with that kamma. Thus, it is according to the appropriate conditions where one is born. -------- Text Vis.: (iv) Briefly, rebirth-linking [consciousness] has three kinds of objects, namely, past, present, and not-so-classifiable. Non-percipient rebirth-linking has no object. ---------- N: The Tiika states that here the text does not go into detail as to which pa.tisandhicitta experiences which kind of object. Objects experienced by the pa.tisandhicitta can be past, present or not-so-classifiable, navattabba.m. When the object is not-so- classifiable, it cannot be classified as past or present. In the following sections the objects of the pa.tisandhicitta will be further explained. ********* Conclusion: The texts remind us of the danger and disadvantage of the arising of naama and ruupa at rebirth. So long as there is clinging, which is the second noble Truth, there will be dukkha, the arising and falling away of the five khandhas from the moment of birth on. At this moment we are in the human plane, but we cannot be sure that the next rebirth is in a plane where right understanding can be developed. Even when kusala kamma produces rebirth, there may be rebirth with ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta which is the condition for being handicapped or being with defective capacities or slow in understanding. All the texts about rebirth can be a reminder not to waste opportunities to develop understanding at this moment so that ignorance can be eliminated. ******* Nina. #68444 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:32 am Subject: Gender and the Dhamma nilovg Dear Sarah and Jon, I think the speech is very good. It is about the outstanding women today so it is good you mention Dhammadinna and then continue. One passage could be clarified: Perhaps this: all the suttas point to this. Perhaps more about the six doors? About: all the teachings lead to detachment? What is this detachment? What has to be understood? ****** Nina. #68445 From: han tun Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech hantun1 Dear Sarah and all, First of all, please let me congratulate Khun Sujin for the prestigious award she is receiving and which she fully deserves. Now, in preparing the Acceptance speech, let us first look at the letter she received which reads: "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." Therefore, IMHO the speech should start with thanking the United Nations for organizing the awards ceremony in recognition of the United Nations International Women’s Day, and the international committee of scholars and Buddhist clergy for selecting her as an Outstanding Woman in Buddhism. Then she should give a brief biography of herself, and what she is doing, why she is doing, what are the main themes of her teachings, and what results she have achieved so far, and what are her future plans for further development of women in Buddhism, and so on. Finally she should say that she accepts the award, not only on her own behalf but also on behalf of all the women in the world who are propagating the Buddha’s teachings to the entire populations. The story of Dhammadinnaa should go into her “Talk” on Gender and the Dhamma to prove that women can even excel the men in the dhamma practice. Respectfully, Han --- sarah abbott wrote: > Dear All, > > This was the first draft of the Acceptance Speech we > sent to K.Sujin at > the beginning of the week. Comments welcome! > Sarah & Jon > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Outstanding Women in Buddhism Award > > Acceptance speech > #68446 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction nilovg Dear Annapureddy, welcome to our group. In which country do you live? I feel very happy that you take an interest in the Abhidhamma and want to study it so as to better understand the suttas. The terms of the Abhidhamma represent realities, the Abhidhamma is not a theoretical textbook. It teaches us about attachment, aversion and ignorance, and these are realities of our life. It also teaches about all the wholesome qualities and these can be developed. It teaches about understanding, understanding of all that appears through the six doors. It teaches about all the conditions for all phenomena that arise. What have you read already of the Abhidhamma? Where shall we begin? Nina. Op 16-feb-2007, om 12:02 heeft Annapureddy Siddhartha Reddy het volgende geschreven: > I would like to improve my knowledge of the > abhidhamma terminology so as to better understand the sUttas. #68447 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:02 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (26) nichiconn Dear Friends, Abhaya's mother, Padumavati, ex-courtesan of Ujjeni, part two: "Kilesaa jhaapitaa mayha.m {, bhavaa sabbe samuuhataa; naagiiva bandhana.m chetvaa, viharaami anaasavaa. "Svaagata.m vata me aasi, buddhase.t.thassa santike; tisso vijjaa anuppattaa, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m. "Pa.tisambhidaa catasso, vimokkhaapi ca a.t.thime; cha.labhi~n~naa sacchikataa,} kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti. 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. arahatta.m pana patvaa attano puttena abhayattherena dhamma.m kathentena ovaadavasena yaa gaathaa bhaasitaa, udaanavasena sayampi taa eva paccudaaharantii- 33. "uddha.m paadatalaa amma, adho ve kesamatthakaa; paccavekkhassuma.m kaaya.m, asuci.m puutigandhika.m. 34. "Eva.m viharamaanaaya, sabbo raago samuuhato; pari.laaho samucchinno, siitibhuutaamhi nibbutaa"ti.- Aaha. Then after she attained Arahathip, her own son, Thera Abhaya, spoke these verses to her by way of instruction in giving a talk on the Doctrine. And she repeated them herself as a solemn utterance, saying: 33. Mother, from the sole[s] of the feet upwards, from the head and hair downwards, consider this impure, evil-smelling body. 34. As I dwell in this way, all my desire has been rooted out. The burning fever has been cut out. I have become cool, quenched. [RD: 'Upward from sole of foot, O mother dear, Downward from crown of hair this body see. Is't not impure, the evil-smelling thing?' (33) This have I pondered. meditating still, Till every throb of lust is rooted out. Expunged is all the fever of desire. Cool am I now and calm - Nibbana's peace. (34) Tattha pa.thamagaathaaya taava aya.m sa"nkhepattho- amma padumavati, paadatalato uddha.m kesamatthakato adho naanappakaara-asucipuuritaaya asuci.m sabbakaala.m puutigandhavaayanato puutigandhika.m, ima.m kucchitaana.m aayatanataaya kaaya.m sariira.m ~naa.nacakkhunaa paccavekkhassuuti. Aya~nhi tassaa puttena ovaadadaanavasena bhaasitaa gaathaa. 33. There, the meaning in brief as far as this first verse is concerned is: Mother (amma), Padumavatii, from the soles of the feet upwards, from the head and hair downwards, use the eye of knowledge to consider the body (sariira.m), which is the body (kaaya.m) because of the disgusting things (kucchitaana.m) in this dwelling place (aayatana) [of theirs] that is evil smelling (puutigandhika.m) because an evil smell is always blowing [from it] (puutigandha-vaayanato) and impure (asuci.m) because it is filled with all sorts of impurity (naana-ppakaara-asuci-puuritaaya). This verse was indeed spoken to her by her son as a means of giving her instruction. Saa ta.m sutvaa arahatta.m patvaa udaanentii aacariyapuujaavasena tameva gaatha.m pa.thama.m vatvaa attano pa.tipatti.m kathentii "eva.m viharamaanaayaa"ti dutiya.m gaathamaaha. 34. She heard it, attained Arahatship, and made a solemn utterance, speaking that very same first verse as a way of honouring her teacher. Then speaking of her own attainment, she spoke the second verse [beginning] As I dwell in this way. Tattha eva.m viharamaanaayaati eva.m mama puttena abhayattherena "uddha.m paadatalaa"ti-aadinaa dinne ovaade .thatvaa sabbakaaya.m asubhato disvaa ekaggacittaa tattha bhuutupaadaayabhede ruupadhamme tappa.tibaddhe vedanaadike aruupadhamme pariggahetvaa tattha tilakkha.na.m aaropetvaa aniccaanupassanaadivasena viharamaanaaya. Sabbo raago samuuhatoti vu.t.thaanagaaminivipassanaaya maggena gha.titaaya maggapa.tipaa.tiyaa aggamaggena sabbo raago mayaa samuuhato samugghaa.tito. There, As I dwell in this way means: having abided by the instruction given by my son Thera Abhaya, from the sole[s] of the feet upwards, etc, I saw the whole body as unpleasant, having a concentrated mind. In this connection, she grasped immaterial phenomena such as sensations, etc, and the material phenomena connected to them of the [two] categories of primary entities and those that are derived. And she dwelt there, having established the three characteristics through the contemplation of impermanence, etc, and said, all my desire has been rooted out, meaning: all my desire has been rooted out, completely destroyed through the highest path of the [four] paths, one after the other, that are connected with the insight leading to emergence. Pari.laaho samucchinnoti tato eva sabbo kilesapari.laaho sammadeva ucchinno, tassa ca samucchinnattaa eva siitibhuutaa sa-upaadisesaaya nibbaanadhaatuyaa nibbutaa amhiiti. Abhayamaatutheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. The burning fever (pari.laaho) has been cut out (samucchinno) means: therefore all the burning fever of the defilements (kilesa-pari.laaho) is completely uprooted (samma-d-eva ucchinno), and because it has been cut out (samucchannattaa), I have become cool, quenched through the element of quenching with [the result of past] attachment still remaining. Here ends the commentary on the verses by Therii Abhayamaataa. ======= peace, connie. #68448 From: "joelaltman26" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:06 am Subject: gentle wisdom, part III (on gratitude) joelaltman26 Dear friends in dhamma, Khun Sujin said: "How can such visible object appear at that very moment without conditions? to be pleasant or unpleasant? We cannot select. We cannot make today to be the beautiful day at all. So what conditions such seeing? There must be seeing otherwise there cannot be the beautiful day at all, right? And what conditioned seeing right at that moment? It's not just happened. So when we think about gratitude or to pay respect, It's only understanding the Vipaka. No one to be respected." i love how she turns it completely around. who or what are we thanking, and why, for what? it is vipaka that conditions the sense objects that appear in the sense doors at a given moment. gratitude is the recognition of vipaka... and it can be whether vipaka is kusula or even akusula. thank you all, with love, joel #68449 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:52 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 24, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Discourse to Díghanakha (Middle Length Sayings II, no. 74) that the Buddha taught Dhamma to the wanderer Díghanaka on Vulture's Peak near Råjagaha. He taught him about the getting rid of wrong views and about the impermanence of conditioned realities. Såriputta, who was an ariyan but had not yet attained arahatship, was also present at the time of that discourse. We read: Now at that time the venerable Såriputta was standing behind the Lord, fanning the Lord. Then it occurred to the venerable Såriputta: ``The Lord speaks to us of getting rid of these things and those by means of super-knowledge, the Well-farer speaks to us of casting out these things and those by means of superknowledge''. While the venerable Såriputta was reflecting on this, his mind was freed from the cankers without clinging. But to the wanderer Díghanakha there arose the stainless, spotless vision of dhamma, that whatever is of the nature to arise all that is of the nature to stop... Såriputta attained arahatship, but he did not go into solitude in order to attain it; he was fanning the Buddha. Díghanakha listened to the Buddha and then became a sotåpanna. We read in the Kindred Sayings (III, Khandhå-vagga, Middle Fifty, chapter 4, §89, Khema) that Khemaka, who was an anågåmí, attained arahatship while he was preaching and monks who were listening attained arahatship as well. We read: Now when this teaching was thus expounded the hearts of as many as sixty monks were utterly set free from the åsavas, and so was it also with the heart of the venerable Khemaka... If one is on the right Path, paññå can be developed, no matter what the circumstances are, even to the degree of enlightenment. People may wonder whether it would be possible to notice it when a person attains nibbåna. But can one see whether someone else is mindful or not mindful? Who knows the cittas of other people? We cannot know when someone else is mindful of nåma and rúpa or when he attains nibbåna. The question may arise whether all four stages of enlightenment (the stages of the sotåpanna, the sakadågåmí, the anågåmí and the arahat) can be attained in the course of one life. We read in the suttas about disciples of the Buddha who attained the ariyan state but not yet arahatship and realized arahatship later on in life. Ånanda, for example, did not attain arahatship during the Buddha's life, but he became an arahat after the Buddha had passed away, the evening before the first great council was to start (the ``Illustrator of Ultimate meaning'', commentary to the ``Mangala-sutta'' or ``Good Omen Discourse'', Minor Readings, Khuddaka Nikåya). ***** Nina #68450 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:55 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 7, no 9 nilovg Dear friends, What is the most precious gain (låbha)? Everybody wants excellent things, but if there is no wisdom one does not know whether one's possessions are really superior. Those who had strong confidence in the Buddha, like Ånanda, had the best of gains. The same is said about the other enlightened disciples and the noble persons who developed the eightfold Path. We find the things which give us pleasant feeling most valuable in our life. However, the teachings remind us that pleasant feeling is very temporary, that clinging to pleasant objects leads to sorrow. When we have enough confidence in the teachings we shall continue to develop right understanding of all realities which appear. We shall see that it is most valuable to know our defilements, to have less ignorance about realities. Then we shall have the best of gains. As to the trainings (sikkhå) which are superior, these are the higher síla, the higher samådhi and higher wisdom of the eightfold Path. Ånanda and the other disciples of the Buddha valued these three trainings as unsurpassable, since they lead to the eradication of defilements. If we consider them as unsurpassable we shall not be neglectful, we shall be aware of any reality which appears, pleasant or unpleasant, kusala or akusala. The unsurpassable ministry (påricariya) is the ministry to the Buddha, as Ånanda and the other disciples performed. Through satipaììhåna they had acquired the greatest confidence and respect for the high qualities of the Buddha who taught the truth of impermanence, dukkha and anattå. Without right understanding the ministry to the Buddha is not an unsurpassable experience. The Buddha has passed away but we can still serve the Dhamma. One ministers to the Dhamma when one studies it and explains it to others so that they too can develop right understanding. The unsurpassable recollection (anussata) is the recollection of the Buddha's qualities, those which are "worldly" (lokiya) as well as those which are supramundane (lokuttara), the commentary states. Without wisdom one cannot recollect the qualities of the Buddha. When we are mindful of nåma and rúpa we value the Buddha's wisdom at that moment. Without his teaching we could not develop satipatthåna. Thus at that moment there is the sixth unsurpassable experience. Khun Sujin said that enlightenment cannot be attained without these six most excellent experiences. If we do not consider the Dhamma as that which is most valuable in our life, enlightenment cannot be attained. We value the Dhamma not merely by words, but by applying it, by developing right understanding. When we listen to the Dhamma, consider what we heard and begin to be aware of realities we can verify the truth of what the Buddha taught. Then we can gain more confidence to develop all the "perfections", the good qualities the Buddha had developed together with right understanding during aeons. Ånanda and the other disciples had developed the perfections during aeons and when they met the Buddha and listened to him it was the right time for them to attain enlightenment. Khun Sujin's words at the end of your tape were a good reminder: "In order to come to the moment of enlightenment all kinds of realities must be thoroughly understood. Then there can be the moment of awareness which conditions enlightenment. If there is not enough development, have more development!" ******* Nina. #68451 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma nilovg Dear Sarah and Jon, I discussed the speech with Lodewijk. He does not like the title at all. It seems like a plea for the emancipation of women. He also thinks it should not be like a treatise on Dhamma points but more a speech addressed to those connected with the U.N. More universal, but then there is a problem if it is made into something superficial. We wondered about the Brahmavihaaras? She made once a beautiful speech for policemen who were interested at the Brahmaviharas to be applied during their tasks. Or the perfections? There are also Mahayana people. Nina. Op 16-feb-2007, om 16:32 heeft Nina van Gorkom het volgende geschreven: > It is about the outstanding women > today #68452 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 2/16/2007 7:48:10 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, all - As I see the matter, persons are no less real and no more real than any other conventionally existent complex-entities. They are simply more important, as the belief in their existence as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of sentient beings. Persons, just as all complexes, are unreal as individual phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or delimitable. However, complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not *fully* illusion. Why? For the same reason that they are erroneously grasped as entities to begin with: 1) TG: Up to here I'm with you. There are manifold paramattha dhammas, TG: There are no Ultimate Realities. There are only Relative Realities. That being, the so-called Paramattha Dhammas, though more elemental than "person," are just as much Relative and Hollow of anything unto-them-selves as "person." Let's face it, the term "Ultimate Reality" connotes a "selfhood" to the elements (dhammas) under consideration. Those that deny it are just blind to their own methods IMO. closely interrelated in multiple ways, that underlie the perceived entity, TG: Except that the "paramattha Dhamma" is also a "perceived entity" ... per above. and 2) the perception of that aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of grasping the relations involved. Persons and other complexes, while not nothing at all, are empty of self, not only in that, like paramattha dhammas, they depend on prior and co-occurring conditions, but also in that they depend on their "parts", and, more finely, on their paramatthic "constituents"fi TG: Adopting the "paramattha dhamma / paramatthic" terminology only acts to become a complicit partner in projecting a "self-entity" quality toward phenomena. It should be REJECTED and replaced with something more suitable to "emptiness." and, moreover, they depend on extensive sankharic processing for being perceived at all. The matter is complicated and subtle, and requires much more detail than is given in simple assertions to the effect that there are no persons, trees, and Dhamma-discussion lists. TG: Seems to me it can be summed up with -- the idea of person is just relative. However, the same applies to all conditions. There is no way to use the term Paramattha Dhammas (as if it were some sort of a foundation) in such a discussion because those states are also just relative. Whatever can be said about "person," can equally be said about the so-called paramattha dhammas. Although the over-all intention of this post and its main point regarding "person" is correct, it falls prey to the notion of paramattha dhammas as somehow being a clear depiction of selflessness. This is an impossible bridge to gap IMO. You can't dance with the Devil and be an Angel at the same time. ;-) With metta, Howard TG #68453 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:29 pm Subject: Gentle wisdom 3. nilovg Dear Joel, thank you very much --------- So when we think about gratitude or to pay respect, It's only understanding the Vipaka. No one to be respected." i love how she turns it completely around. who or what are we thanking, and why, for what? it is vipaka that conditions the sense objects that appear in the sense doors at a given moment. gratitude is the recognition of vipaka... and it can be whether vipaka is kusula or even akusula. ------- N: I am glad you appreciate the way Kh Sujin turns things around. I am so used to it , but for some people it is hard. It seems that she does not give a straight answer to their questions. It is the logical thinking that can cause trouble. That kind of thinking does not really give the answer to our questions. It is the practice with right understanding. When I pay respect to a monk I do not think of a person, but of the value of monkhood. Or when I express gratefulness of the Dhamma to a person, I do not think of that person. It is Kh Sujin, or someone else of my Dhamma friends who helped me in understanding. But when we hear: no one to be respected, it is not any denial of the conventional world. Of course we know that a bhikkhu is present. But it is best not to think so much of the person of the bhikkhu, rather what he represents: the higher life, the monks' life. Nina. #68454 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma egberdina Hi Sarah, Jon and all, On 17/02/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah and Jon, > I discussed the speech with Lodewijk. He does not like the title at > all. It seems like a plea for the emancipation of women. He also > thinks it should not be like a treatise on Dhamma points but more a > speech addressed to those connected with the U.N. More universal, but > then there is a problem if it is made into something superficial. > We wondered about the Brahmavihaaras? She made once a beautiful > speech for policemen who were interested at the Brahmaviharas to be > applied during their tasks. Or the perfections? There are also > Mahayana people. I tend to agree with Lodewijk. It would be a lost opportunity if a perfectly worded speech, containing all the gems of subtle teaching, would be well delivered but not listened to. It may be very dificult, but I would try to anticipate who my audience was, and tailor the speech for their lowest common understanding. Perhaps there are points of commonality between the mission statement(s) of the UN and core Buddhism that can be highlighted? I also thought the Brahmavihaaras were a great idea. Kind Regards Herman #68455 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons egberdina Hi TG and Howard, This is super, in my books. Like TG, I agree with the main thrust of Howard's initial post, and TG has saved me a lot of typing, because his proviso was mine as well. Kind Regards Herman #68456 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/16/07 3:22:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > TG: Up to here I'm with you. > > > There are manifold paramattha dhammas, > TG: There are no Ultimate Realities. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: I wouldn't translate 'paramattha dhamma' as 'ultimate reality'. I would translate it as 'ultimate phenomenon', and by 'ultimate' I mean "irreducible" in the sense of not being a collection and not depending on sankharic construction for its perception. I do not, for example, believe that a warmth sensation, the sensation itself, depends on conceptualization. But the warmth sensation is not self-existent, not independent of conditions (including consciousness), not substantial, and impersonal. It is a fleeting element of experience with only borrowed existence. And I don't believe there are no ultimate realities. I believe there is one: nibbana - unborn, unconditioned, unarising, unceasing, and true peace. ------------------------------------------ There are only Relative Realities. > > That being, the so-called Paramattha Dhammas, though more elemental than > "person," are just as much Relative and Hollow of anything unto-them-selves > as > "person." ----------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that last except for the "just as much". You say they are more elemental than "person". I agree with that. They are not imputed upon other phenomena. They are *conditioned* by other phenomena, but they are not composites. ---------------------------------------- > > Let's face it, the term "Ultimate Reality" connotes a "selfhood" to the > elements (dhammas) under consideration. Those that deny it are just blind > to > their own methods IMO. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I reserve the term only for nibbana, and I don't consider it denoting selfhood in that case, as nibbana is beyond all description including that of "entity". ----------------------------------------- > > > > closely interrelated in multiple ways, that underlie the perceived entity, > TG: Except that the "paramattha Dhamma" is also a "perceived entity" ... > per above. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Not as *I* use the term 'entity'. I do not consider dhammas entities. They are mere fleeting experiences - conditioned, dependent and empty. An entity is a self-existent reality. I know of none. ----------------------------------------- > > > and > 2) the perception of that aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of > > grasping the relations involved. > Persons and other complexes, while not nothing at all, are empty of > self, not only in that, like paramattha dhammas, they depend on prior and > co-occurring conditions, but also in that they depend on their "parts", > and, > more > finely, on their paramatthic "constituents"fi > TG: Adopting the "paramattha dhamma / paramatthic" terminology only acts > to > become a complicit partner in projecting a "self-entity" quality toward > phenomena. It should be REJECTED and replaced with something more suitable > to > "emptiness." ------------------------------------- Howard: Please see all that I've written above. -------------------------------------- > > > and, moreover, they depend on > extensive sankharic processing for being perceived at all. > The matter is complicated and subtle, and requires much more detail > than is given in simple assertions to the effect that there are no persons, > > trees, and Dhamma-discussion lists. > > TG: Seems to me it can be summed up with -- the idea of person is just > relative. However, the same applies to all conditions. There is no way to > use > the term Paramattha Dhammas (as if it were some sort of a foundation) in > such > a discussion because those states are also just relative. Whatever can be > said about "person," can equally be said about the so-called paramattha > dhammas. ---------------------------------------- Howard: No, I don't think so. The paramattha dhammas, that is - the khandhic phenomena that the Buddha reduced the conventional person to, have greater reality to them than "the person". ---------------------------------- > > Although the over-all intention of this post and its main point regarding > "person" is correct, it falls prey to the notion of paramattha dhammas as > somehow being a clear depiction of selflessness. This is an impossible > bridge to > gap IMO. You can't dance with the Devil and be an Angel at the same time. > > ;-) ------------------------------------ Howard: I disagree with your take on my post. ----------------------------------- > > > > With metta, > Howard > ======================= With metta, Howard #68457 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/16/07 3:39:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > This is super, in my books. Like TG, I agree with the main thrust of > Howard's initial post, and TG has saved me a lot of typing, because > his proviso was mine as well. > ======================= Please see my reply to TG, and then tell me whether you still see matters the same way. With metta, Howard #68458 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Sukin, Thank you for your very nice post. It is good to see you're still around, you lurker, you :-) > > There is no control over what the object will be and what the roots. I do not believe that this is useful to discuss. Because whether it is the case or not, it makes no difference to anything. You are basically saying that both the arising of the question "What is the reality of the present moment?" and whatever the answer of the moment will be, are given. So what? I ask that seriously, not in a dismissive way. > > And even if such an understanding were to arise more often, does this stop > any accumulated attachment or the Brahmavihaaras to "Lodewijk" from > arising? I don't think so. > If everything is given, then whether questions are asked or not is also just given, and whatever answers arise, that is also just given. And you saying "I don't think so" is just given. So what? > I think you are being overly critical of the Abhidhamma perspective. This I > believe is due to your not understanding it, and also perhaps that you came > in this time, fascinated and strongly influenced by other lines of thought, > the `existentialism' of Sarte ….?? I was struck by how Sartre did a super job of coming up with the First and Second Noble Truth. He completely lacks any Third or Fourth Noble Truth. Which you do too, did you realise that? "There is no control over what the object will be and what the roots" is a perfect denial of the Third and Fourth Noble Truth. > > If nothing else, I hope that you see the value of kusala in general. This is a strange statement to make for someone who says "There is no control over what the object will be and what the roots." > But even > here it seems, you think to be `human invention' with no direct > correspondence to reality and may be the reason why you think it right to > just say what you want? If I think this, could it be any other way? (Remember - "There is no control over what the object will be and what the roots.") >Please tell me that I misunderstand you!! Again, "there is no control over what the object will be and what the roots." > > Ps: It just occurred to me that perhaps your reaction is due to seeing some > contradiction in the `no self' perspective and that of `beings' and `objects'? > If so, we can discuss this. But right now, I just want to send this off. > Let's just see what happens in a world where both the question and the answer are already given Kind Regards Herman #68459 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons egberdina Hi Howard, On 17/02/07, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 2/16/07 3:39:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > This is super, in my books. Like TG, I agree with the main thrust of > > Howard's initial post, and TG has saved me a lot of typing, because > > his proviso was mine as well. > > > ======================= > Please see my reply to TG, and then tell me whether you still see > matters the same way. > Your clarification certainly shows that we are very close in our thinking. But I do not see any value in making the determination that any sensation, that has already passed, was irreducible. Certainly, as one approaches, enters and climbs up the jhanic ladder, objects become less and less compounded. I cannot say about myself that I have experienced an object that was not able to be differentiated further, nor do I think it is possible to know that such a state had been reached. Kind Regards Herman #68460 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' egberdina Hi Scott, On 17/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > Thanks for all the information on attention and mindfulness. I doubt very much that I use my words in these ways. It is not necessary to go further into it, but if attention is included in all consciousnesses, then there is in Abhidhamma terms no state of inattention. Clearly, everyday usage is not like that at all. I just know there are a myriad of subtle graduations of state of mind from being unaware of musing, to being aware of musing, to not musing, to a point approaching not even not musing :-) Thanks for all your other points. Kind Regards Herman #68461 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: About Mudita egberdina Hi Sarah, > ... > S: This relates to the rest of the discussion as well - we have to use > terms like 'computer keyboard' and the 'Botanic Gardens' as a kind of > shorthand and for easy communication. Yes, agreed. But as I stress above, at any moment > there is only ever the world appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > body-sense or mind-door. Yes, agreed, and when it is thought about this way, that is what is happening. And then if even eyes, ears, nose and all sorts of other thoughts are left behind, we approach jhana. But, invariably, we have to go to the toilet at some time :-) > > However, we've also discussed a lot on compassion recently on the list, > led by Joop. Just as we live in ignorance and attachment most the time, so > do our good friends. Knowing the foibles and sensitive points of other > travellers on the path, just like those we* experience as well, we can > have compassion and show kindness, don't you think? > Absolutely. And how we show kindness and compassion is by doing what we believe is good for another person. They may not agree, though :-) Kind Regards Herman #68462 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] about mudita egberdina Hi Nina, - > You gave us a very nice report I really enjoyed. When people do not > know you and they read the post you wrote to me yesterday they may > misunderstand you, not realizing what is behind it. > --------- > N: It is helpful to know more personal background info sometimes, > otherwise people may think: Herman is provocative, or, does he mean > this, is he serious? > You are searching the truth and you find it difficult > (understandable) from the time you were a pastor. You write in a > provocative style sometimes, because you hope that you will get > nearer to the truth when reading different answers. It happened that > you were disappointed several times and then you left the list for a > while. Am I too personal here? But I do not like others to misjudge > you. Thank you for your comments. I really appreciate them. No, you are not too personal. It is fine. Kind Regards Herman #68463 From: "colette" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:09 am Subject: Mephistopheles, Why Not Merlin, or eventhe author of the Goetia? ksheri3 Good Day Scott, that Mephistopheles intro caught my eye and so I had to read more. > Yeah, if I'm following you, consciousness is momentary, variegated, > object-related and the 'next' moment is never the same as the last > hence there can be no 'consciousness in general'. colette: darn, only a few minutes at this time but I intend on staying out in the cold so that I can get another computer later. "object-related", now I'm working on this thing called consciousness through the Yogacara teachings, something that is "related to" another thing then would be a CONDITIONED THING, no? Is the "object" actually related to ANYTHING OTHER than the mere thought of it, whatever it is? The "object" is the hallucination that you possess and that possesses you. darn, I gotta go. Just when I was on a roll. toodles, colette #68464 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "In some logics, like intuitionist logic, a negation of a negation is meaningless. Ananatta would just be a case of stuttering :-)" L: Nibbana is the deathless. "Deathless" is a double negative. A single negative is a double negative whenever the single negative is not a mere negation (not negation = double negative), whenever the single negative is an actual actuality, a really real reality. Nonsense isn't the spacious emptiness of sense but an actual phenomenon. Therefore "nonsense" is implicitly a double negative because nonsense is not nothing. Some might consider "anatta" to be a double negative if they think anatta is not nothing. Others might consider anatta to be a mere negation and therefore not a double negative. Larry #68465 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:56 pm Subject: Gender and the Dhamma nichiconn Dear Lodewijk, Herman, All The whole of the Buddha's teaching might be read as a plea for the emancipation of beings, female or otherwise. That's one recognition, like three crooked things. There's also the acknowledgement of a woman who doesn't stand so much on ceremony as to speak from a platform of understanding that doesn't, perhaps, truly elevate her to the ranks of Dhammadinna, but justifies our thinking of her as TA, teaching authentic recognition as the highest praise. Not to debate, but does it matter whether it's the UN-Women-ly thing or a funeral? peace, connie #68466 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:20 pm Subject: Re: Mephistopheles, Why Not Merlin, or eventhe author of the Goetia? scottduncan2 Hi colette, c: "that Mephistopheles intro caught my eye and so I had to read more." Mephistopheles seemed an antithetical epithet to the one chosen for me by Herman, so I used it. (Not to mention that Faust sold his soul to Mephistopheles for knowledge, which seemed somehow relevant at the time although why this was so escapes me now.) Merlin may have been better, at least the old man who was enthralled by, was it Morgan la Fay? I'm forgetting my Morte d'Arthur. I love The Once and Future King. I don't even know the author of Goetia but I'm sure this person would have served well the cause since I was goofing around... Blathered I to Herman: "Yeah, if I'm following you, consciousness is momentary, variegated, object-related and the 'next' moment is never the same as the last hence there can be no 'consciousness in general'." colette: "darn, only a few minutes at this time but I intend on staying out in the cold so that I can get another computer later. "'object-related', now I'm working on this thing called consciousness through the Yogacara teachings, something that is "related to" another thing then would be a CONDITIONED THING, no?" I don't know the Yogaacaara teachings. In the Pa.t.thaana, which I don't know well either, the 'conditioning thing' is said to be related to the 'conditioned' thing. I also think that the conditions are the forces which link a cause (thing) to an effect (another thing). I'll check this later but I think that's how it goes. 'Object condition' is one of the forces that bridges cause and effect. c: "Is the "object" actually related to ANYTHING OTHER than the mere thought of it, whatever it is? The "object" is the hallucination that you possess and that possesses you." I think that there are objects that are just existing and don't need consciousness to exist, say ruupa of certain kinds; but I think that consciousness always has an object. I think, therefore, that while some 'objects' are chimeric, others are real. Would it be fair to suggest that wisdom can know and distinguish such things? If a tree is the object then, if I love trees, a tree is indeed the hallucination I possess and that possesses me. Why? Because there is no tree. Does that make sense? I don't really like what I say about things but you did ask... c: "darn, I gotta go. Just when I was on a roll." Nice to meet you, colette. Chat when you roll back. Sincerely, Scott. #68467 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' scottduncan2 Hi Herman, H: "Thanks for all the information on attention and mindfulness. I doubt very much that I use my words in these ways." You're welcome. H: "It is not necessary to go further into it, but if attention is included in all consciousnesses, then there is in Abhidhamma terms no state of inattention. Clearly, everyday usage is not like that at all. I just know there are a myriad of subtle graduations of state of mind from being unaware of musing, to being aware of musing, to not musing, to a point approaching not even not musing :-)" Its amusing to muse about a musing... H: "Thanks for all your other points." Again, you're welcome. Thanks for taking them so kindly. Sincerely, Scott. #68468 From: "joelaltman26" Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:09 pm Subject: Re: Gender and the Dhamma joelaltman26 Dear Connie, dear all: well spoken friend. this friend speaks my mind. thank you. joel >The whole of the Buddha's teaching might be read as a plea for the emancipation of beings, female or otherwise. That's one ... #68469 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 2/16/2007 1:58:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Although the over-all intention of this post and its main point regarding > "person" is correct, it falls prey to the notion of paramattha dhammas as > somehow being a clear depiction of selflessness. This is an impossible > bridge to > gap IMO. You can't dance with the Devil and be an Angel at the same time. > > ;-) ------------------------------------ Howard: I disagree with your take on my post. Since the subject of your post was "person," and I agreed with your statements about "Person," I'm not sure why you would disagree with my take on your post. My post raised another issue, that of terminology. And however you wish to use paramattha dhamma, the term is used by the majority to mean something other than your meaning IMO. Therefore, I still would reject its usage as being confusing at best. I disagree with the outlook that an element, such as consciousness, is not reducible into other elements. It takes a whole constellation of conditions to generate, for example, consciousness. BTW, what do you mean by Sankharic construction? Do you mean conceptualization? To me, any condition is a Sankharic construction so the term doesn't define anything in my mind. Also, your opinion of Nibbana is pure conjecture and conceptualization is it not? It seems odd that you sometimes seem uncomfortable about making claims about the "outside" physical world, yet hold a belief about the Ultimate Reality of Nibbana. Wondering how you resolve that from a Phenomenological perspective. Take Care, TG #68470 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear All, Many thanks for all the feedback to date. We'll try to incorporate comments and we'll be asking you to elaborate! Meanwhile, anyone else, pls also add your feedback too. The more the better. Phil, James and any other writers out there - let us know what you would include! Chris, Joop, Howard and those who've considered the social aspect a lot, let's hear it! Joel, Scott, Azita, Mike and those who are used to listening to KS, pls let us know if you come across material or ideas for inclusion too. Meanwhile, I'll separately post the 2nd draft for the Acceptance Speech we sent on Wednesday (I think) after being told by a friend of KS's feedback to date for the first drafts posted yesterday: a)For the Acceptance Speech - fine, but she would prefer to have/consider it more appropriate to use, the example of a female lay-follower of the Buddha who didn't ordain and wasn't an arahant (so not Dhammadina, but she likes the idea). b)The Talk was fine. ******* Since then and since posting yesterday, we had another call from the friend and KS herself to say: a) She likes the new examples in the Acceptance Speech (you're about to see), but it needs to be 3 times as long!! (Originally we were told 'half a page and short was fine for it', but now she has tried reading it out loud, she realizes it needs to be much longer!!) Also we had thought that she might add personal comments, edit, add other detail, but now it seems not so, both speeches have to be translated into Thai and be sent to the organisers at least a week in advance of the event and she herself, will be going away....pls can we get the final copy back in the next day or two:-/ b) She likes the Talk just as it is, but please would we make it 4 times as long!! It only took her 5 mins or so to read it out loud and it needs to last for 30 mins and 'no', she wouldn't like to elaborate on it, but just wants to read the Talk we submit:-/!:-). Again, pls can we get the final copy back asap. So, lots of urgent help needed! We really will try to incorporate all suggestions to the best or our very limited and time-constrained abilities. Metta, Sarah ======== #68471 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear All, 2nd Draft of this - comments and feedback most welcome! Jon & Sarah =============================================== Outstanding Women in Buddhism Award Acceptance speech I am honoured to have been chosen to receive this recognition from the Awards Committee to mark the United Nations International Women’s Day. Many people associate Buddhism with Buddhist monks. Although the Buddha highly praised the monk’s life properly lived, he also made clear that his teaching was for everyone regardless of gender or status. Thus he described his followers as comprising 4 categories of persons: • monks and nuns (bhikkhus and bhikkhuniis), and • male and female lay-followers. During the Buddha’ lifetime there was a large order of nuns (bhikkhuniis) and there were many eminent female lay-followers. Some of these women gained the highest levels of attainment; some were teachers of the Dhamma to other followers. Some attained enlightenment as nuns, some attained as lay-followers and contintued living as lay-followers after their attainment. Visaakhaa was the daughter of a rich merchant. When she was only 7 years old she visited the Buddha, listened to his teaching and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life, marrying and having 10 children. She visited the Buddha frequently to listen to his discourses and attended daily to the needs of monks. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among the female lay disciples who ministered to the Order. Khujjuttaraa was a slave-woman to Queen Saamaavati. One day she heard the Buddha preach and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She too remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life. She continued living in the same household, teaching to the Queen and the Queen’s five hundred women attendants the Dhamma she heard on her frequent visits to the Buddha. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among lay women with knowledge of the teachings. These truly were ‘outstanding women in Buddhism’. *********** #68472 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear Han, Great to see you back again! We'll all look forward to reading more of your posts, I know. (You may like to do a search for 'Han' on the DSG homepage as there was some feedback to your messages from before you went away and some of Phil's comments come to mind.) Pls start the series on Dana anytime you've settled back too. --- han tun wrote: > Dear Sarah and all, > > First of all, please let me congratulate Khun Sujin > for the prestigious award she is receiving and which > she fully deserves. ... S: Kind of you to say so. Many thanks for your very constructive comments below. ... > > Now, in preparing the Acceptance speech, let us first > look at the letter she received which reads: > "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." > > Therefore, IMHO the speech should start with thanking > the United Nations for organizing the awards ceremony > in recognition of the United Nations International > Women’s Day, and the international committee of > scholars and Buddhist clergy for selecting her as an > Outstanding Woman in Buddhism. .... S: As we are so pressed for time and don't have your knowledge of these matters, would you kindly elaborate on this and post a paragraph (in the 1st person) that we can incorporate into the speech. .... > > Then she should give a brief biography of herself, and > what she is doing, why she is doing, what are the main > themes of her teachings, and what results she have > achieved so far, and what are her future plans for > further development of women in Buddhism, and so on. .... S: I think she was asked to give a brief bio separately which she did. We haven't seen it. We had thought she might add any personal bits along these lines, but she doesn't have any interest in doing so. Again, if you have a few lines you can suggest, pls do so. ....... > > Finally she should say that she accepts the award, not > only on her own behalf but also on behalf of all the > women in the world who are propagating the Buddha’s > teachings to the entire populations. .... S: Again, pls write a sentence or two for us to consider. Perhaps a paragraph including all these points you've mentioned. ..... > > The story of Dhammadinnaa should go into her “Talk” on > Gender and the Dhamma to prove that women can even > excel the men in the dhamma practice. ... S: I see the point, but we've now been asked to make it much longer, not shorter and I know she has no interest in talking about herself:-). We'll look forward to reading further what you come up with. Metta, Sarah ====== #68473 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Thank you for these comments. Because of time limits, if you think of any particularly relevant comments of KS's which are in her books or which you've transcribed and used in your articles/books, pls quote them here for possible inclusion. Metta, Sarah --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah and Jon, > I think the speech is very good. It is about the outstanding women > today so it is good you mention Dhammadinna and then continue. > One passage could be clarified: to forget, that the *object* of the > understanding that is to be developed – that is to say, what it is that > has to be understood: the dhammas of the present moment – are not to be > found in the description of the teachings, in the texts.> > Perhaps this: all the suttas point to this. the eye... etc.> > Perhaps more about the six doors? About: all the teachings lead to > detachment? What is this detachment? What has to be understood? > ****** > Nina. #68474 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Lodewijk, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah and Jon, > I discussed the speech with Lodewijk. He does not like the title at > all. It seems like a plea for the emancipation of women. .... S: Lodewijk, pls would you give us some suggestions for the title. ... >He also > thinks it should not be like a treatise on Dhamma points but more a > speech addressed to those connected with the U.N. More universal, but > then there is a problem if it is made into something superficial. > We wondered about the Brahmavihaaras? She made once a beautiful > speech for policemen who were interested at the Brahmaviharas to be > applied during their tasks. ... S: Again, as we are now expanding the talk anyway, perhaps Lodewijk could write a paragraph or two that he thinks would be particularly suitable for the audience. Nina, did you transcribe this speech (or a similar lecture) she gave or use it in an article/book? If so, would you post any part of it you think would be suitable for possible inclusion. ... Or the perfections? There are also > Mahayana people. ... S: Again, would you kindly quote a couple of paragraphs or so from her book perhaps that would be general enough for possible inclusion. (We can simplify any terms etc as need be). In any case, all these ideas people have are good to post, share and discuss here. It's good to read all kinds of feedback. Metta, Sarah ======== #68475 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > I tend to agree with Lodewijk. It would be a lost opportunity if a > perfectly worded speech, containing all the gems of subtle teaching, > would be well delivered but not listened to. It may be very dificult, > but I would try to anticipate who my audience was, and tailor the > speech for their lowest common understanding. Perhaps there are points > of commonality between the mission statement(s) of the UN and core > Buddhism that can be highlighted? I also thought the Brahmavihaaras > were a great idea. > ... S: Thanks, Herman for your good considerations too. Again, I'm going to ask you if you would try to write a couple of paragraphs along the lines you suggest. Yes, it's a challenge for us all:-) Let me also pass on the 'asap' to all those who are kindly helping us too!! Metta, Sarah ======= #68476 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Gender and the Dhamma sarahprocter... Dear Joel & Connie, Keep your comments flowing too.... Again, if you have any sentences, paragraphs for inclusion (preferably using words from the dictionary!!), they will be appreciated. S. --- joelaltman26 wrote: > Dear Connie, dear all: > > well spoken friend. this friend speaks my mind. thank you. > joel > > > Connie said: > The whole of the Buddha's teaching might be read as a plea for the > emancipation of beings, female or otherwise. That's one recognition, > like three crooked things. > > There's also the acknowledgement of a woman who doesn't stand so much > on ceremony as to speak from a platform of understanding that doesn't, > perhaps, truly elevate her to the ranks of Dhammadinna, but justifies > our thinking of her as TA, teaching authentic recognition as the > highest praise. Not to debate, but does it matter whether it's the UN- > Women-ly thing or a funeral? > > > #68477 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Andrew, Ken H and others not mentioned, --- sarah abbott wrote: > Phil, James and any other writers out there - let us know what you would > include! .... S: Also, I just thought of Andrew T as a professional writer - any draft paragraphs or comments? (Ken H, would you check he's reading this?) And Ken H, how about a choice of closing comments/punch-lines? Any of your comments, draft paras would be of great help too. S. #68478 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear All, I drew James' attention to these speeches and he wrote the following to me off-list and said I was welcome to share it. S. =========== --- James Mitchell wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > I took a look at what you and Jon have written and you do have some > problems. It isn't really a speech at all. (no offense). It is > supposed to be an acceptance speech for an award for women in Buddhism. > Giving some examples of women in Buddhism in the past is fine, but the > speech should focus on women in Buddhism in today's time and the future. > It should inspire more women to become involved in Buddhism. > > Since it is Chinese New Year and all of my friends and boyfriend are out > of town visiting relatives, and I have nothing to do for a few days. I > will write a rough draft of a longer speech and send it to you. 30 > minutes is a very long time to fill though! You need a lot more > material! I will see what I can come up with. > > Metta, > James > --- sarah abbott wrote: <...> > Phil, James and any other writers out there - let us know what you would > include! #68479 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (18) sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all 'Sisters-Enthusiasts', --- connie wrote: > Dear Sisters-Enthusiasts, > This is the last of this set. Again, the text from VRI ala Pruitt plus > > Mrs R-D's verse translation. > > 18. Sa"nghaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa > 18. The commentary on the verse of Therii Sa"nghaa > Giving up desire and hatred means: through the noble path > she abolished desire, which has the nature of being passionate, and > hatred, which has the nature of being evil. And discarding ignorance > means: and having become dispassionate, through the path she destroyed > delusion, which is a forerunner of all that is unwholesome. It is to be > understood thus. .... S: 'through the path she destroyed delusion, which is a forerunner of all that is unwholesome' got my attention. Only through the development of understanding and other path factors can delusion be destroyed. Since delusion is 'the forerunner of all that is unwholesome' (just as wisdom is the forerunner of all that is wholesome), when delusion is seen more and more for what it is by wisdom, the wholesome develops. To give a simple example I heard recently: with more understanding of anatta, there's less thought and concern about oneself. Thx for all the inspiring quotes as usual. Metta, Sarah ====== #68480 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil hantun1 Dear Phil, I read your message #67357, dated Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:01 pm, on the subject of Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) only after I came back from Yangon, at the suggestion by Sarah. I am really honoured by your kind words about me, and I must say that our appreciation of each other’s posts is mutual. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #68481 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A final venting from phil, probably. sarahprocter... Hi Phil, all, Please keep venting - I'd like to pick up now on the point about seclusion, but no need to respond unless you wish. --- Phil wrote: > The other approach to suttas is to choose one that suits one's > purposes, and ignore many others on the same point that don't suit > one's purposes. (Mind you, everybody's guilty of this at times, I'm > sure.) The "seclusion" issue comes to mind. Now there are so many > suttas in which the Buddha explicitly refers to seclusion to mean > just what we think seclusion means. Getting away from people, for > the quiet and withdraw from sensory overload that is needed for > serious meditation. I think of this passage from AN VII, 58: > "dwellings where there are few sounds and little noise, which are > fanned by cool breezes, remote from human habitation, suitable for > seclusion." There are many – empty huts, roots of trees. .... S: Yes, many references to physical seclusion, but for whom? Surely not for everyone. For example, of all the therii accounts I've read in the series so far, the only reference to physical seclusion of any kind which comes to mind was in the case of Dhammadina when she was about to become an arahant with all the Discriminations. As quoted by Connie recently: .... "Saa pabbajitvaa kamma.t.thaana.m gahetvaa katipaaha.m tattha vasitvaa vivekavaasa.m vasitukaamaa aacariyupajjhaayaana.m santika.m gantvaa, "ayyaa, aaki.n.na.t.thaane mayha.m citta.m na ramati, gaamakaavaasa.m gacchaamii"ti aaha. She went forth, took a meditation subject, and after living there for a few days, wanting to live in seclusion(vivekavaasa.m), she went to her teacher and preceptor and said, "Venerable ladies, I do not delight in a place that is full [of people], I shall go live in a residence in a village." Bhikkhuniyo ta.m gaamakaavaasa.m nayi.msu. Saa tattha vasantii atiite madditasa"nkhaarataaya na cirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Tena vutta.m apadaane (apa. therii 2.3.95-130)- The bhikkhuniis led her to a residence in a village. While she was living there, because in the past she had crushed the formations, she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations after a very short time." ..... S: Note: there is no suggestion that all the therii with her should leave the place (full of people) or even that for Dhammadinna it was anything other than her (natural) inclination to do so. In the Nyantiloka dictionary, we read about the 3 kinds of viveka. In the ultimate sense, seclusion refers to the mental detachment from all conditioned dhammas. Not just in one or two suttas, but over and over again in this referred to in the context of enlightenment. Dict: >viveka 'detachment', seclusion, is according to Niddesa, of 3 kinds: (1) bodily detachment (kaaya-viveka), i.e. abiding in solitude free from alluring sensuous objects; (2) mental detachment (citta-viveka), i.e. the inner detachment from sensuous things; (3) detachment from the substrata of existence (upadhi-viveka). In the description of the 1st absorption, the words "detached from sensuous things" (vivicc' eva kaamehi) refer, according to Vis.M. IV, to 'bodily detachment'; the words "detached from karmically unwholesome things" (vivicca akusalehi dhammehi) refer to 'mental detachment'; the words "born of detachment" (vivekaja), to the absence of the 5 hindrances.< ........ We also read in the texts about 'viveka-sukha' (happiness of detachment) Again from the dictionary, this refers to: >viveka-sukha 'happiness of detachment', or aloofness (s. prec). "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not partake of the happiness of renunciation, detachment, peace and enlightenment" (A.VII.86).< ---------- S: I think this last quote is the kind of quote which is often read as suggesting one should live away from society and worldly bustle. But it is the mental state, the happiness of mental detachment which is being referred to. .... >The Buddha > made it crystal clear that it is necessary to have sensory seclusion > from the world to seek his way deeply. .... S: How does being in the forest or village (as opposed to being in the 'bustle')lead to there being any more 'sensory seclusion'? I watched a beautiful documentary last night about a panda living in a cave. Did it have 'sensory seclusion'? Does not having TV, a computer and the other things I believe you discussed really lead to the kind of 'mental detachment' or seclusion which the Buddha recommended? What about seclusion at the present moment, no matter what the lifestyle or inclinations? .... >But Acharn Sujin and her > students have latched on to a single sutta in SN ( I forget the > exact reference, sorry) which refers to the momentary seclusion that > is provided by the understanding of a dhamma, wherever one is. ... S: I think you're referring to the Migajala sutta, 35:63. Yes, it's a favourite of mine, but the message is surely the same throughout the Salayatanavagga which you used to appreciate so much. For example, 'all is burning - the eye...eye-consciousness...eye-contact.....Rurning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hatred, with the fire of delusion....' and so on. Do you mean to tell me that such 'burning' is less applicable if we were to retreat to the forest or the mountains of Quebec or ordain? Don't these suttas about 'full understanding', 'the All', 'Burning' and so on all refer to the present moment, to the ignorance and greed with regard to what is seen, heard and thought now, regardless of the place we find ourselves? And not only in Salayatanavagga, the same applies to Anguttara Nikaya (as I tried to indicate with the passages on the elements, for example), the other Nikayas, as well as the Vinaya and Abhidhamma. The 6 worlds of realities are just the same whether we are here or there. ...... Please don't let a response or two deter you from your other vents. I look forward to the 'series' to Jon and the other one you suggested was the final straw.....:-) Metta, Sarah ====== #68482 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech nilovg Dear Sarah and James, What James said is litterally what Lodeijk said to me today. He is about to write now, and a good idea of it is combined with other ideas. Yes, it is very long. Nina. Op 17-feb-2007, om 9:47 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I drew James' attention to these speeches #68483 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persons upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/16/07 11:45:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi Howard > > In a message dated 2/16/2007 1:58:36 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > upasaka@... writes: > > Although the over-all intention of this post and its main point regarding > >"person" is correct, it falls prey to the notion of paramattha dhammas as > >somehow being a clear depiction of selflessness. This is an impossible > >bridge to > >gap IMO. You can't dance with the Devil and be an Angel at the same time. > > > > ;-) > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > I disagree with your take on my post. > > > > > Since the subject of your post was "person," and I agreed with your > statements about "Person," I'm not sure why you would disagree with my take > on your > post. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! So, could I have saved on expenditure of finger and hand effort by merely typing the subject heading? ;-)) ---------------------------------------------- > > My post raised another issue, that of terminology. And however you wish to > > use paramattha dhamma, the term is used by the majority to mean something > other than your meaning IMO. Therefore, I still would reject its usage as > being > confusing at best. > > I disagree with the outlook that an element, such as consciousness, is not > reducible into other elements. It takes a whole constellation of > conditions > to generate, for example, consciousness. -------------------------------------------- Howard: But, TG, I'm not talking about the constellation of phenomena that condition the arising of a consciousness - I'm only talking about the consciousness. If one counts conditions, in a sense each phenomenon is, interrelatedly, all phenomena. But conditionality isn't identity, unless one wants to speak only in metaphor. ------------------------------------------- > > BTW, what do you mean by Sankharic construction? Do you mean > conceptualization? To me, any condition is a Sankharic construction so the > term doesn't > define anything in my mind. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I meant conceptualization. Sankharic construction includes much more in the way of fabricational operations. You are right - I should have been more precise. I do think, however, that while one's sankharic operations, most specifically, cetana, are *among* the conditions for the arising of all our experiences - after all, it was our kamma that led to birth in this specific realm of experience, making cetana a conditrion for all that arises in "us", it is too strong to characterize all experiences as "sankharic constructs". Lots, if not most, of our experiences find their primary conditions among sources other than our own sankharic fabrication. --------------------------------------------- > > Also, your opinion of Nibbana is pure conjecture and conceptualization is > it > not? It seems odd that you sometimes seem uncomfortable about making > claims > about the "outside" physical world, yet hold a belief about the Ultimate > Reality of Nibbana. Wondering how you resolve that from a Phenomenological > > perspective. ------------------------------------------- Howard: My sense of being caught up in the midst of a grand illusion has always (in this lifetime) been keen, and I have always believed that were I only to remove the blinders, the reality, always there, would appear. I have always believed in the uniqueness of "reality" - perhaps it's my Jewish background ("YHVH echad" - the unconditioned infinite is one), or perhaps it's just the mystical inclination I came into this world with. In any case, if I didn't believe that there is the unborn that the Buddha speaks of, I would not see the point of the Dhamma. But having seen at most a glimmer of a glimmer of a glimmer, I would have to agree that I do not know nibbana as experiential reality. I'm reminded of a sutta in which there was described looking at the water at the bottom of a very deep well - the distance glimpse not providing an iota of taste of the sweet, fresh liquid. So, I could certainly be wrong, though I don't believe it. ------------------------------------------------- > > Take Care, TG > > ======================== With metta, Howard #68484 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:35 am Subject: Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi Howard, If I may, I'd like to, as an exercise, add counterpoint to some of the points you offer - they are essentially a version of a Puggalavaadin perspective, as I see it. H: "As I see the matter, persons are no less real and no more real than any other conventionally existent complex-entities." In other words, persons are concepts, just like any other concept. H: "They are simply more important, as the belief in their existence as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of sentient beings." Being concepts, it seems unusual to consider one concept to be more important than any other. 'Sentient beings' are also concept, and hence a 'belief in their existence as unites/entities' is merely belief in a concept. To say, 'I believe in the existence of a unified entity called a person' seems no different than to say, 'I belieive in the existence of a unified entity called a God' (or an apple, for that matter). H: "Persons, just as all complexes, are unreal as individual phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or delimitable. However, complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not *fully* illusion. Why? For the same reason that they are erroneously grasped as entities to begin with: 1) There are manifold paramattha dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways, that underlie the perceived entity, and 2) the perception of that aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of grasping the relations involved." One's 'means of grasping the relations involved' is known as 'clinging'. I don't think there is such a thing as a fractional illusion. How can this be? Is there partial clinging? I think it is erroneous to conceive a relationship between 'manifold paramattha dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways' and 'the perception of the aggregate of phenomena as a unity'. The former arises and falls away whereas concepts go on forever and ever and ever. 'Perception 'of unity is total illusion. H: "Persons and other complexes, while not nothing at all, are empty of self, not only in that, like paramattha dhammas, they depend on prior and co-occurring conditions, but also in that they depend on their 'parts', and, more finely, on their paramatthic 'constituents', and, moreover, they depend on extensive sankharic processing for being perceived at all." Isn't this like cutting up the cow and then gluing it back together again? Sincerely, Scott. #68485 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:10 pm Subject: Fwd: Lodewijk's draft nilovg Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: Nina van Gorkom > Datum: 17 februari 2007 21:09:13 GMT+01:00 > Aan: sarah abbott > Onderwerp: Lodewijk's draft > > Dear Sarah, > this is Lodewijks' draft. He found your first draft better than the > second, you left out essential things. > Nina. > -------- > I wish to dedicate this award to all women and in particular to the > courageous women of Asia. > The united Nations have rightly developed important policies and > instruments to enhance the rights of women in the form of treaties, > policy making organs and supporting funds. In the Buddhist > teachings women are free and equal persons, not subservient to > doctrines, externa, rules or external authorities, equally able to > follow the Buddha's path and to strive for the ultimate freedom > from ignorance and all defilements. In the scriptures we find > abundant evidence of the role and the importance of women in daily > life and in the application of the Dhamma as taught by the Buddha. > Thus, we read inthe Commentary to the first book of the Abhidhamma, > the Atthasalini, how the Buddha preached the Abhidhamma to his own > mother in the Tavatimsa heaven. He often exhorted his followers to > rever their parents, mother and father. Numerous are the examples > of women of all walks of life, attaining enlightenment after > listening to the Dhamma and in daily circumstances, even when > burning the food in the kitchen. On many occasions, the Buddha > showed his profound respect for women. In the Salayatana Vagga > (Kindred Sayings IV, Maatugaama Samyutta, Kindred Sayings about > womankind, §34, Growth) he speaks of the powers and qualities of > women: "She grows in faith, grows in virtue, in learning, in > generosity, in wisdom. Making such growth, she takes hold of the > essential, she takes hold of the better." And in verse: > Who in this world in faith and virtue grows, > In wisdom, generosity and lore - > A virtuous disciple, in this world > She wins what is essential for herself. > > The Buddha's teachings are profoundly human and compassionate and > directly applicable to daily life. The Scriptures show us vividly > the active role played by women in society in the days of the > Buddha. Fortunately, the world, in this regard has not changed and, > if so, for the better. Also today, the active, crucial role of > women in society in Asia is strongly supported, encouraged and > inspired by the Buddha's teachings. > Consider, for instance, the Parami's, the ten Perfections leading > to enlightenment. Generosity, morality, renunciation, wisdom, > energy, patience, truthfulness, determination, loving kindness and > equanimity, each of the ten perfections, when developed with > understanding, will gradually lead to the lessening of attachment, > illiwill and ignorance. And in this way they will also enhance > coherence, solidarity and progress in society. Also today, women > can learn and benefit so much from the teachings, by considering > and applying the ten Parami's, thus directly influencing and > strengthening human society. > And consider the Four Divine Abidings, the "Brahmavihara's": metta, > loving kindness, karuna, compassion, mudita, sympathetic joy and > upekkha, equanimity, the foundations of human peace and harmony, > guiding principles and tasks for all women in both family and > social life. > The Triple Gem, the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, is like a > bright star, guiding humanity towards wisdom, peace and ultimate > freedom. > The Buddha's teachings, are teachings of love, human respect, non- > discrimination and tolerance. They are not opposed to any religion > or creed, they preach non-violence and peace. > We should have full confidence in the Dhamma, encouraged and > inspired by the words of the Buddha, addressed to monks and lay > people, men and women alike (Anguttara Nikaya, Book of the Twos, ch > 2, §9): > "Abandon evil, o monks! One can abandon evil, o monks! If it > were impossible to abandon evil, I would not ask you to do so. But > as it can be done, therefore, I say "Abandon evil". > "Cultivate the good, o monks! One can cultivate what is good, o > monks. If it were impossible to cultivate the good, I would not ask > you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say, "Cultivate > the good!" > > ******* > Lodewijk. > #68486 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/17/07 1:36:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > If I may, I'd like to, as an exercise, add counterpoint to some of the > points you offer - they are essentially a version of a Puggalavaadin > perspective, as I see it. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Then you see it wrongly. I see nothing to "the person" other than the underlying, complexly interrelated dhammas. It is a convention to treat them as a unity due to the interrelationships, but, other than them, there is nothing. The personalists presumed some shadow something-or-other that was neither the same as nor different from them. I am not a personalist. ---------------------------------------- > > H: "As I see the matter, persons are no less real and no more real > than any other conventionally existent complex-entities." > > In other words, persons are concepts, just like any other concept. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, concepts only, but not fictions and not nothing at all. Persons are not baseless concepts. They are dynamic aggregates of complexly interrelated experiential phenomena. The dhammas underlying them do occur (i.e. arise & cease), and the relationships holding among those dhammas are real. And that is all there is to persons and all other non-fictional conventional objects - interrelated dhammas. Ignoring the patterns of relations holding among dhammas is ignoring an essential aspect of reality. Selves, however, ARE baseless. There is no self to be found in *anything*, including the paramattha dhammas. If you cannot see the distinction between selves and persons, that is your problem, not mine. There is not the same degree of unreality to persons as to selves, for the latter do not exist at all in any sense. It is not false to say that Gotama was a person who became the Buddha. It is false to say that there was any "self" or core of self-existence in Gotama, even before his awakening. Frankly, Scott, if you believe there was no Buddha in any sense at all, then I don't understand what you think you are discussing on this list. ------------------------------------------------------ > > H: "They are simply more important, as the belief in their existence > as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of > sentient beings." > > Being concepts, it seems unusual to consider one concept to be more > important than any other. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I think it would be worthwhile for you to think about that conclusion! Your compulsion to think in terms of nihilism when it comes to aggregates and substantialism when it comes to dhammas leads to weird conclusion, IMO. ---------------------------------------------- 'Sentient beings' are also concept, and > > hence a 'belief in their existence as unites/entities' is merely > belief in a concept. To say, 'I believe in the existence of a unified > entity called a person' seems no different than to say, 'I belieive in > the existence of a unified entity called a God' (or an apple, for that > matter). ---------------------------------------- Howard: I exactly do NOT believe in unified entities!! Either you haven't read my posts or you just cannot follow them. ---------------------------------------- > > H: "Persons, just as all complexes, are unreal as individual > phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or > delimitable. However, complexes perceived as unities are not nothing > at all. They are not *fully* illusion. Why? For the same reason that > they are erroneously grasped as entities to begin with: 1) There are > manifold paramattha dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways, > that underlie the perceived entity, and 2) the perception of that > aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of grasping the > relations involved." > > One's 'means of grasping the relations involved' is known as > 'clinging'. I don't think there is such a thing as a fractional > illusion. How can this be? Is there partial clinging? I think it is > erroneous to conceive a relationship between 'manifold paramattha > dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways' and 'the perception of > the aggregate of phenomena as a unity'. The former arises and falls > away whereas concepts go on forever and ever and ever. 'Perception > 'of unity is total illusion. ----------------------------------------- Howard: As I said before, there are degrees to things, and there are both baseless and well-based concepts. But strictly black & white understanding is incapable of grasping this. ------------------------------------------- > > H: "Persons and other complexes, while not nothing at all, are empty > of self, not only in that, like paramattha dhammas, they depend on > prior and co-occurring conditions, but also in that they depend on > their 'parts', and, more finely, on their paramatthic 'constituents', > and, moreover, they depend on extensive sankharic processing for being > perceived at all." > > Isn't this like cutting up the cow and then gluing it back together again? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > ========================= Enough, Scott. I don't want to discuss straw men! With metta, Howard #68487 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi Howard, Thanks for the reply. H: "Then you see it wrongly...Frankly, Scott, if you believe there was no Buddha in any sense at all, then I don't understand what you think you are discussing on this list...Your compulsion to think in terms of nihilism when it comes to aggregates and substantialism when it comes to dhammas leads to weird conclusion, IMO...Either you haven't read my posts or you just cannot follow them...But strictly black & white understanding is incapable of grasping this...Enough, Scott. I don't want to discuss straw men!" My apologies for trying your patience. Sincerely, Scott. #68488 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma egberdina Hi Connie, On 17/02/07, connie wrote: > Dear Lodewijk, Herman, All > > The whole of the Buddha's teaching might be read as a plea for the > emancipation of beings, female or otherwise. That's one recognition, like > three crooked things. > > There's also the acknowledgement of a woman who doesn't stand so much on > ceremony as to speak from a platform of understanding that doesn't, > perhaps, truly elevate her to the ranks of Dhammadinna, but justifies our > thinking of her as TA, teaching authentic recognition as the highest > praise. Not to debate, but does it matter whether it's the UN-Women-ly > thing or a funeral? > Thanks for your post. I'm not sure what you are meaning to convey. If it helps any, I personally don't believe that the funeral of a woman is any different in value than the funeral of a man. Kind Regards Herman #68489 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Objects egberdina Hi Larry, Thank you for continuing to prompt me to reflect on what I think is very fundamental, and therefore very important. On 17/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > L: Nibbana is the deathless. Yes, but this is shorthand for "Nibbana is the deathless to the dying and to those subject to death". Nibbana is not the deathless in itself or to itself. Nibbana stands in no relation with itself. It is beyond, or before, all opposites. It does not contain within itself the seed for negation. "Deathless" is a double negative. A single > negative is a double negative whenever the single negative is not a mere > negation (not negation = double negative), whenever the single negative > is an actual actuality, a really real reality. Nonsense isn't the > spacious emptiness of sense but an actual phenomenon. Therefore > "nonsense" is implicitly a double negative because nonsense is not > nothing. This is very well pointed out. And it is all from the perspective of consciousness, which is negation in it's foundation. All objects of consciousness are real, and they are all negations of sorts. Negation is the basis of all phenomena. But the being and reality of consciousness is quite other than the being and reality of Nibbana. > > Some might consider "anatta" to be a double negative if they think > anatta is not nothing. Others might consider anatta to be a mere > negation and therefore not a double negative. > Kind Regards Herman #68490 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma egberdina Hi Sarah, > ... > S: Thanks, Herman for your good considerations too. > > Again, I'm going to ask you if you would try to write a couple of > paragraphs along the lines you suggest. Yes, it's a challenge for us > all:-) This is my shot at it. It is the truth of the reality of suffering that brings people together, in a search for what is good for us all. This truth of our common suffering was perfectly penetrated and expounded by the Buddha. It is not a truth known by men in one way, and by women another way. It is a truth that applies to all living beings. Nor is there a two-fold cause for this suffering, one for men, and a different one for women. At the root of the suffering of all beings is the seemingly unquenchable thirst for needing to be like this or that, and for situations to be this way or that way, or even just the craving for having things, any things. This truth of the reality of craving as the root of suffering was also perfectly penetrated and expounded by the Buddha. This is the end of my shot at it. Now you could choose to insert statements that there is noone who can do anything, or that there is no difference between being given this award and going to the toilet. But I wouldn't recommend it :-) Kind Regards Herman #68491 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech hantun1 Dear Sarah, > > Han: IMHO the speech should start with thanking the United Nations for organizing the awards ceremony in recognition of the United Nations International Women’s Day, and the international committee of scholars and Buddhist clergy for selecting her as an Outstanding Woman in Buddhism. > Sarah: As we are so pressed for time and don't have your knowledge of these matters, would you kindly elaborate on this and post a paragraph (in the 1st person) that we can incorporate into the speech. Han: [*……………….., *……………….., *……………….., *……………….. (names and designations of dignitaries sitting on the podium), Excellencies, and Distinguished Guests, At the outset, I would like to express my deep appreciation to the United Nations for organizing this awards ceremony in recognition of the United Nations International Women’s Day, and my sincere thanks to the International Committee of Scholars and Buddhist Clergy for selecting me as an Outstanding Woman in Buddhism.] ========== > > Han: Then she should give a brief biography of herself, and what she is doing, why she is doing, what are the main themes of her teachings, and what results she have achieved so far, and what are her future plans for further development of women in Buddhism, and so on. > Sarah: I think she was asked to give a brief bio separately which she did. We haven't seen it. We had thought she might add any personal bits along these lines, but she doesn't have any interest in doing so. Again, if you have a few lines you can suggest, pls do so. Han: If that is the case (if she doesn't have any interest in doing so), I do not have anything to write on this point. ========== > > Han: Finally she should say that she accepts the award, not only on her own behalf but also on behalf of all the women in the world who are propagating the Buddha’s teachings to the entire populations. > Sarah: Again, pls write a sentence or two for us to consider. Perhaps a paragraph including all these points you've mentioned. Han: [In conclusion, I would like to say that I am most happy to accept this prestigious award. I am accepting this award not just for myself, but on behalf of all women who are dedicated throughout their lives for propagating the Buddha’s teachings to all walks of life. Thank you very much.] ========== Respectfully, Han #68492 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 6:48 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: What are the aggregets of Intellect? dacostacharles Thanks Connie, I forgot about this site/information. It contains all the info needed to make a model of a Buddhist view on the mind and personality, however, the last time I looked at it I thought it unclear, a boring read, and incorrect at some points; therefore, I did not get far with it. I have a tendency to search for more or other interpretations, especially when I find information I don't: understand, agree with, or think it is unclear. The bottom line is I get caught in an activity trap, start spinning my wheels and go nowhere, so nothing appears to be getting done.. I think you may have sparked the light that will guide me out the current trap, because I am more accepting/less judgmental now. --- It is a good thing you referred me back to it, I am more ready to receive it. Yours truly, Charles DaCosta #68493 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:15 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (27) nichiconn Dear Friends, part one of Abhayaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa / The commentary on the verses of Therii Abhayaa* [*RD: Fearless. ] Abhaye bhiduro kaayoti-aadikaa abhayattheriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m pu~n~na.m upacinantii sikhissa bhagavato kaale khattiyamahaasaalakule nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa aru.nara~n~no aggamahesii ahosi. The verse beginning Abhayaa, fragile is the body is Therii Abhayaa's. She too performed meritorious deed under previous Buddhas and accumulated merit in various lives as [her] basis for release. At the time of the Blessed One Sikhii she was born in the family of a wealthy Khattiya. When she came of age, she became the chief queen of King Aru.na. Raajaa tassaa ekadivasa.m gandhasampannaani satta uppalaani adaasi. Saa taani gahetvaa "ki.m me imehi pi.landhantehi. Ya.mnuunaaha.m imehi bhagavanta.m puujessaamii"ti cintetvaa nisiidi. Bhagavaa ca bhikkhaacaaravelaaya.m raajanivesana.m paavisi Saa bhagavanta.m disvaa pasannamaanasaa paccuggantvaa tehi pupphehi puujetvaa pa~ncapati.t.thitena vandi. One day, the king gave her seven sweet-smelling lotuses. She took them and thought to herself, "Why adorn myself with these? Let me rather honour the Blessed One with them." And she sat down. And the Blessed One entered the king's residence when he went out on his food round. When she saw the Blessed One, she was favourably disposed [towards him], went to meet him, honoured him with those flowers, and paid homage with the fivefold prostration. Saa tena pu~n~nakammena devamanussesu sa.msarantii imasmi.m buddhuppaade ujjeniya.m kulagehe nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa abhayamaatusahaayikaa hutvaa taaya pabbajitaaya tassaa sinehena sayampi pabbajitvaa taaya saddhi.m raajagahe vasamaanaa ekadivasa.m asubhadassanattha.m siitavana.m agamaasi. Through that meritorious deed she journeyed on among devas and men, and in this Buddha era, she was born in the home of a [good] family in Ujjenii. When she came of age, she became the friend of Abhayamaataa, and when she [Abhayamaataa] became one who has gone forth, she [Abhayaa] went forth herself out of affection for her [Abhayamaataa] and lived together with her in Raajagaha. One day, she went to Siitavana in order to contemplate an unpleasant [object]. [RD: Reborn for this among gods and men, she was, in this Buddha-dispensation, born once more at Ujjenii in a respectable family, and became the playmate of Abhaya's mother. And when the latter had left the world, Abhayaa, for love of her, also took orders. Dwelling with her at Raajagaha, she went one day to Cool-Grove to contemplate on a basis of some foul thing. *143 *143 B. Psy., p. 69. The 'foul things' were corpses or human bones, such as might be seen in any charnel field, where the dead were exposed and not cremated. I have before me a photograph of a Ceylonese bhikkhu seated in the cleft of a rock contemplating two skulls and other bones lying before him - a modern snapshot of a scene that might be 2,500 years old instead of 250 days. ] Satthaa gandhaku.tiya.m nisinnova tassaa anubhuutapubba.m aaramma.na.m purato katvaa tassaa uddhumaatakaadibhaava.m pakaasesi. Ta.m disvaa sa.mvegamaanasaa a.t.thaasi. The Teacher, seated in his Perfumed Chamber, made [appear] before her what she had previously experienced as a support [for her contemplation] and explained to her the [meditative] state reached through [contemplating] a corpse, etc. Having seen that, she stood there with her mind profoundly stirred. [RD: The Master, seated in his Fragrant Chamber, caused her to see before her the kind of object she had been directed to choose. Seeing the vision, dread seized her. ] Satthaa obhaasa.m pharitvaa purato nisinna.m viya attaana.m dassetvaa- 35. "Abhaye bhiduro kaayo, yattha sattaa puthujjanaa; nikkhipissaamima.m deha.m, sampajaanaa satiimatii. 36. "Bahuuhi dukkhadhammehi, appamaadarataaya me; ta.nhakkhayo anuppatto, kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti.- Imaa gaathaa abhaasi. Then the Teacher sent forth his radiance and appeared as though he were seated before her, and he spoke these verses: 35. Abhayaa, fragile is the body to which ordinary individuals are attached. Attentive and possessed of mindfulness, I shall discard this body. 36. Delighting in vigilance because of many painful objects, I have obtained the annihilation of craving. I have done the Buddha's teaching. [RD: Then the Master, sending forth glory, appeared as if seated before her, and said: Brittle, O Abhayaa, the body is, Whereto the worldling's happiness is bound. For me I shall lay down this mortal frame, Mindful and self-possessed in all I do. (35) For all my heart was in the work whereby I struggled free from all that breedeth Ill. Craving have I destroyed, and brought to pass That which the Buddhas have revealed to men. *144 (36) *144 Lit. (as in many other verses), 'done is the will, or rather the system or teaching (saasana.m) of the Buddha.' Verses 36, 38, and 41 (except the last two lines) are in the text identical, though varied in translation. ] ====== peace, connie #68494 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:21 pm Subject: Re: Persons philofillet Hi Howard and all In my opinion we can go wrong if we try to make this issue too complex, or if we have too much faith in our ability to understand paramattha dhammas in the way the Buddha understood them. Every morning I refect on this passage from Vism, which we are all familiar with: "...There comes to be the more conventional term 'a being', 'a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption 'I am,' or 'I'; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. THe vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision." There are so many degrees of "correct vision." For me, correct visioin is understanding the above passage and reflecting on it so degree, and throughout the day if it comes up. It's my opinioin that many fall into the trap of relying on a deeper "correct vision" than they have, thus people are prematurely reduced to paramattha dhammas by minds that are hungry for wisdom. Yes, people are paramattha dhammas. But if we go through life reflecting on this constantly, or if we ignore the Buddha's very clear teaching about people realting to people, we are off on a seductively appealing (wisdom is very appealing) but misleading path. It is enough to understand "in the ultimate sense there is only materiality-mentality." It shouldn't and can't and won't be experienced that way by busy worldlings. Busy worldling can and should (and this wone will) develop intentional practices that provide the foundation that the Buddha clearly taught is necessary for the deepening of that "correct vision." Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > As I see the matter, persons are no less real and no more real than > any other conventionally existent complex-entities. #68495 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil philofillet Hello Han Welcome back. > I am really honoured by your kind words about me, and > I must say that our appreciation of each other's posts > is mutual. Thank you. Really, I'm very grateful to you. Your small comment "I think some of our friends here don't pay enough attention to sila" (or words to that effect) helped me a lot. Now I have studied a lot of suttas that make it so clear that the Buddha urged virtuous behaviour in body, speech and mind not only because it leads to happiness in this life but more importantly because it helps build the necessary foundation for anything deeper than that. I will be sharing a lot of suttas that I have been appreciating. The gentle tone of your posts is also a good example for us all. But I guess I have said that enough. Thanks again. Metta, Phil #68496 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech ken_aitch Hi Sarah and Jon, Wow, you are living one of my exam dreams! So much to do and so little time to do it in! :-) For some inexplicable reason, I didn't check my DSG messages yesterday afternoon. I was busy writing a silly computer program. But - better late than never - I have come up with a bit of an idea. The draft you wrote (message # 68430) was excellent. So too was Lodewijk's draft. Both were too short, so, simply join the two up and Bob's your uncle! Here is my rough idea of how you might join the two up. (I haven't thought yet about how to add your other bit (about the women in the scriptures). I assume it could be added on at the end.): > "Abandon evil, o monks! One can abandon evil, o monks! If it > were impossible to abandon evil, I would not ask you to do so. But > as it can be done, therefore, I say "Abandon evil". > "Cultivate the good, o monks! One can cultivate what is good, o > monks. If it were impossible to cultivate the good, I would not ask > you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say, "Cultivate > the good!" > You will notice the words, "If it were not possible." I urge you to consider, why did the Buddha include the words, "If it were not possible?" Why would there be any question as to whether or not it were "possible" to abandon evil? May I suggest to you that, when we have heard the Buddha's teaching correctly, the most natural question to spring to mind will be, "Is it possible to abandon evil?" The Buddha's doctrine is one of anatta – of not-self. In the truth and reality taught by the Buddha, there is no self. Nor is there anything that pertains to a self. Therefore – given that there is no self, nor anything pertaining to a self - how is it possible to abandon evil? How is it possible to do anything? These urgent questions will occur to us when we have heard the Dhamma correctly. The answers are profound and difficult to see. They are so extremely profound and so extremely difficult to see that one would have to ask, "Is it possible? Is it possible to understand this profound teaching of the Buddha, which leads to the abandonment of evil?" > The name `Buddha' comes from the word meaning `enlightened'. > The Buddha was enlightened to the way things truly are. > The way things truly are is called the Dhamma. > > From the time of his enlightenment until his death some 45 years later, > the Buddha taught the Dhamma to those who were able to receive and > understand it. > > Thus the word Dhamma means both > > • the way things are in reality, and > • the teaching of the Buddha as a description of that. > > Another meaning of the word `dhamma' is: anything that is real in the > ultimate sense. > > Examples of things that are real in the ultimate sense include: > > • present consciousness, > • present sense-door data, and Good luck! Ken H #68497 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:41 am Subject: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and all) - Karunadasa in his "Dhamma Theory" writes the following about Puggalavada: _________________________ About a hundred years after its [i.e., the dhamma theory's] formulation, as a reaction against it, there emerged what came to be known as puggalavada or "personalism," a philosophical theory that led to a further clarification of the nature of dhammas. Now here it may be noted that according to the early Buddhist discourses there is no denial as such of the concept of the person ( puggala), if by "person" is understood, not an enduring entity distinct from the five khandhas nor an agent within the khandhas, but simply the sum total of the five causally connected and ever-changing khandhas. From the point of view of the dhamma-analysis, this can be restated by substituting the term dhamma for the term khandha, for the dhammas are the factors that obtain by analysis of the khandhas.However, this way of defining the concept of person (puggala) did not satisfy some Buddhists. In their opinion the dhamma theory as presented by the Theravadins led to a complete depersonalization of the individual being and consequently failed to provide adequate explanations of such concepts as rebirth and moral responsibility. Hence these thinkers insisted on positing the person (puggala) as an additional reality distinct from the khandhas or dhammas . As recorded in the Kathavatthu, the "Points of Controversy," the main contention of the Puggalavadins or "Personalists" is that the person is known in a real and ultimate sense (saccikatthaparamatthena upalabbhati ----------------------------------------------------- And from Wikipedia there is the following: ______________________________ The Pudgalavada or "Personalist" school of Buddhism broke off from the orthodox Sthaviravada (elders) school around 280 BCE. The Sthaviravadins interpreted the doctrine of anatta to mean that, since there is no true "self", all that we think of as a self (i.e., the subject of sentences, the being that transmigrates) is merely the aggregated skandhas. The Pudgalavadins asserted that, while there is no atman, there is a pudgala or "person", which is neither the same as nor different from the skandhas. They would argue that without such a person, it is impossible to account for karma, rebirth, or nirvana. -------------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #68498 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:49 pm Subject: Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy scottduncan2 Hi Howard, Thanks. H: "Karunadasa in his "Dhamma Theory" writes the following about Puggalavada...They would argue that without such a person, it is impossible to account for karma, rebirth, or nirvana." Am I to discuss this with you? Sincerely, Scott. #68499 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gender and the Dhamma sarahprocter... Nina & All, Just a brief note to thank everyone to date for all the input on this and the Acceptance Speech (printed out, but not yet read). We're dashing off to the beach now, so will take them with us to read and work on further after a swim and surf. Nina, pls thank Lodewijk for his kind help. We'd still like to see any notes you transcribed/used from the Police talk you mentioned and also any paragraph or two from the Perfections which could possibly be incorporated, though the Police talk brahma viharas might be the most relevant. We're very conscious of the need to be KS's 'voice' - i.e what she is happy saying as they are her talks. Metta, Sarah ====== #68500 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech egberdina Hi KenH, > > For some inexplicable reason, I didn't check my DSG messages > yesterday afternoon. I was busy writing a silly computer program. > But - better late than never - I have come up with a bit of an idea. > I'd love to hear what sort of computer programs you like to write, and what languages you write in. I dabble in VB and write programs that play different games, like chess, for me on the internet, so I get to look as though I am a half-decent player :-) Cheers Herman I'm sure there's lots of Dhamma in there. You just have to know how to look. #68501 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 6:50 pm Subject: Computer programming /was Re: Acceptance speech ken_aitch Hi Herman, ------------ H: > I'd love to hear what sort of computer programs you like to write, and what languages you write in. I dabble in VB and write programs that play different games, like chess, for me on the internet, so I get to look as though I am a half-decent player :-) -------------- I am learning Python. Howard is an old hand at it, BTW. My first ever computer - an Amstrad - came with instructions for Mallard Basic. It was great! I wrote a very long program (probably twice as long as it needed to be) that played an excellent (though I say so myself) game of draw poker. Twenty-three years later, I purchased Y-----'s (trade name deleted to protect the innocent) simulated Texas Hold'em Poker. It was woeful! So I have decided to write a decent one. --------------------- H: > I'm sure there's lots of Dhamma in there. You just have to know how to look. --------------------- Too right! I hear you are working on a program that converts concepts into realities. :-) Ken H #68502 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:02 pm Subject: Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing sukinderpal Hi Herman, > Thank you for your very nice post. It is good to see you're still > around, you lurker, you :-) I am usually quite behind in my reading, writing posts would make me even less up to date. I read your response while cutting and pasting on to Word for printing out and reading later. So infact I hadn't even read many of the posts that went before yours, the one that I responded to. > > There is no control over what the object will be and what the roots. > > I do not believe that this is useful to discuss. Because whether it is > the case or not, it makes no difference to anything. You are basically > saying that both the arising of the question "What is the reality of > the present moment?" and whatever the answer of the moment will be, > are given. So what? I ask that seriously, not in a dismissive way. I often have difficulty understanding your statements, too cryptic and philosophical sometimes? It is the same here. Do you mean to say that you read me as saying that 'everything that arises in the moment is already determined by/in the citta that went before'? You repeat the same point in the rest of your post, so I will wait for your response first to then respond to it. With metta, Sukin > > > > > And even if such an understanding were to arise more often, does this stop > > any accumulated attachment or the Brahmavihaaras to "Lodewijk" from > > arising? I don't think so. > > > > If everything is given, then whether questions are asked or not is > also just given, and whatever answers arise, that is also just given. > And you saying "I don't think so" is just given. So what? #68503 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil hantun1 Dear Phil, Thank you very much for drawing attention to the siila once again. I am a strong believer in the value of siila. When one says the siila is the foundation for samaadhi and pa~n~naa, one might visualize it as an inert concrete foundation that supports a building. But actually it is a “living” support like the roots of a tree. As the roots grow the tree also grows, samaadhi as the trunk, branches and leaves, and pa~n~naa as flowers and fruits. As the tree grows it also makes the roots grow. As the siila supports samaadhi and pa~n~naa, samaadhi and pa~n~naa also support the siila. In this respect, I like very much Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi’s Nourishing The Roots: Essays on Buddhist Ethics. I think you must have also read this document. In case if you have not read it, please kick on the following link. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel259.html I am also very glad that you will be sharing a lot of suttas that you have been appreciating. I look forward to reading together those suttas. Respectfully, Han #68504 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:08 pm Subject: Daana Corner (01) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi had compiled and edited some selected essays by the following authors. The Practice of Giving (Susan Elbaum Jootla) Giving in the Pali Canon (Lily de Silva) Giving from the Heart (M. O'C. Walshe) Generosity: The Inward Dimension (Nina van Gorkom) The Perfection of Giving (Acariya Dhammapala) I will present this document in installments for the Group members to discuss. ------------------------------ I will start with the Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi. ------------------------------ Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi The practice of giving is universally recognized as one of the most basic human virtues, a quality that testifies to the depth of one's humanity and one's capacity for self-transcendence. In the teaching of the Buddha, too, the practice of giving claims a place of special eminence, one which singles it out as being in a sense the foundation and seed of spiritual development. In the Pali suttas we read time and again that "talk on giving" (danakatha) was invariably the first topic to be discussed by the Buddha in his "graduated exposition" of the Dhamma. Whenever the Buddha delivered a discourse to an audience of people who had not yet come to regard him as their teacher, he would start by emphasizing the value of giving. Only after his audience had come to appreciate this virtue would he introduce other aspects of his teaching, such as morality, the law of kamma, and the benefits in renunciation, and only after all these principles had made their impact on the minds of his listeners would he expound to them that unique discovery of the Awakened Ones, the Four Noble Truths. The Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi to be continued. Han #68505 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Also, I just thought of Andrew T as a professional writer - any draft > paragraphs or comments? Hi Sarah This is wonderful news about A. Sujin's award. My congratulations to her! Regarding the acceptance speech, my first thought is that it is A. Sujin's award and speech and she must be comfortable with its contents and style and emphasis, even if you or I would do it differently. The drafts and suggestions so far have been very good. I think James' comments were very sensible and Herman's idea that the speech should be pitched to the lowest level of understanding in the expected audience is also sensible. I wonder, then, who *is* the audience? Is the audience just the people present at the event or will the speech be recorded and available for posterity? I suspect the latter - in which case the audience is in fact quite extensive. Lots of the suttas end with "and the audience was satisfied and delighted with the Buddha's words". So I think a good goal is to satisfy and delight the audience. Satisfy - with a good description of the place of women in Buddhism (not an uncontroversial topic, as we know). Delight - with consideration of past Ariyan women and the paramis and so on. That's as much as I can think of really. I'm sure it will all go well and look forward to hearing more. Sorry my contribution has been so late in coming ... I have been out and about in my usual manner. Best wishes Andrew #68506 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > In this respect, I like very much Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi's > Nourishing The Roots: Essays on Buddhist Ethics. I > think you must have also read this document. In case > if you have not read it, please kick on the following > link. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel259.html Dear Han and Phil Thank you for reminding me about this publication. I have a copy and flicked it open to this quote (on page 11). A teaser for you, Phil: "Though volition or cetana is the primary instrument of change, the will in itself is indeterminate, and requires specific guidelines to direct its energy toward the actualization of the good. A mere "good will" from the Buddhist standpoint, is altogether inadequate, for despite the nobility of the intention, as long as the intelligence of the agent is clouded with the dust of delusion, the possibility always lies open that laudable motives might express themselves in foolish or even destructive courses of action." Best wishes Andrew #68507 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/17/07 6:49:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks. > > H: "Karunadasa in his "Dhamma Theory" writes the following about > Puggalavada...They would argue that without such a > person, it is impossible to account for karma, rebirth, or nirvana." > > Am I to discuss this with you? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > ========================== I'm not sure that that this particular business calls for discussion. I just sent it out for informational purposes. As for discussing things with you in general, I would certainly be happy to so long as the discussions avoid an adversarial tone. It is an adversarial tone to which I have been reacting in your posts to me, not to disagreement. I have no problem with disagreements, as you may see from some recent conversations I've had with Herman, TG, and James. I've also had loads of doctrinal disagreements with Jon, Sarah, Nina, and others, all dear friends. But I do not respond well to grilling, interrogation, and accusation. For me, friendly sharing of points view, and together seeking out the meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma is the sort of discussion I am happy with, and I'Il be pleased to pursue such with you should you care to. With metta, Howard #68508 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil lbidd2 Hi Andrew and all, This quote from B. Bodhi brings up a slight qualm: BB: "Though volition or cetana is the primary instrument of change, the will in itself is indeterminate, and requires specific guidelines to direct its energy toward the actualization of the good. A mere "good will" from the Buddhist standpoint, is altogether inadequate, for despite the nobility of the intention, as long as the intelligence of the agent is clouded with the dust of delusion, the possibility always lies open that laudable motives might express themselves in foolish or even destructive courses of action." L: It seems to me intention is chanda rather than cetanaa. Chanda is often translated as "wish to do" and that seems to me to be the same as "intention". Plus I think there is a distinct difference between intention and volition. The point of the above quote is that it is the root cetasikas (lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, amoha) that determine whether a volition (cetanaa) is kusala or akusala. However, an intention (chanda) also arises with volition. It is a mental volition (act) and so also is determined to be kusala or akusala by the root cetasikas. So a good intention is completely good and could be cultivated for its own good qualities. This is not to say that it is easy to determine which cetasikas are actuating a volition. True generosity can arise without a lot of understanding, but without understanding it is impossible to say whether it is true generosity or lobha. On the other hand, doubt is not understanding. Larry #68509 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Fwd: Lodewijk's draft nilovg Dear all, I try again to send this. The title could be: Buddhism in woman's daily life. > > Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > >> see #68485 #68510 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:02 am Subject: Rough Draft Acceptance Speech buddhatrue Hi All, Sarah asked if I could write an acceptance speech for KS for an outstanding women in Buddhism award. Here is a rough draft of a possible speech: I am honoured to have been chosen to receive this recognition from the Awards Committee to mark the United Nations International Women's Day. As I am accepting this award for outstanding women in Buddhism, I would like to address the subject of women in Buddhism. Many people believe that the role of women in Buddhism began when the Buddha established the Bhikkhuni Sangha, the community of Buddhist nuns, after he had established the Bhikkhu Sangha, the community of Buddhist monks. However, the role of women in Buddhism began much earlier than that. Siddhartha Gotama, before he became enlightened and was thereafter known as the Buddha, practiced many austerities in the forest. He practiced what was then known as the holy life: starving himself, never bathing, refusing to wear clothes, maintaining difficult postures for hours, etc. He was attempting to transcend the body by slowly torturing it to eliminate desire. Fortunately, he had a realization one day, as he was very close to death, that torturing the body was not the way to transcend it. It was at this time that a village girl came upon the starving and dying Gotama and offered him a hearty meal. With the strength he gained from that meal, Siddhartha Gotama was then able to practice meditation, mindfulness of breathing, and become enlightened. Was it a coincidence that just as the starving and dying Gotama realized he needed strength to become the Buddha, a woman offered him the food he needed? In Buddhism we learn that there are no coincidences, everything happens as a result of kamma. Women have had an important role in Buddhism ever since its beginning; actually, even before its beginning. In this talk I intend to show how women have been pivotal to the practice and survival of Buddhism up to our day and age and how women will be pivotal to the practice and survival of Buddhism much into the future. Many people associate Buddhism with Buddhist monks. Although the Buddha highly praised the monk's life properly lived, he also made clear that his teaching was for everyone regardless of living situation or gender. Thus he described his followers as comprising 4 categories of persons: • monks and nuns (bhikkhus and bhikkhuniis), and • male and female lay-followers. The decision to become a monk or nun is very admirable as it requires a lot of sacrifice to follow the Buddha's path to perfection. However, the Buddha's path is not meant for just monks and nuns and can be followed quite nicely by householders as well. As the Buddha said, and recorded in the Dhammapada: Even though he be well-attired, Yet if he is poised, calm, controlled and established in holy life, Having set aside violence towards all beings- He, truly, is a holy man, a renunciate, a monk. And the same could be said for women in Buddhism: Even though she be well-attired, Yet if she is poised, calm, controlled and established in holy life, Having set aside violence towards all beings- She, truly, is a holy woman, a renunciate, a nun. It isn't her clothes which make the woman a follower of the Buddha, it is the state of her mind. Women from all walks of life and situations can enjoy the fruits of Buddhism, which are inner peace and a happy heart. During the Buddha' lifetime there was a large order of nuns (bhikkhuniis) and there were many eminent female lay-followers. Some of these women gained the highest levels of attainment; some were teachers of the Dhamma to other followers. Some women attained enlightenment as nuns; some attained various levels of enlightenment as lay-followers and continued living as lay- followers after their attainment. Visaakhaa was the daughter of a rich merchant. When she was only 7 years old she visited the Buddha, listened to his teaching and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life, marrying and having 10 children. She visited the Buddha frequently to listen to his discourses and attended daily to the needs of monks. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among the female lay disciples who ministered to the Order. Khujjuttaraa was a slave-woman to Queen Saamaavati. One day she heard the Buddha preach and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She too remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life. She continued living in the same household, teaching to the Queen and the Queen's five hundred women attendants the Dhamma she heard on her frequent visits to the Buddha. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among lay women with knowledge of the teachings. These truly were `outstanding women in Buddhism'. It is ironic to be discussing the role of women in Buddhism because, ultimately, gender has no role in Buddhism. As the Buddha taught, both men and women have equal ability to become enlightened. Furthermore, the Buddha taught that to advance spiritually one must forget and abandon clinging to one's gender. However, we cannot forget that even though gender isn't important to the practice of Buddhism, it is important in the dynamics of society. Mara, the personification of evil, taunted Theri Soma that no woman could reach "the high ground of the wise" because the only thing that women know how to do is cook. Theri Soma replied: What matters being a woman If with mind firmly set One grows in the knowledge Of the Right Law, with insight? Any one who has to question Am I a woman or am I a man And does not oneself really know Over such a one will Mara triumph. As Their Soma points out, being a man or being a woman isn't important at all in the practice of Buddhism. However, as Mara points out with his taunt, women do have to overcome societal stereotypes if they are to advance on the spiritual path. Because of societal stereotypes, women face more obstacles than men in their pursuit of Buddhist practice. It is more difficult for women to become ordained as nuns; women raising children have fewer opportunities to cultivate spiritual practice; and the spiritual accomplishments of women are not recognized by society as readily as those of men. However, since the problem originates in society it is society which can correct it. Recognizing women in Buddhism, as today's award does, is a very positive step in the right direction. But the biggest way to change society's viewpoint of women in Buddhism is for more women to become involved in Buddhism. If more women become involved and active, the attitudes of society will change on their own- and that will benefit both men and women. In today's world, there are quite a few outstanding women in Buddhism, from all lineages. Here are just a few of the outstanding women in Buddhism: Charlotte Joko Beck is a Zen master, the 3rd Dharma heir of Hakuyu Maezumi Roshi and founder of the Ordinary Mind Zen School; she is head of the San Diego Zen Center and also teaches at the Prairie Zen Center in Champaign, Illinois. She has written two books and several short articles. Pema Chödrön, one of the foremost students of the late Ven. Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, is the resident teacher/director (abbess) of Gampo Abbey in Nova Scotia. She has written several books on Buddhism. Ajahn Sundara, born in France, was one of the first four women ordained in England by Ajahn Sumedho in 1979 in the Thai Forest Tradition of Ajahn Chah. She has been involved in the establishment and the training of the nuns' community at Chithurst and Amaravati Buddhist Monasteries in England and since the late 1980's she has taught and led retreats in Europe and the United States. Sharon Salzberg has been a student of Buddhism since 1971, and has been leading meditation retreats worldwide since 1974. She teaches both intensive awareness practice (vipassana or insight meditation) and the profound cultivation of lovingkindness and compassion (the Brahma Viharas). These outstanding women in Buddhism illustrate that Buddhism is not just the domain of men; and, regardless of what Mara told Theri Soma, women know how to do a lot more than just cook. From the very beginning of the Buddha's enlightenment, women have been pivotal to the advancement of Buddhism. Just five years after the establishment of the Bhikkhu Sangha, the Buddha established the Bhikkhuni Sangha- a truly revolutionary act for its time. Buddhism is open to members of both sexes; only those seeking inner peace need apply. I would like to encourage more women, and more men for that matter, to become involved in Buddhism. As the Buddha taught, his path is happy in the beginning, happy in the middle, and happy in the end. May all beings find happiness! Thank you for listening. ****** Metta, James #68511 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:08 am Subject: acceptance speech, texts. nilovg Dear Sarah, you asked me to quote some texts. You could make a choice and see how to insert it. This is from the Perfections. I tried to select texts that were not too difficult for the general public. You can also insert some of them, using your own wording. ----------- <... everybody has defilements, and this can be compared to suffering from illness. We are like a sick person who does not know how to recover and gain strength. We see that the way we have to travel is extremely far, but when our body is not healthy and strong we cannot travel all the way through and reach our destination. The eightfold Path is the long way we have to travel in order to reach our destination, that is, the realization of the four noble Truths. If we do not examine and know ourselves, we are likely to be a person who knows the right Path but who cannot go along it. We are like someone who does not know the way to gain strength and recover from his ailments. Therefore, listening to the Dhamma and considering it so that we gain understanding, can be compared to the situation of a person who looks for the right medicine to cure his illness. Someone who does not listen to the Dhamma and does not even know that he is sick, will not look for medicine to cure his illness. As soon as he finds the Dhamma and has right understanding of it, he is like a person who has found the right medicine that cures his illness so that he has sufficient strength to travel a long way. The dhammas that make the citta healthy and strong so that one can walk the eightfold Path all the way through are the ten perfections. We should carefully consider the perfections so that we have correct under- standing of them, otherwise we shall not be able to develop them. We may listen to the Dhamma every day, but we should know and consider why we listen: we should listen with the firm determination and intention to have right understanding of the Dhamma so that we can apply it, now and during each life to come. We should know the right purpose of listening: the development of paññå that can eradicate defilements. In this way the perfections can begin to develop while we listen.> ------------ Mindfulness of Death: < The Buddha’s different methods of teaching Dhamma are in conformity with each other, there is no contradiction between them. For example, the Buddha taught mindfulness of death, maraùa sati. Moreover, he also taught that there are three kinds of death: momentary death (khaùika maraùa), conventional death (sammutti maraùa) and final death (samuccheda maraùa). Momentary death is death at each moment, and this means that our life occurs during only one moment of citta. One may say that life lasts long, that a person is very old, but in reality, life is a series of cittas that arise and fall away in succession. If we reduce the duration of life that seems to be very long into just one extremely short moment of citta, we can understand that life occurs during only one moment of seeing. At this moment of seeing, there is just one moment of life that arises and sees; if there would not be seeing there would be no life. Seeing has arisen and sees, and then it dies, it lasts for an extremely short moment. At the moment we are hearing, life occurs only during one short moment of hearing and then there is death. When someone who develops the perfection of paññå is mindful of death, he should not merely think of death in conventional sense, sammutti maraùa. It is not enough to think, even with some degree of detachment, that there is nobody who can own anything, and that one day we shall be separated from all things, that all we used to take for self or mine will disappear. Merely intellectual understanding cannot lead to the eradication of defilements. The true understanding of momentary death, death occurring at each moment of citta, is different from understanding of death in the conventional sense. We should understand momentary death: each moment we are seeing, seeing arises and then dies. It is the same in the case of hearing, the other sense-cognitions and thinking. If we have right understanding of momentary death, we will be able to investigate and know as they are the characteristics of the realities that are appearing. This is mindfulness of death. > Final death, samuccheda maraùa, is the final passing away of the arahat who will not be reborn. ------------- Metta to all people. When we are able to have friendliness to all people we shall not be neglectful of the perfection of mettå, loving-kindness. There should be no limits to mettå; and if we restrict it there may not be mettå but lobha, attachment, which is akusala, not kusala. If we only consider the outward appearance of our deeds, attachment and loving-kindness seem to be similar. When we perform a good deed for the sake of someone who is close to us, whom we respect and love, it seems that this is motivated by kusala, by mettå. However, why can we not be kind in the same way to some-one else, no matter who he is? If there is true mettå it should be exactly the same whether we perform an act of kindness to someone who is close to us, with whom we are familiar, or to a person we are not familiar with. If there is true mettå, if we want to develop the perfection of mettå, we should not restrict mettå to particular persons. When we limit mettå, we should investigate the characteristic of the citta at that moment, we should know whether it is kusala citta or akusala citta. ...... true mettå is not restricted to particular people. All people are equal, no matter whether they are close to us or not, no matter whether we know them or not. Did we in our daily life assist others with generosity? If we wish for their wellbeing and happiness, we have loving-kindness towards them. When someone experiences sorrow, when he suffers, we may have compassion and wish that he will be free from suffering. When we wish to help a person who is sick and who suffers pains, when we want to take care of him, we have compassion: we wish that person to be free from suffering. ---------- Impartiality. The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, it is non-disturbance by controversial conduct of people, by trying events or by the vicissitudes of life, no matter whether they are desirable or undesirable, such as gain and loss, praise and blame. At present we suffer because of being easily disturbed and unstable, but someone who has firm understanding of kamma can become unaffected by the vicissitudes of life. If one develops the perfection of equanimity, one does not pay attention to the wrongs of others, as the Commentary to the “Basket of Conduct” explains. One can be impartial and evenminded, undisturbed by the wrongs of others; one understands that people will receive the result of their own kamma. ---------- We should not neglect anyone of these ten perfections, we need all of them. We need sincerity in the abandonment of defilements and that is the perfection of truthfulness. We should remember to think of other people’s wrongs with loving-kindness. We also need the perfection of determination, the firm, unshakable determination to practise all kinds of kusala in order to reach the goal. We may have sincerity in our wish to abandon defilements, but at times we lack determination, we are not firm enough in our determination to abandon defilements. We need the perfection of determination for being sincere in our practice to eradicate defilements. We need the perfection of patience, that is, endurance. We need to develop all the perfections and this is the only way to have wise attention to whatever we experience, to develop paññå. ----------- The perfection of paññå can be developed when we perform deeds of generosity, but we should know to what purpose we give things away: to eliminate defilements. Someone who does not know that paññå has to be developed in order to realize the four noble Truths, gives without paññå, and he may expect a reward for his good deed. However, someone who gives things away with understanding of realities is aware of the fact that, in truth, no beings, people or self are to be found; he knows that birth leads to suffering and trouble, life after life. He knows that the end to rebirth is the end to suffering. This means that seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or the experience of tangible object and all the sufferings caused by them will not arise any more. All kinds of kusala have to be developed to the degree of a perfection, so that the four noble Truths can be realized and defilements be eradicated. -------- Nina. #68512 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil hantun1 Dear Andrew, Larry and Phil, Andrew has quoted a passage “Though volition or cetana is the primary instrument of change .........or even destructive courses of action” as a teaser for Phil. I do not know how Phil will respond to this, but my humble opinion is to read the entire article and not just an isolated passage to understand the above quote. Larry’s explanation on the above quote touching upon cetana and chanda, and root cetasikas, is also very good. Bhikkhu Bodhi also stressed on the importance of root cetasikas. Immediately before the passage quoted by Andrew, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: “Just as unwholesome volitions invariably arise in association with the unwholesome roots — with greed, hatred and delusion — so do wholesome volitions inevitably bring along with them as their concomitants the wholesome roots of non-greed, non-hatred and non-delusion. Since opposite qualities cannot co-exist, the replacement of unwholesome volition by wholesome volition at the same time means the transposition of the unwholesome and the wholesome roots. Continually called into play by the surge of volition, the wholesome roots "perfume" the mental stream with the qualities for which they stand — with generosity, loving-kindness and wisdom; and these, as they gather cumulative force, come to prominence as regular propensities of the personality, eclipsing the inclination towards the unwholesome. In this way the exercise of wholesome volitions on repeated and varied occasions effects a transformation of character from its initial moral susceptibility to a pitch of purity where even the temptation to evil remains at a safe remove.” Respectfully, Han #68513 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rough Draft Acceptance Speech sarahprocter... Hi James & all, This is a remarkable effort - you've gone to a lot of trouble like a good friend in need, thank you and welcome back! I particularly like the way you have kept 'the voice' and style, incorporated the parts already 'approved' and you've added some great quotes. Lots we may incorporate. I read it out loud to Jon and it only took 10 mins, but that's certainly as long as it's going to be! K.Sujin will just have to read slowly if it has to last 20mins or so. Many thanks for all the other good suggestions and examples. Han, thank you for putting us straight on what is expected and Lodewijk for your good draft back to us so promptly. Herman, I like it! I think everyone else has addressed the Acceptance Speech apart from you weighing into the Talk. Thx Nina, for the suggestions from Perfections, Ken H for your suggestions guaranteed to keep the audience awake! Andrew & Herman, yes, I agree about the 'basic level' and the importance of it being something KS is happy with as well as the audience.....and not being superficial...and...(oh yikes!). Anyway, we have plenty of material....will show you the next drafts which have rather taken over this holiday weekend here....When K.Sujin said it was not her accumulations to do something like this, it was really on the tip of my tongue to suggest it certainly wasn't ours, but instead, I said we'd just do our best to try and help. Metta, Sarah ====== #68514 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:27 am Subject: Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil philofillet Hello Han and all Thank you for your comments, Han, and the link to the Bhikkhu Bodhi article You wrote : > As the tree grows it > also makes the roots grow. As the siila supports > samaadhi and pa~n~naa, samaadhi and pa~n~naa also > support the siila. Yes. I have often been saying that we tend to want too much panna too soon, but this is not to say that I think it is a strict sila>samadhi>panna progression without any interflow. I think the wisdom that helps out beginners like myself is more like "circumspection", which I believe is the wisdom that allows us to see danger in some actions and benefits in others. Really, it is a kind of wisdom that is not unique to the Dhamma, a kind of common sense, but stirred and guided by the Buddha. The wisdom that is unique to the Dhamma, seeing into anatta - personally, I think it comes later, though of course there is an intellectual acceptance of it at the beginning, and hints of deeper understanding at other times. Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote : To say that sila is the precondition for success, however, does not mean, as is too often believed in conservative Buddhist circles, that one cannot begin to meditate until one's sila is perfect. Such a stipulation would make it almost impossible to start meditation, since it is the mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom of the meditative process that bring about the gradual purification of virtue. Ph: And obviously it would be incorrect to say that one cannot begin to meditate until wisdom is sharp and penetrative. BB: But to say that virtue is the basis of practice does mean that the capacity for achievement in meditation hinges upon the purity of our sila. If our roots of virtue are weak, our meditation will likewise be weak. Ph: I'm very fond of AN X,1 - "The Benefits of Virtue" "Near the beginning is this line - "non-remorse is the benefit and reward of virtuous ways of conduct." This in turn leads to gladness being the benefits and reward of non-remorse, and then joy, and then serenity, and then happiness, and then comes concentration and we know what is conditioned by concentration! So really, while I used to criticze Dhamma being used for emotional stability, the Buddha clearly teaches that emotional stability is a precondition for concentration. (Not only in this sutta, there are many that promise happiness - I used to think that was "cheap.") Of course, in abhidhamma there is concentratoin with every citta, otherwise objects couldn't be cognized, so there is concentration with all states of mind. But the concentration that conditions wisdom, that - it seems - is another story. But I may be wrong. I don't really understand samadhi yet, and a superficial reading of suttas by a beginner does not provide a trustworthy answer. Thanks again, Han. I will be going back to those essays and pulling up more bits, I imagine. Metta, Phil #68515 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:34 am Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil philofillet Hi Andrew Our posts passed each other. > A teaser for you, Phil: Ph: I guess I might have answered it in the post I just sent to Han - of course there must be discretionary wisdom from the beginning, circumspection. It needn't be penetrative. I am going to be posting quite a few suttas that lay out recommended practices, in particular a wonderful sutta in MN, the Buddha to Rahula, teaching him that all those who have become enlightened repeatedly considered before, during and after actions of body, speech and mind are leading to one's welfare and that of others. I forget the exact words. I will be posting it. It refers to a kind of discretionary wisdom that is of the kind that can see through the thicker and grimier forms of delusion, I think. Metta, Phil > "Though volition or cetana is the primary instrument of change, the > will in itself is indeterminate, and requires specific guidelines to > direct its energy toward the actualization of the good. A mere "good > will" from the Buddhist standpoint, is altogether inadequate, for > despite the nobility of the intention, as long as the intelligence of > the agent is clouded with the dust of delusion, the possibility > always lies open that laudable motives might express themselves in > foolish or even destructive courses of action." > > Best wishes > Andrew > #68516 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... F/W message for a lurking member and friend in Thailand, Jiw. Jiw, Kung Hei Fat choi (Happy Chinese New Year) to you and many, many thanks. I tried to send you a note off-list, but it was rejected. I hope you don't mind my forwarding your helpful message to the list for others to read too. Metta and anumodana, Sarah. ========================= February 18, 2007 Dear Khun Sarah, Xin Nian Fa Chai (Kung Hei Fat Choi) I should be sending the message to the group but I am too shy and too lazy to following the rules to introduce myself as I won't able to participate in the discussion group. The limitation of my English usage would confuse the readers. I have a humble comment concerning the drafts of the Acceptance Speech for Than Achan. I like your first draft as well as Khun Ludewijk's below. However I share the same concern Andrew has on who is the audience. If I understand correctly, the event will be at the UN regional office in Bangkok. The audience, besides the UN officials, some diplomats. Thai representatives from all women organizations, and media. The ceremony is very formal and is not open to the public. So, the audience will be a mixture of educated expatiate, woman rights, activists, academics, and elite. In the past, hardly March 8 speech was publicized. The Bangkok Post and the Nation, and other Thai language media only report the news with some interviews. The speeches could have been uploaded on the UN regional website and kept in the achieve. Besides, Than Achan, there is another Thai nun, ordained and resides at the Plum Village. I am not sure whether there are more recipients. The drafts are too impersonal, which Than Achan probably prefers it, however I am afraid that it won't reach out to the audience. I would like to suggest that the speech, besides the courtesy pattern of thanking whoever and before getting into Parami and Bhramavihara, should begin with Than Achan's first assignment in 1956, from her female Dhamma teacher, to teach the female inmates at Klong Prem Prison. I think it is appropriate to mention the group of forgotten females in the society. It should be good to mentioned that Than Achan have been teaching for 50 years. I hope my above comment would be somewhat useful to your important task. I am not a writer and am not a native English speaker. I am sorry that I cannot be any help in drafting but I trust you all should have no problem woven information in. Warmest wishes, Trasvin (Jiw) #68517 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:26 am Subject: Re: A final venting from phil, probably. philofillet Hi Sarah Thanks for getting back to me and for as always being so patient with criticism. I don't know how you (and Jon and Nina and others) do it. Well, the Dhamma does it, of course. >> I think of this passage from AN VII, 58: > > "dwellings where there are few sounds and little noise, which are > > fanned by cool breezes, remote from human habitation, suitable for > > seclusion." There are many ?Eempty huts, roots of trees. > .... > S: Yes, many references to physical seclusion, but for whom? Surely not > for everyone. Ph: Not for everyone, that seclusion. And I think when busy householder try to grab that kind of seclusion by going on weekend retreats..well, I really wonder how effective it is. (I wonder if I'll ever fall out - I'm too self-conscious by my thunderous snoring to ever coop up with a bunch of meditators, especially since the snoring is sometimes while I'm meditating.) But seeking elements of that seclusion by getting up very early before even the mice are stirring, sitting in a quiet room, going to a hut I've found in a woody hillside park near my place to meditate, using earplugs, closing one's eyes...those forms are increasing elements of seclusion are very helpful. I'm actually kind of amazed that any former meditators don't sometimes have a go at it and see for themselves. What is a suitable metaphor? A microscope? A stethoscope? Being able to see processes of the mind in a way that one wouldn't in less secluded conditions. For example, and I think I'll refer to this a lot, one morning when I was meditating my stomach did one of those little acid burbles because I'd had a coffee beforehand. And I was able to observe as hte mind hooked on this and leapt back to a conversation I'd had with a student, a liver specialist, the day before, who'd said coffee was harmful, and this triggered proliferation on disease and death, parting from Naomi, all this crap. I brought the mind back to the meditation object, but off it went on the same track. And agian, and again. So I had had a nice little lesson on how a very subtle change of the form khanda gave rise to a "constellation of mental states" as that sutta puts it. No way I would have got that lesson from that stomach burble if I had not been in a kind of seclusion that allowed sensitivity to it. You know, it's just so fascinating watching how uncontrollable the mind is, watching what it is conditioned to do. Much more interesting than TV, if I can stay awake. The show is not broadcast when we are not relatively secluded, when it is not quiet. If it is not quiet the surrounding noises take over and demand attention and the quiet little voices cannot be heard. Oh, that's so crude, but this is just basic meditation talk that you've heard a million times. > > In the Nyantiloka dictionary, we read about the 3 kinds of viveka. In the > ultimate sense, seclusion refers to the mental detachment from all > conditioned dhammas. Not just in one or two suttas, but over and over > again in this referred to in the context of enlightenment. > > Dict: >viveka > 'detachment', seclusion, is according to Niddesa, of 3 kinds: > > (1) bodily detachment (kaaya-viveka), i.e. abiding in solitude free from > alluring sensuous objects; > > (2) mental detachment (citta-viveka), i.e. the inner detachment from > sensuous things; > > (3) detachment from the substrata of existence (upadhi-viveka). > > In the description of the 1st absorption, > > the words "detached from sensuous things" (vivicc' eva kaamehi) refer, > according to Vis.M. IV, to 'bodily detachment'; > > the words "detached from karmically unwholesome things" (vivicca akusalehi > dhammehi) refer to 'mental detachment'; > > the words "born of detachment" (vivekaja), to the absence of the 5 > hindrances.< > > ........ > We also read in the texts about 'viveka-sukha' (happiness of detachment) > > Again from the dictionary, this refers to: > >viveka-sukha > 'happiness of detachment', or aloofness (s. prec). > > "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not partake of > the happiness of renunciation, detachment, peace and enlightenment" > (A.VII.86).< > > ---------- > S: I think this last quote is the kind of quote which is often read as > suggesting one should live away from society and worldly bustle. But it is > the mental state, the happiness of mental detachment which is being > referred to. Ph: OK, I see you know what you're talking about. I just wanted to get that off my chest. I really believe that if one hestitates to intentionally seek out as much quiet and seclusion as one can in one's life (for example, by making a point to get up early before everyone else) one is missing out on a great opportunity to get to know one's defilements better. We all know that it is only by getting to know one's defilments that we can begin to eradicate them? Why not spend quality time together with them when there's no one else around to distract one from relating to them, getting to know them? I just don't see why that isn't obvious. Because there is attachment or desire for results involved? So what? Metta, Phil p.s to be honest, I didn't read all the material you quoted, but I'm sure it's valid and you know what you're talking about. And as usual I ditched out halfway through the post and didn't finish reading it. I know you understand, and I'm glad you had your say in case I misrepresented anything. #68518 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil hantun1 Dear Phil, Thank you very much for your kind note. I agree completely with all of your comments. One benefit I received from your post is your reference to AN X.1 The Benefits of Virtue (kimatthiya sutta). The trouble with me is I have all the books but I cannot read all of them. So only when a good friend like you pointed out a particular sutta then I look it up. So I looked up AN X.1 and found that, as you had said, it is a very good sutta. The sequence of benefits are virtue (kusala siila) > non-remorse (avippatisaara) > gladness (pamojja) > joy (piiti) >serenity (passaddhi) > happiness (sukha) > concentration (samaadhi) >knowledge and vision of things as they really are (yathaabhuuta-~naana-dassana) >revulsion and dispassion (nibbidaa-viraaga) > knowledge and vision of liberation (vimutti-~naana-dassana). This sutta confirms your statement that “the Buddha clearly teaches that emotional stability is a precondition for concentration.” I look forward to reading some suttas together like this. Respectfully, Han #68519 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rough Draft Acceptance Speech nilovg Hi James, I think this is excellent, I liked your quoted texts. Lodewijk said: fantastic, and the speech style is very good, people have to listen. Very beautiful English, as Lodewijk said. Nina. Op 18-feb-2007, om 10:02 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Here is a rough draft of a > possible speech: #68520 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech hantun1 Dear Sarah, I like a paragraph from Jiw’s post. “The drafts are too impersonal, which Than Achan probably prefers it, however I am afraid that it won't reach out to the audience. I would like to suggest that the speech, besides the courtesy pattern of thanking whoever and before getting into Parami and Bhramavihara, should begin with Than Achan's first assignment in 1956, from her female Dhamma teacher, to teach the female inmates at Klong Prem Prison. I think it is appropriate to mention the group of forgotten females in the society. It should be good to mentioned that Than Achan have been teaching for 50 years.” That’s why I had suggested that she then should give a brief biography of herself, and what she is doing, why she is doing, what are the main themes of her teachings, and what results she have achieved so far, and what are her future plans for further development of women in Buddhism, and so on. But as she is not interested in doing so I cannot say anything more. Respectfully, Han #68521 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:56 am Subject: Re: A final venting from phil, probably. rjkjp1 Dear Phil Am I right in thinking that you believe people who listen to Khun Sujin avoid quite places etc? 14 years ago I spent 3 months in Thailand and Khun Sujin arranged ofr me to stay at Kurunoi, the residence of Khun Thanit,(Nina has been there) He has many huts and I spent 6 weeks there in a 8ft by 6ft wooden hut, sleeping on the floor (like the other residents)and getting up at 5am, simple food etc. In the weekends people come to discuss Dhamma. It has been like that for years. There are so many people who listen to Khun Sujin, some live simple lives,celibate, 8 precepts; some enjoy the five strands. Robert #68522 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:09 am Subject: Re: Rough Draft Acceptance Speech buddhatrue Hi All, I wrote an e-mail to Sarah off-list and she thought I might like to share it on-list to explain my reasoning behind the rough draft of the speech I wrote: Hi Sarah, I have attached a rough draft of a possible speech for KS. Feel free to add or delete as you see fit. I hope this helps you and Jon out. ****** Hi Sarah, I rejoined DSG and posted the speech. I still don't think it is long enough, but maybe you can add some more material. It's hard to discuss women in Buddhism without bringing up controversial subjects! ;-)) I also tried to stay away from writing too much about Buddhism itself since she is going to be giving a speech on that separately (which I would probably disagree with points of her speech ;-)). Anyway, I got a message that the speech won't be posted until it is approved by you. So, hope this helps. Metta, James #68523 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:18 am Subject: Re: A final venting from phil, probably. philofillet Hi Robert I see, my misunderstanding. It seemed to me that there was always a kind of correction for people who thought that seeking out quiet places was wholesome and helpful for mindfulness and concentration. I remember the talk (in the cassettes I've just sent to Scott) in which a German who had been at a mountain top temple or something came to a A. Sujin talk and he got quite a grilling from people - "is seeing, hearing etc any different in your mountain temple than it is here?" etc. The message was that he was very naive to think that that kind of seclusion could be helpful for deepening his understanding of Dhamma. I'm sure I'm full of misunderstandings of what Acharn Sujin is really talking about. Metta, Phil #68524 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy scottduncan2 Hi Howard, H: "..As for discussing things with you in general, I would certainly be happy to so long as the discussions avoid an adversarial tone. It is an adversarial tone to which I have been reacting in your posts to me, not to disagreement. I have no problem with disagreements...I've also had loads of doctrinal disagreements with Jon, Sarah, Nina, and others, all dear friends. But I do not respond well to grilling, interrogation, and accusation. For me, friendly sharing of points view, and together seeking out the meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma is the sort of discussion I am happy with, and I'Il be pleased to pursue such with you should you care to." I'll see you in Persons and we'll see about the above. I'll respond as always, as will you, and you can either totally ignore me or point out where you feel I've been adversarial or accusatory. Sincerely, Scott. #68525 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rough Draft Acceptance Speech buddhatrue Hi Nina and Lodewijk (and Sarah), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > I think this is excellent, I liked your quoted texts. Lodewijk said: > fantastic, and the speech style is very good, people have to listen. > Very beautiful English, as Lodewijk said. Thank you and Lodewijk for the kind words. I'm glad you both like the speech. But, I really don't feel it is perfect or complete. It needs some more material. I like what Lodewijk wrote and think it could be incorporated somehow (I didn't see his speech when I wrote the rough draft, only Sarah and Jon's speech). Also, I like the suggestions from Jiw and Han. I can understand KS's reticence about talking about herself and her accomplishments, as Buddhists aren't supposed to do that; however, telling some about the anecdote of the women's prison is very relevant to the subject matter and would give a glimpse into KS as a person. I think she should be highly encouraged to include that anecdotal story! ;-)) Metta, James #68526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A final venting from phil, probably. nilovg Dear Robert, This evokes good memories. At the background there is a kind of saw mill, but it gives the impression of a waterfall, very soothing. A very good example of how sa~n~naa remembers concepts on account of the hearing, correct or not. An example of vippallasa. Nina. Op 18-feb-2007, om 13:56 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > Khun Sujin arranged ofr > me to stay at Kurunoi, the residence of Khun Thanit,(Nina has been > there) > He has many huts and I spent 6 weeks there in a 8ft by 6ft wooden > hut, sleeping on the floor (like the other residents)and getting up > at 5am, simple food etc. #68527 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:58 am Subject: Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi Howard, I'll try again. I don't agree with your stance, as you know. Here, through the miracle of me learning to cut and paste, I put a section of the Katthavatthu, 'Of the Existence of A Personal Entity', culled from the famous Useful Posts. I prefer the source: "1. Of the Existence of a Personal Entity. Controverted Point. That the 'person' is known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact. (Sarah:paramattha dhamma). From the commentary- "The Theravadin questions a Puggalavadin (one who believes in the existence of a personal entity, soul, or perduring immortal essence in man) concerning his position. Who among the eighteen schools of thought were Puggalavadins? In the Saasana the Vajjiputtakas and Sammitiyas, and many other teachers besides, not belonging to the Saasana. 'Person'(puggala) means soul, being, vital principle. 'Is known': is approached and got at by the understanding, is cognized. 'Real': not taken as an effect of magic or mirage, actual. 'Ultimate'(paramattho): highest sense, not taken from tradition, or hearsay. 'Known' as one of the fifty-seven ultimates of our conscious experience (i.e 5 aggregates, 12 sense organs and objects, 18 elements, 22 controlling powers)." There are puggala, attaa, sakkaaya, and other words the full meaning of which, along with the interrelations, would be interesting to know more of. Now, I suggested the following: "...some of the points you offer - they are essentially a version of a Puggalavaadin perspective, as I see it." In stating: '...complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not fully illusion...', it gives me pause. This is why I thought of the Puggalavaadins. Although, clearly, this is not a pure and full-out statement regarding 'person' as ultimate, there is, nonetheless, a statement regarding the possibility of knowing this entity called 'complexes perceived as unities'. And further the mechanism by which these 'complexes perceived as unities' is asserted to be via 'extensive sankharic processing'. This is what is suggested to be the Puggalavaadin-like stance - that a person is only partial illusion. The statement regarding 'partial illusion' was not explained, and it is here especially that these arguments are directed. Below, in response to the suggestion that 'person' is concept, along with agreement, it is asserted: "...they are simply more important, as the belief in their existence as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of sentient beings." Here is what I think is the crux of things: I'm guessing that this is related to the old paradox of 'to whom is one compassionate if there is no one to be compassionate to'? In attempting to solve this paradox it was seen as necessary, I think, to salvage some notion of 'person' as a more palatable way of maintaining the sense of there being someone who is able to be compassionate to someone. (I think, by the way, that the resolution to this paradox is the same as the resolution to the question of 'who inherits the results of kamma if there is no one acting'?) I think that there is much subtle self-view pervading the various ways in which this paradox is given solution. In this case, a version of 'person' to have as an object of compassion, or whatever. Here's Vajiraa dealing with Maara: SN 5,10,553-555: "Why now do you assume 'a being'? Maara, is that your speculative view? This is a heap of sheer formations: Here no being is found. "Just as with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates exist, There is the convention of 'a being'. "It's only suffering that comes to be, Suffering that stands and falls away. Nothing but suffering comes to be, Nothing but suffering ceases." Sincerely, Scott. #68528 From: connie Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:59 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (27) nichiconn dear friends, continuing from #68493, here is the second half of Abhayaa: Saa gaathaapariyosaane arahatta.m paapu.ni. Tena vutta.m apadaane (apa. therii 2.1.71-90)- "Nagare aru.navatiyaa, aru.no naama khattiyo; tassa ra~n~no ahu.m bhariyaa, vaarita.m vaarayaamaha.m. "Sattamaala.m gahetvaana, uppalaa devagandhikaa; nisajja paasaadavare, eva.m cintesi taavade. "Ki.m me imaahi maalaahi, sirasaaropitaahi me; vara.m me buddhase.t.thassa, ~naa.namhi abhiropita.m. "Sambuddha.m pa.timaanentii, dvaaraasanne nisiidaha.m; yadaa ehiti sambuddho, puujayissa.m mahaamuni.m. At the end of the verses, she attained Arahatship. As it is said in the Apadaana: There was a Khattiya named Aru.na in the town of Aru.navatii. I was that king's wife and kept myself well restrained. I took a garland of seven divine-smelling lotuses and sat down in the excellent palace, and thought straight away: "Why put these garlands on my head? It would be best to present them to the knowledge of the Best of Buddhas." I sat down near the door, waiting for the Fully Awakened One [and thinking,] "When the Fully Awakened One comes, I will honour the Great Seer." "Kakudho vilasantova, migaraajaava kesarii; bhikkhusa"nghena sahito, aagacchi viithiyaa jino. "Buddhassa ra.msi.m disvaana, ha.t.thaa sa.mviggamaanasaa; dvaara.m avaapuritvaana, buddhase.t.thamapuujayi.m. "Satta uppalapupphaani, pariki.n.naani ambare; chadi.m karonto buddhassa, matthake dhaarayanti te. "Udaggacittaa sumanaa, vedajaataa kata~njalii; tattha citta.m pasaadetvaa, taavati.msamagacchaha.m. The Conqueror came along the street accompanied by the Order of Bhikkhus, like a kakudha tree sporting [in the breeeze] or a lion with its mane. Seeing the radiance of the Buddha, I was happy and my mind was deeply stirred. I opened the door and honoured the Best of Buddhas. The seven lotus flowers were spread around in the air, making a cover for them, held over the Buddha's head. I paid respects with raised hands together, with a happy mind, joyful, and filled with enthusiasm. My mind was gladdened then, and I went to the Taavati.msa realm. "Mahaanelassa chaadana.m, dhaarenti mama muddhani; dibbagandha.m pavaayaami, sattuppalassida.m phala.m. "Kadaaci niiyamaanaaya, ~naatisa"nghena me tadaa; yaavataa parisaa mayha.m, mahaanela.m dhariiyati. "Sattati devaraajuuna.m, mahesittamakaarayi.m; sabbattha issaraa hutvaa, sa.msaraami bhavaabhave. "Tesa.t.thi cakkavattiina.m, mahesittamakaarayi.m; sabbe mamanuvattanti, aadeyyavacanaa ahu.m. "Uppalasseva me va.n.no, gandho ceva pavaayati; dubba.n.niya.m na jaanaami, buddhapuujaayida.m phala.m. I wore a covering of sapphire on my head, and I gave forth a divine odour. This was the consequence of [giving] seven lotuses. Sometimes, when I was being led by a group of my relations then, my sapphire was carried as far as the assembly. I was the chief queen of seventy deva kings, and everywhere I journeyed on in various existences I was the ruler's wife. I was the chief queen for sixty-three wheel-turning monarchs. All of them accomodated me, and what I said carried weight. I had a lotus complexion and gave forth a lotus perfume. I am not aware of [ever having] a bad complexion. This is the consequence of honouring the Buddha. "Iddhipaadesu kusalaa, bojjha"ngabhaavanaarataa; abhi~n~naapaaramippattaa, buddhapuujaayida.m phala.m. "Satipa.t.thaanakusalaa, samaadhijhaanagocaraa; sammappadhaanamanuyuttaa, buddhapuujaayida.m phala.m. "Viiriya.m me dhuradhorayha.m, yogakkhemaadhivaahana.m; sabbaasavaparikkhii.naa, natthi daani punabbhavo. "Ekati.mse ito kappe, ya.m pupphamabhipuujayi.m; duggati.m naabhijaanaami, buddhapuujaayida.m phala.m. I am skilled in the bases for supernormal powers. I delight in developing the constituents of awakening. I have attained perfection in direct knowledge. This is the consequence of honouring the Buddha. I am skilled in the foundation of mindfulness. I feed on concentration and absorption states. I am devoted to right exertion. This is the consequence of honouring the Buddha. Energy is my beast of burden, bearing me to rest from exertion. All my taints are exhausted. Now there is no renewed existence [for me]. In the thirty-one aeons since I honoured [the Buddha with] that flower I am not aware of [birth in] any realm of misery. This is the consequence of honouring the Buddha. "Kilesaa jhaapitaa mayha.m {, bhavaa sabbe samuuhataa; naagiiva bandhana.m chetvaa, viharaami anaasavaa. "Svaagata.m vata me aasi, buddhase.t.thassa santike; tisso vijjaa anuppattaa, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m. "Pa.tisambhidaa catasso, vimokkhaapi ca a.t.thime; cha.labhi~n~naa sacchikataa,} kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti. 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. arahatta.m pana patvaa udaanentii taa eva gaathaa parivattitvaa abhaasi; When she attained Arahatship, making a solemn utterance, she spoke these same verses, repeating them. tattha abhayeti attaanameva aalapati; bhiduroti bhijjanasabhaavo, aniccoti attho; yattha sattaa puthujjanaati yasmi.m kha.nena bhijjanasiile asuciduggandhajegucchapa.tikkuulasabhaave kaaye ime andhaputhujjanaa sattaa laggaa laggitaa; nikkhipissaamima.m dehanti aha.m pana ima.m deha.m puutikaaya.m puna anaadaanena nirapekkhaa khipissaami cha.d.dessaami; tattha kaara.namaaha "sampajaanaa satiimatii"ti; 35. There, Abhayaa means: she is speaking only to herself. Fragile (bhiduro) means: subject to breaking up by nature (bhijjana-sabhaavo). The meaning is: it is impermanent. To which (yattha) ordinary individuals (puthujjanaa) are attached (sattaa) means: these blind ordinary people (andha-puthujjanaa) are attached, clinging to (laggaa), adhering to (laggitaa) the body which is by nature unclean, evil smelling, disgusting, and repulsive, and which has the characteristic of breaking up (bhijjana-siile) in a moment. I shall discard (nikkhipissaam') this body means: now I shall abandon it, throw it away with indifference (nirapekkhaa khipissaami), not grasping again this body, this body of corruption. With regard to that, she explains the cause: attentive and possessed of mindfulness. bahuuhi dukkhadhammehiiti jaatijaraadiihi anekehi dukkhadhammehi phu.t.thaayaati adhippaayo; appamaadarataayaati taaya eva dukkhoti.n.nataaya pa.tiladdhasa.mvegattaa sati-avippavaasasa"nkhaate appamaade rataaya; sesa.m vuttanayameva; ettha ca satthaaraa desitaniyaamena- "nikkhipaahi ima.m deha.m, appamaadarataaya te; ta.nhakkhaya.m paapu.naahi, karohi buddhasaasanan"ti.- 36. Many (bahuuhi) painful objects means: affected by many (anekehi) painful objects such as birth, old age, etc. That is the meaning. Delighting in vigilance (appamaada-rataaya) means: delighting in vigilance (appamaade rataaya), called the non-absence of mindfulness, the state of having been profound stirred because she is permeated with pain. The meaning of the rest has been explained. And here, because of what the Teacher taught, there is the reading: Discard this body. You, delighting in vigilance, attain the annihilation of craving. Do the Buddha's teaching. Paa.tho theriyaa vuttaniyaameneva pana sa.mgiiti.m aaropitattaa. Appamaadarataaya teti appamaadarataaya tayaa bhavitabbanti attho. Abhayaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. But [the verse] was included in the recension as it was spoken by the therii. "You, delighting in vigilance (appamaada-rataaya te)" means: "you, being one who delights in vigilance (appamaada-rataaya tayaa bhavittabban)." That is the meaning. Here ends the commentary on the verses by Therii Abhayaa. ======= peace, connie #68529 From: "sukinder" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:08 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy sukinderpal HI Howard (and Scott), ========================== I'm not sure that that this particular business calls for discussion. I just sent it out for informational purposes. As for discussing things with you in general, I would certainly be happy to so long as the discussions avoid an adversarial tone. It is an adversarial tone to which I have been reacting in your posts to me, not to disagreement. I have no problem with disagreements, as you may see from some recent conversations I've had with Herman, TG, and James. I've also had loads of doctrinal disagreements with Jon, Sarah, Nina, and others, all dear friends. But I do not respond well to grilling, interrogation, and accusation. For me, friendly sharing of points view, and together seeking out the meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma is the sort of discussion I am happy with, and I'Il be pleased to pursue such with you should you care to. With metta, Howard ======================= I am very inspired by Scott's posts, they reflect not only an excellent grasp of Dhamma (imo of course), but also much patience and metta. But then I am not on the receiving end of his interrogations. I happened to think, just before reading your response, about this matter of being 'questioned'. I thought about one's views being challenged and the need to respond with patience. I think we all still have a long way to go, not only in terms of accumulated panna, but also khanti, sacca, viriya and the other paramis. I know how I react when reading many posts here!! But sometimes I think about Nina and Jon for example, and remember from their example, the value of patience and development of kusala in general. So I urge you Howard, continue to write as you do and allow Scott to do as he does, there are others like me I believe, who benefit from your exchange just the way it has always been. Metta, Sukin #68530 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rough Draft Acceptance Speech upasaka_howard Dear James - In a message dated 2/18/07 4:15:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi All, > > Sarah asked if I could write an acceptance speech for KS for an > outstanding women in Buddhism award. Here is a rough draft of a > possible speech =========================== What you wrote is, IMO,. not less than superb! Well thought out, interesting, encouraging, and brilliantly crafted. You should write a book on the Dhamma, James! Sadhu x 3! :-) With metta, Howard #68531 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/18/07 8:47:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > I'll see you in Persons and we'll see about the above. I'll respond > as always, as will you, and you can either totally ignore me or point > out where you feel I've been adversarial or accusatory. > ========================== Would you care to say a drop more? I'm hopefully misreading this, but I seem to be missing a tone of friendliness and accomodation. Am I in error? With metta, Howard #68532 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:34 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe Ch 24, no 8 nilovg Dear friends, The arahat has eradicated all defilements and thus he has reached the end of the cycle of birth, old age, sickness and death; he has realized the end of dukkha. The arahat will not be reborn, but he still has to die and therefore one may ask whether he really has attained the end of dukkha at the moment he realizes arahatship. Even the arahat is subject to death, since he was born. He can also experience unpleasant results of akusala kamma committed before he became an arahat. However, he has no more defilements and cannot accumulate any more kamma which might produce vipåka, he is really free from dukkha. In As it was said (Itivuttaka, The Twos, chapter II, §7, Khuddaka Nikåya) two ``conditions [1] of nibbåna'' are explained. In this sutta Sa-upådi-sesa-nibbåna [2], one ``condition'' of nibbåna, pertains to the arahat who has eradicated all defilements but for whom the five khandhas are still remaining. For the arahat who has not finally passed away yet, there are still citta, cetasika and rúpa arising and falling away. An-upådi-sesa-nibbåna [3], the other ``condition'' of nibbåna, pertains to the arahat who has finally passed away; for him there are no khandhas remaining, there are no longer citta, cetasika and rúpa arising and falling away. We read in the verse of this sutta, after the explanation: These two nibbåna-states are shown by him Who sees, who is such and unattached. One state is that in this same life possessed With base remaining, though becoming's stream Be cut off. While the state without a base Belongs to the future, wherein all Becomings utterly do come to cease. They who, by knowing this state uncompounded Have heart's release, by cutting off the stream, They who have reached the core of dhamma, glad To end, such have abandoned all becomings. ---------- footnotes: 1. dhaatu, which literally means element. 2. Upaadi: the five khandhas. Sesa: remaining. 3. An-upaadi-sesa: without the khandhas remaining. ******* Nina. #68533 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:44 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana, no 8 nilovg Dear friends, the Hague, June 29, 1991 Dear Robert, You have understood that the eightfold Path the Buddha taught is the Middle Way. The Buddha said in Isipatana to the five disciples that two extremes should not be followed: devotion to sense pleasures and devotion to self-mortification (Kindred Sayings V, Mahå-vagga, Book XII, Ch II). We may understand in theory that we have to follow the Middle Way, but when it comes to the practice doubts may arise. Should we do particular things in order to have more awareness and should we avoid things which seem unfavorable for the development of satipaììhåna? We may do wholesome deeds such as performing generosity or helping others, but still, attachment, lobha, aversion, dosa, and ignorance, moha, arise time and again, and sati seldom arises. We may become discouraged about our lack of progress. You have understood that satipaììhåna should be developed naturally, in daily life, but, as you wrote, you have doubts whether you should avoid certain situations. You mentioned that you had doubts whether you should accept an invitation from your friends to go to the movies or whether you should stay home in order to study Dhamma. You feel that accepting is indulgence in pleasure. Nevertheless you find that, even while watching the movie, you would have the opportunity to face the present reality. I will quote from your letter: "Although I have at home the opportunity to study the Dhamma, perhaps there will be a feeling of "my practice", "my síla", so that the benefits may not be high. Whereas if I would accept I would lose the study time but there is less chance of developing attachment to "my practice" and really just as much time to observe the present moment. Of course, as paññå develops one may naturally not have any desire to see a movie and then one would decline anyway. I do, however, believe that there are more conditions for developing kusala cittas if one stays home. I guess that the answer to this is that the practice is not so much to accumulate many kusala cittas but rather to develop understanding which recognizes the different characteristics of all rúpas and nåmas and sees them as anattå, including sati and paññå." The answer to this dilemma is that one never knows beforehand which type of citta arises at which moment, kusala citta or akusala citta. Only the anågåmí, the person who has realised the third stage of enlightenment, will never indulge in sense pleasures. He will have no inclination to go to movies. For us it is different. Sometimes we shall accept an invitation to go to the movies, sometimes we shall decline and the cittas arising in both cases can be kusala or akusala, nobody can predict that. We can also accept an invitation because of kindness, out of consideration for someone else who may not be able to go alone. How could one prescribe citta what to decide? Each citta arises because of its own conditions, it is anattå, beyond control. ********* NIna. #68534 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:47 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe Ch 24, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > The arahat has eradicated all defilements and thus he has reached the > end of the cycle of birth, old age, sickness and death; he has > realized the end of dukkha. The arahat will not be reborn, but he > still has to die and therefore one may ask whether he really has > attained the end of dukkha at the moment he realizes arahatship. Even > the arahat is subject to death, since he was born. I disagree with what you write here. Technically, the arahant doesn't experience "death"; he/she experiences paranibbana. To the observer it appears to be like death, but it is really nothing like the experience of "death" (which is dukkha). Paranibbana isn't dukkha in the slightest. Metta, James #68535 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rough Draft Acceptance Speech buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Dear James - > > In a message dated 2/18/07 4:15:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > > Hi All, > > > > Sarah asked if I could write an acceptance speech for KS for an > > outstanding women in Buddhism award. Here is a rough draft of a > > possible speech > =========================== > What you wrote is, IMO,. not less than superb! Well thought out, > interesting, encouraging, and brilliantly crafted. You should write a book on the > Dhamma, James! Sadhu x 3! :-) Gee, thanks Howard! Now you have me blushing! ;-)) However, I wouldn't consider writing a book on the Dhamma unless I became a monk. My lifestyle is too sensous and pleasure-filled to really know the Dhamma....I just know how to use words. :-) Metta, James #68536 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons TGrand458@... Hi Howard and Scott In a message dated 2/18/2007 8:00:42 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Now, I suggested the following: "...some of the points you offer - they are essentially a version of a Puggalavaadin perspective, as I see it." In stating: '...complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not fully illusion...'They are not fully illusion...', thought of the Puggalavaadins. If I may butt in ... I don't think Howard is seeing "person" in the way you think he is seeing it Scott. I would feel confident in believing that Howard still sees all aspect of what most minds consider as "person" as a non-entity, as empty of self , and a collection of aggregates. Let me see if Howard would agree with this (perhaps not my language) as this would be my take of his writing about "person" ... The conglomeration of aggregates that go together to make up what most minds consider to be a person is actually a "system." When Howard says that "person" is not nothing at all, I would interpret it to be saying that there is an "interactive system of aggregates." I do NOT interpret him as saying that at some level or another there is actually a "person." TG #68537 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy scottduncan2 Hi Howard, H: "Would you care to say a drop more? I'm hopefully misreading this, but I seem to be missing a tone of friendliness and accomodation. Am I in error?" No thanks, Howard. Go to 'Persons' and let's discuss. The proof is in the pudding... Sincerely, Scott. #68538 From: "m. nease" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A final venting from phil, probably. m_nease Hi Phil and Rob, Just FYI Phil, I did the same for six months in Thailand and three months in Burma (though not nearly so well-placed as Robert). This is not to boast, just to let you know that I've checked out the possibilities to some extent. Interestingly, Robert and I still share a deep attachment (if I may say so, Rob) to the Zendo (ç¦…å ‚). Now, Rose and I play cribbage and chess every day. The same (different) dhammas arise and subside as did in the temples. mike #68539 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:18 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi TG, Thanks for butting in: TG: "...The conglomeration of aggregates that go together to make up what most minds consider to be a person is actually a "system." When Howard says that 'person' is not nothing at all, I would interpret it to be saying that there is an 'interactive system of aggregates.' I do NOT interpret him as saying that at some level or another there is actually a 'person.' Yes, let's see what Howard says. In the meantime, I think I'm saying the equivalent of, 'A rose by any other name yet would smell as sweet' - self by any other designation (e.g. 'interactive system of aggregates') is still self. I agree that what is being proposed is not out-and-out, blatant self-view, but rather, I think, somewhat subtle, but self-view nonetheless. SN 23,2(2): "...Venerable sir, it is said, 'a being, a being.' In what way, venerable sir, is one called a being? "One is stuck, Raadha, tightly stuck, in desire, lust, delight, and craving for form; therefore one is called a being. One is stuck, tightly stuck, in desire, lust, delight, and craving for feeling...for perception... for volitional formations...for consciousness; therefore one is called a being..." Bh. Bodhi, Note 244: "This reply hinges on a pun between satta...'a being', and as the past participle of sajjati,...'attached'. Taking 'being' as synonymous with 'person' (a stance I'm not totally sure of, by the way) the definition hinges on a state of being, not on being; that is, I think it is 'being attached' that defines 'being', not some existent or semi-existent or quasi-existent entity as I understand is being set out. SN 41,3(2): "...Now, householder, are you asking thus: 'Venerable elder, there are various views that arise in the world: 'The world is eternal'... - these as well as the sixty-two speculative views mentioned in the Brahmajaala. Now when what exists do these views come to be? When what is nonexistent do these views not come to be? "Yes, venerable sir. "As to the various views that arise in the world...: when there is identity view, these views come to be; when there is no identity view these views do not come to be. "But, venerable sir, how does identity view come to be? "Here, householder, the uninstructed worldling, who has no regard for the noble ones and in unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for the good persons and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He regards feeling as self...perception as self...volitional formations as self...consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. It is in such a way that identity view comes to be. "And, venerable sir, how does identity view not come to be? "Here, householder, the instructed noble disciple, who has regard for the noble ones and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, who has regard for good persons and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, does not regard form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He does not regard feeling as self...or perception as self...or volitional formations as self...or consciousness as self...or self as in consciousness. It is in such a way that identity view does not come to be." Sincerely, Scott. #68540 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:28 am Subject: re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat nilovg Hi James, ----------- J: I disagree with what you write here. Technically, the arahant doesn't experience "death"; he/she experiences paranibbana. To the observer it appears to be like death, but it is really nothing like the experience of "death" (which is dukkha). Paranibbana isn't dukkha in the slightest. ------- N: I agree that paranibbaana is not dukkha, it is the end to dukkha. What does it mean, when we say: the arahat dies? It means that the last citta of his lifespan, the dying-consciousness, cuticitta, falls away and that it does not have to be succeeded by rebirth- consciousness, such as is the case for all of us who have not realized arahatship. Arising is dukkha, nama and rupa arise at birth. There are three kinds of death, mara.na: momentary death (khaùika maraùa), conventional death (sammutti maraùa) and final death (samuccheda maraùa). Momentary death is death at each moment, and this means that our life occurs during only one moment of citta which arises and then falls away. Conventional death: the end of a lifespan. Final death: death of the arahat who does not have to be reborn and that is the end to dukkha. -------- Nina. #68541 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] re words on Rough Draft nilovg Hi James, Each life is different and the Dhamma is for monks and laypeople, also laypeople who enjoy sense pleasures. We have to know ourselves just as we are. We come to know that all our attachments are conditioned elements, not self. It is the beauty of the teachings that it is understanding that has to be developed, comprehension. No need to force oneself to be different or live according to an ideal image one thinks of, an imge of how one should be. That is very frustrating. Nina. Op 18-feb-2007, om 16:50 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > My lifestyle is too sensous and pleasure-filled to really know > the Dhamma....I just know how to use words. :-) #68542 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/18/07 10:00:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I'll try again. I don't agree with your stance, as you know. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I truly don't think you understand what my "stance" is. I say that there is an aggregate of interrelated dhammas that is called a person - like the proverbial chariot, but that it is merely a convention to do so, that all that is present at any time are those dhammas, and that no entity of any sort exists. ------------------------------------------- > > Here, through the miracle of me learning to cut and paste, I put a > section of the Katthavatthu, 'Of the Existence of A Personal Entity', > culled from the famous Useful Posts. I prefer the source: > > "1. Of the Existence of a Personal Entity. > > Controverted Point. That the 'person' is known in the sense of a real > and ultimate fact. (Sarah:paramattha dhamma). > > From the commentary- > > "The Theravadin questions a Puggalavadin (one who believes in the > existence of a personal entity, soul, or perduring immortal essence in > man) concerning his position. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I believe in no personal entity, soul, or preduring immortal essence in *anything*! In a recent post to TG, I wrote "I do not consider dhammas entities. They are mere fleeting experiences - conditioned, dependent and empty. An entity is a self-existent reality. I know of none." -------------------------------------- Who among the eighteen schools of> thought were Puggalavadins? In the > Saasana the Vajjiputtakas and > Sammitiyas, and many other teachers besides, not belonging to the > Saasana. 'Person'(puggala) means soul, being, vital principle. 'Is > known': is approached and got at by the understanding, is cognized. > 'Real': not taken as an effect of magic > or mirage, actual. 'Ultimate'(paramattho): highest sense, not taken > from tradition, or hearsay. 'Known' as one of the fifty-seven > ultimates of our conscious experience (i.e 5 aggregates, 12 sense > organs and objects, 18 elements, 22 controlling powers)." > > There are puggala, attaa, sakkaaya, and other words the full meaning > of which, along with the interrelations, would be interesting to know > more of. > > Now, I suggested the following: > > "...some of the points you offer - they are essentially a version of > a Puggalavaadin perspective, as I see it." ---------------------------------------- Howard: And I fully disagree with that assessment, though in retrospect I see that I should have taken greater care with some of my language use. --------------------------------------- > > In stating: '...complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. > They are not fully illusion...', it gives me pause. This is why I > thought of the Puggalavaadins. ------------------------------------- Howard: There is a (fuzzy) trans-temporal stream of interrelated dhammas that it is a convention to refer to as a unity with the concept-name "person". When one goes beyond that mere conventional usage and takes seriously the unity notion, presuming an entity of some sort, some self-existent individual something beyond the mere dhammas, that is an atta-view. Please reread what Karunadasa had to say about the puggalavadins. (I will add, as an aside, BTW, that when one takes any of those dhammas as a self-existent entity, that also is an atta-view.) ------------------------------------ > > Although, clearly, this is not a pure and full-out statement regarding > 'person' as ultimate, there is, nonetheless, a statement regarding the > possibility of knowing this entity called 'complexes perceived as > unities'. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Anytime anyone uses a single name for an aggregate of phenomena, that is a conventional usage that speaks of the aggregate as if it were a unity, a single, indivisible thing. It, of course, is not. Aside from its components, it's nothing at all! If one is fooled by the usage, one falls prey to a language-induced atta-view. The reason that I said that refering to an aggregate such as a so-called person as if it were a unity is not fully delusive is in recognition of the relations holding amongst the dhammas involved. That is the basis for the language convention. It is good to see what the convention is all about. Seeing its basis clarifies what the reality is and helps us avoid being taken in by the terminology. The puggalavadins were taken it by it, and also by their desire to cling to entities and substance. I am not, I assure you. --------------------------------------------------- And further the mechanism by which these 'complexes> > perceived as unities' is asserted to be via 'extensive sankharic > processing'. > > This is what is suggested to be the Puggalavaadin-like stance - that a > person is only partial illusion. The statement regarding 'partial > illusion' was not explained, and it is here especially that these > arguments are directed. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I hope you follow my meaning as elaborated above. You may recall that in my original post entitled "Persons", I wrote the following: - - - - - - - - Persons, just as all complexes, are unreal as individual phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or delimitable. However, complexes perceived as unities are not nothing at all. They are not *fully* illusion. Why? For the same reason that they are erroneously grasped as entities to begin with: 1) There are manifold paramattha dhammas, closely interrelated in multiple ways, that underlie the perceived entity, and 2) the perception of that aggregate of phenomena as a unity is our means of grasping the relations involved. - - - - - - - - - Please note that I said they "are unreal as individual phenomena, their unity never actually being findable or delimitable." What I said after that should have been more carefully worded. My point was that our convention of treating complexes as unities is based on the reality of the interrelationships holding among the dhammas involved. We're not talking about random, grab-bag collections dhammas, but integrated complexes of realted phenomena. The relations really hold among the dhammas, and they are the reason we are *able* to construct percepts of trees, people, parents, children, and emails. I can see that you took the way I expressed matters as suggesting that perhaps persons, for example, really are in some way unities and entities. I regret not having taken more care in how I expressed myself. It is not an easy matter to choose one's words perfectly on such a topic. Even now I am dissatisfied. I do see the problems. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Below, in response to the suggestion that 'person' is concept, along > with agreement, it is asserted: > > "...they are simply more important, as the belief in their existence > as unities/entities is more serious as regards the suffering of > sentient beings." ------------------------------------------- Howard: My point there was that our sense of an entity-core in the "person" is a more serious cognitive error as as regards human suffering than our reifying other conventional objects. That is a point that, IMO, Theravada sees more clearly than Mahayana. -------------------------------------------- > > Here is what I think is the crux of things: > > I'm guessing that this is related to the old paradox of 'to whom is > one compassionate if there is no one to be compassionate to'? In > attempting to solve this paradox it was seen as necessary, I think, to > salvage some notion of 'person' as a more palatable way of maintaining > the sense of there being someone who is able to be compassionate to > someone. (I think, by the way, that the resolution to this paradox is > the same as the resolution to the question of 'who inherits the > results of kamma if there is no one acting'?) ------------------------------------------- Howard: All that is required, IMO, for compassion is to be aware of streams of dhammas including sorrow. That grief, and even just dissatisfaction, arises is sufficient cause for compassion. It doesn't require contenancing self, core, essence, or unity in dhammic streams. Knowing dukkha in "oneself" is sufficient basis for the impulse to ease it in "others". ------------------------------------------- > > I think that there is much subtle self-view pervading the various ways > in which this paradox is given solution. In this case, a version of > 'person' to have as an object of compassion, or whatever. > > Here's Vajiraa dealing with Maara: > > SN 5,10,553-555: > > "Why now do you assume 'a being'? > Maara, is that your speculative view? > This is a heap of sheer formations: > Here no being is found. > > "Just as with an assemblage of parts, > The word 'chariot' is used, > So, when the aggregates exist, > There is the convention of 'a being'. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Exactly! Need I point out that the word 'chariot' is not used when the parts are unassembled? Interrelationship is the basis for the convention, ans without it the convention would be baseless. Even *with* it, it is still appropriate to realize that it remains mere convention, though well founded. --------------------------------------------- > > "It's only suffering that comes to be, > Suffering that stands and falls away. > Nothing but suffering comes to be, > Nothing but suffering ceases." > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > > ======================= With metta, Howard P.S. No problems with "tone" here, as far as I'm concerned. This , IMO, was a decent, useful, and friendly conversation. :-) I hope you agree as regards my participation. #68543 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 2/18/07 10:06:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: > So I urge you Howard, continue to write as you do and allow Scott to do as > he does, there are others like me I believe, who benefit from your exchange > just the way it has always been. > ========================= Thank you, but I think both Scott and I can improve matters. :-) With metta, Howard #68544 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Daana Corner (01) nilovg Dear Han, welcome back. I always feel so happy to correspond with you. Your instalment on giving is a good idea, thank you very much. I shall try to add now and then, I hope others do too. Nina. Op 18-feb-2007, om 5:08 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > The practice of giving is universally recognized as > one of the most basic human virtues #68545 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: For Whatever Interest It May Hold: The Puggalavadin Heresy upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/18/07 10:24:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > Hi, Scott - > > In a message dated 2/18/07 8:47:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, > scduncan@... > writes: > > >I'll see you in Persons and we'll see about the above. I'll respond > >as always, as will you, and you can either totally ignore me or point > >out where you feel I've been adversarial or accusatory. > > > ========================== > Would you care to say a drop more? I'm hopefully misreading this, but > I seem to be missing a tone of friendliness and accomodation. Am I in error? > > With metta, > Howard > ======================== I see that I *was* in error. How wonderful! :-) With metta, Howard #68546 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Scott) - In a message dated 2/18/07 11:19:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > If I may butt in ... I don't think Howard is seeing "person" in the way you > > think he is seeing it Scott. I would feel confident in believing that > Howard > still sees all aspect of what most minds consider as "person" as a > non-entity, as empty of self , and a collection of aggregates. > > Let me see if Howard would agree with this (perhaps not my language) as > this > would be my take of his writing about "person" ... > > The conglomeration of aggregates that go together to make up what most > minds > consider to be a person is actually a "system." When Howard says that > "person" is not nothing at all, I would interpret it to be saying that > there is an > "interactive system of aggregates." I do NOT interpret him as saying that > at some level or another there is actually a "person." > > TG > ======================== Yes, I believe you do understand me, TG. The matter is difficult to properly formulate, I find. With metta, Howard #68547 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Daana Corner (01) hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind encouragement. I am also glad to know that you will try to add now and then. I also hope others do too. It will be very useful. Respectfully, Han #68548 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:20 pm Subject: The proof of the pudding egberdina Hi all, Let us not be confused as to the Buddhist pudding. Let us not be confused as to the taste of sila. Sila tastes like samadhi. And samadhi tastes like panna. And panna tastes like nothing, Nibbana. Cheers Herman #68549 From: "Andrew" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil corvus121 Dear Han I hope I haven't given the wrong impression. A "teaser" is meant as an incentive to go on and read the entire article/book. I think Phil has already done this so look forward to more comments from him and you about the full body of the text. Best wishes Andrew #68550 From: "Andrew" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil corvus121 Hi Phil I'm glad the teaser helped to hook you in to the Wheel booklet. A friend gave it to me years ago when I was starting a MA degree in [Western] Ethics. I read the above and your assorted "venting" posts and see where you are coming from. What I am as yet unsure about are some of the possible suggestions I half-see lurking in the gray areas of your posts. Let's bring them into the full light of day, shall we? 1. that people who emphasise an "understanding-led" Dhamma lose interest in sila, perhaps at a subconscious level or perhaps even at the level of not bothering to toss a coin to a beggar. A form of ethical "paralysis by analysis" perhaps? 2. in practical terms, what is the difference between considering before, during and after actions of mind whether they are leading to one's welfare and that of others, and wanting to understand (intellectually or at a deeper level) the realities of the present moment and whether they are kusala or akusala? If you'd care to comment on the above, it would certainly help me to grasp your overall point. On the other hand, I know you're busy and needing time to meditate, so don't feel any obligation. Bye for now Andrew #68551 From: "Andrew" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > L: It seems to me intention is chanda rather than cetanaa. Chanda is > often translated as "wish to do" and that seems to me to be the same as > "intention". Plus I think there is a distinct difference between > intention and volition. The point of the above quote is that it is the > root cetasikas (lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, amoha) that determine > whether a volition (cetanaa) is kusala or akusala. However, an intention > (chanda) also arises with volition. It is a mental volition (act) and so > also is determined to be kusala or akusala by the root cetasikas. So a > good intention is completely good and could be cultivated for its own > good qualities. Hi Larry A great question - that's from the momentary perspective, no? L: This is not to say that it is easy to determine which cetasikas are > actuating a volition. True generosity can arise without a lot of > understanding, but without understanding it is impossible to say whether > it is true generosity or lobha. On the other hand, doubt is not > understanding. A: when you say true generosity can arise without *a lot of understanding*, are you no longer using the momentary perspective or are you indicating "weak" understanding? Best wishes Andrew #68552 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Mystery of Consciousness egberdina Hi Christine and All, I would like to revitalise the possibility of discussion on the matters raised by your original post, which essentially referred the reader to http://tinyurl.com/3ck5qe. In seeking to renew the discussion, I would like to refer to a sutta, which far from making materialism a heresy to be avoided, implies rather that notions of disembodied consciousness have no place in Buddhism. The sutta is MN43, and particularly relevant is the following section: "When this body lacks how many qualities does it lie discarded & forsaken, like a senseless log?" "When this body lacks these three qualities — vitality, heat, & consciousness — it lies discarded & forsaken like a senseless log." Kind Regards Herman #68553 From: connie Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:19 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (28) nichiconn Dear Sisters Enthusiasts, Saamaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa The commentary on the verses of Therii Saamaa Catukkhattu.m pa~ncakkhattunti-aadikaa saamaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m kusala.m upacinitvaa sugatiisuyeva sa.msarantii The verses beginning Four times, five times are Therii Saamaa's. She too did meritorious deed[s] under previous Buddhas and accumulated good [actions] as her basis for release. She journeyed on only in happy existences. imasmi.m buddhuppaade kosambiya.m gahapatimahaasaalakule nibbattitvaa saamaatissaa naama.m ahosi. Saa vi~n~nuta.m pattaa saamaavatiyaa upaasikaaya piyasahaayikaa hutvaa taaya kaala"nkataaya sa~njaatasa.mvegaa pabbaji. Pabbajitvaa ca saamaavatika.m aarabbha uppannasoka.m vinodetu.m asakkontii ariyamagga.m ga.nhitu.m naasakkhi. In this Buddha era, she was born in the home of a wealty householder in Kosambii, and her name was Saamaa. She came of age and became the close friend of the laywoman Saamaavatii. When she [Saamaavatii] died, a profound stirring arose [in Saamaa], and she went forth. [RD: ... When her dear friend, the lay-disciple Saamaavatii, died, she, in her distress, left the world. But being unable to subdue her grief for her friend, she was unable to grasp the Ariyan Way. ] Aparabhaage aasanasaalaaya nisinnassa aanandattherassa ovaada.m sutvaa vipassana.m pa.t.thapetvaa tato sattame divase saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Arahatta.m pana patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa ta.m pakaasentii- 37. "Catukkhattu.m pa~ncakkhattu.m, vihaaraa upanikkhami.m; aladdhaa cetaso santi.m, citte avasavattinii; tassaa me a.t.thamii ratti, yato ta.nhaa samuuhataa. 38. "Bahuuhi dukkhadhammehi, appamaadarataaya me; ta.nhakkhayo anuppatto, kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti.- Udaanavasena imaa dve gaathaa abhaasi. Afterwards, she heard the instuction of Thera Aananda who was seated in the assembly hall. She established insight. Then, on the seventh day, she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. Then, after attaining Arahatship and looking over her attainment, she revealed it, and she spoke these two verses as a solemn utterance: 37. Four times, five time, I went out from my cell, not having obtained peace of mind, being without self-mastery ober the mind. This is the eighth night since my craving was completely rooted out. 38. Delighting in vigilance because of many painful objects, I have obtained the annihilation of craving. I have done the Buddha's teaching. [RD: Now, while she was seated in the sitting-room, listening to Elder AAnanda preaching, she was established in insight, and, on the seventh day after, attained Arahantship, with thorough grasp of the Dhamma in form and meaning. And reflecting on what she had won, she expressed it in this psalm: Four times, nay, five, I sallied from my cell, And roamed afield to find the peace of mind I sought in vain, and governance of thoughts I could not bring into captivity. *145 (37) To me, even to me, on that eighth day It came: all craving ousted from my heart. 'Mid many sore afflictions, I had wrought With passionate endeavour, and had won! Craving was dead, and the Lord's will was done. (38) *145 Cf. 2 Cor. x. 5. ] Tattha catukkhattu.m pa~ncakkhattu.m, vihaaraa upanikkhaminti "mama vasanakavihaare vipassanaamanasikaarena nisinnaa sama.nakicca.m matthaka.m paapetu.m asakkontii utusappaayaabhaavena nanu kho mayha.m vipassanaa maggena gha.t.tetii"ti cintetvaa cattaaro pa~nca caati nava vaare vihaaraa upassayato bahi nikkhami.m. Tenaaha "aladdhaa cetaso santi.m, citte avasavattinii"ti. 37. There, four times, five times, I went out (upanikkhami.m) from my cell (vihaaraa) means: she thought to herself, "Seated in my living quarters (vasanaka-vihaare) paying attention to insight, I am not able to reach the summit of duty of an ascetic. Due to the absence of [good] weather, my insight does not fit in with the path." Four and five means: nine times I went outside (bahi nikkhami.m) my cell, my dwelling (upassayato). That is why she said, not having obtained peace of mind, being without self-mastery over the mind. Tattha cetaso santinti ariyamaggasamaadhi.m sandhaayaaha. Citte avasavattiniiti viiriyasamataaya abhaavena mama bhaavanaacitte na vasavattinii. Saa kira ativiya paggahitaviiriyaa ahosi. Tassaa me a.t.thamii rattiiti yato pa.t.thaaya aanandattherassa santike ovaada.m pa.tilabhi.m, tato pa.t.thaaya rattindivamatanditaa vipassanaaya kamma.m karontii rattiya.m catukkhattu.m pa~ncakkhattu.m vihaarato nikkhamitvaa manasikaara.m pavattentii visesa.m anadhigantvaa a.t.thamiya.m rattiya.m viiriyasamata.m labhitvaa maggapa.tipaa.tiyaa kilese khepesinti attho. Tena vutta.m- "tassaa me a.t.thamii ratti, yato ta.nhaa samuuhataa"ti. Sesa.m vuttanayameva. There, she says peace of mind with reference to the concentration of the noble path. Being without self-mastery over the mind means: because of the absence of balancd energy, I have no control over my mental development. It is said she was excessive in applying energy. This is the eighth night means: from the time of receiving instruction from Thera Aananda, from that time on, unwearied, I devoted myself night and day to the gaining of insight. I went out of my cell at night four times, five times, and established paying careful attention, but I did not attain distinction. Having attained balanced energy, on the eighth night, I destroyed the defilements through the paths, one after the other. That is the meaning. Therefore it was said, This is the eighth night since [my] craving was completely rooted out. The meaning of the rest has been explained. Saamaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Dukanipaatava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Here ends the commentary on the verses by Therii Saamaa. Here ends the commentary on the section of paired [verses]. ====== peace, connie #68554 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil lbidd2 Hi Andrew, ------------------------- L: "So a good intention is completely good and could be cultivated for its own good qualities." A: "A great question - that's from the momentary perspective, no?" ---------------------- L: What I had in mind is that the practice of the Brahma Vihara is purely the cultivation of good intention. Perhaps also the recitation of suttas and "prayers" in general. But I may be slightly off the mark here. ??? One way to read B. Bodhi's remarks is that good intentions are not enough because they sometimes lead to unskillful actions but to my mind good intentions will come to fruition as kusala vipaka citta and unskillful actions will come to fruition as akusala vipaka citta. Of course the best would be to have good intentions and skillful actions. ------------------------ A: "when you say true generosity can arise without *a lot of understanding*, are you no longer using the momentary perspective or are you indicating "weak" understanding?" ----------------------- L: What I had in mind is alobha arising without pa~n~naa. However I should amend this. Alobha always arises with sati and sati is a level of understanding. It is recognizing realities and in the case of generosity the recognition is the recognition of suffering, or, in the case of generosity towards noble ones, it is the recognition of goodness. I think pa~n~naa is in all cases relinquishment of attachment. Generosity always involves giving something away but attachment can still remain. Larry #68555 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:07 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,135 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 135. Herein, in the base consisting of boundless consciousness and the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception, the object of rebirth-linking is 'past'. That of the ten kinds of sense-sphere rebirth-linking is 'past' or 'present'. That of the rest is 'not-so-classifiable'. But while the rebirth-linking consciousness occurs thus with three kinds of objects, the death consciousness, next to which it occurs, has only a 'past' or a 'not-so-classifiable' object, there being no death consciousness with a 'present' object. Consequently, it should be understood how it occurs in the happy destinies and the unhappy destinies as follows, that is to say, how rebirth-linking consciousness with one of the three kinds of objects occurs next to death consciousness with one of two kinds of objects. *********************** 135. tattha vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatananevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanapa.tisandhiina.m atiitameva aaramma.na.m. dasanna.m kaamaavacaraana.m atiita.m vaa paccuppanna.m vaa. sesaana.m navattabbameva. eva.m tiisu aaramma.nesu pavattamaanaa pana pa.tisandhi yasmaa atiitaaramma.nassa vaa navattabbaaramma.nassa vaa cuticittassa anantarameva pavattati. paccuppannaaramma.na.m pana cuticitta.m naama natthi. tasmaa dviisu aaramma.nesu a~n~nataraaramma.naaya cutiyaa anantaraa tiisu aaramma.nesu a~n~nataraaramma.naaya pa.tisandhiyaa sugatiduggativasena pavattanaakaaro veditabbo. #68556 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:29 pm Subject: Re: re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > ----------- > J: I disagree with what you write here. Technically, the arahant > doesn't experience "death"; he/she experiences paranibbana. To the > observer it appears to be like death, but it is really nothing like > the experience of "death" (which is dukkha). Paranibbana isn't > dukkha in the slightest. > ------- > N: I agree that paranibbaana is not dukkha, it is the end to dukkha. Good, thank you. Then paranibbana cannot be called death because death is dukkha. The arahant doesn't experience "death". The Buddha specifically called enlightenment "the deathless". So, the title of this thread is misleading. It shouldn't be "Death of Arahat", it should be "Paranibbana of Arahat". This may seem like a minor point, but it really isn't. It is a big point- a lot rides on this point. Metta, James #68557 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech hantun1 Dear Sarah and all, I went to UN-ESCAP to get more information on this event. The officer responsible for the International Women’s Day said that UN-ESCAP is not involved in the awards ceremony in recognition of the United Nations International Women’s Day (to be held on 7 March), except that the conference facilities are provided for the awards ceremony at the UN Conference Center. The UN-ESCAP is planning only for the International Women’s Day (to be held on 8 March). Therefore, please forget about thanking the United Nations in the Acceptance Speech. Respectfully, Han #68558 From: han tun Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:02 pm Subject: Daana Corner (02) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, This is taken from “Dana: The Practice of Giving” compiled and edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi. The following is the continuation of Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ------------------------------ Strictly speaking, giving does not appear in its own right among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, nor does it enter among the other requisites of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiya dhamma). Most probably it has been excluded from these groupings because the practice of giving does not by its own nature conduce directly and immediately to the arising of insight and the realization of the Four Noble Truths. Giving functions in the Buddhist discipline in a different capacity. It does not come at the apex of the path, as a factor constituent of the process of awakening, but rather it serves as a basis and preparation which underlies and quietly supports the entire endeavor to free the mind from the defilements. Nevertheless, though giving is not counted directly among the factors of the path, its contribution to progress along the road to liberation should not be overlooked or underestimated. The prominence of this contribution is underscored by the place which the Buddha assigns to giving in various sets of practices he has laid down for his followers. Besides appearing as the first topic in the graduated exposition of the Dhamma, the practice of giving also figures as the first of the three bases of meritorious deeds (punnakiriyavatthu), as the first of the four means of benefiting others (sangahavatthu), and as the first of the ten paramis or "perfections." The latter are the sublime virtues to be cultivated by all aspirants to enlightenment, and to the most exalted degree by those who follow the way of the Bodhisatta aimed at the supreme enlightenment of perfect Buddhahood. Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi to be continued. Han #68559 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat egberdina Hi James and Nina, On 19/02/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi James, > ----------- > J: I disagree with what you write here. Technically, the arahant > doesn't experience "death"; he/she experiences paranibbana. To the > observer it appears to be like death, but it is really nothing like > the experience of "death" (which is dukkha). Paranibbana isn't > dukkha in the slightest. > ------- I beg to differ from both of you. There is no experience of paranibbana. From SN41.6 Kamabhu Sutta. "The thought does not occur to a monk as he is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to attain the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am attaining the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have attained the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state." Kind Regards Herman #68560 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:30 pm Subject: To Monk or not to Monk?? (Re: [dsg] re words on Rough Draft) buddhatrue Hi Nina and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Each life is different and the Dhamma is for monks and laypeople, > also laypeople who enjoy sense pleasures. We have to know ourselves > just as we are. We come to know that all our attachments are > conditioned elements, not self. It is the beauty of the teachings > that it is understanding that has to be developed, comprehension. No > need to force oneself to be different or live according to an ideal > image one thinks of, an imge of how one should be. That is very > frustrating. > Nina. It is this issue, the Sangha issue, which I am really touchy about. Nina, as I wrote to you off-list though, I do want to address you about this issue because I really want you to understand where I am coming from. Some may believe that since I praise the lifestyle of the monk/nun, I believe that that is the only way to follow the Buddha's path. They would be mistaken. If you read the rough draft of the speech I wrote for Jon and Sarah, you will see that I know that both householders and monks/nuns can follow the Buddha's path. Unfortunately, I seem to be one of the few in this group who can see that!! Nina, why is it that on the one hand you say you have a lot of respect and admiration for monks and nuns, but then on the other hand if anyone mentions a desire to become a monk or nun you try to dissuade them from doing so?? I'm sorry, but that is hypocritical. Why is it that I would like to become a monk? (But I cannot because of my parents). It is very simple- I would like to become a monk because I lack self-discipline. Let me tell you a related story to illustrate. I would like to learn Chinese. I like Taiwan so I plan to stay here a long time, so I would like to learn Chinese. I am surrounded by many people who speak Chinese and they have all offered to help me learn; however, I sought out a class that meets weekly, that has a textbook and guided lessons, and I paid a lot of money for this class. My friends are shocked by this decision as they have offered to teach me for free, so I have had to explain to them: I lack the self-discipline to learn Chinese on my own. I must have a class, and a teacher, and the pressure to learn the lessons by the next class period, etc. Some people could and do learn Chinese on their own, but I am not that kind of person. I just can't do it. This is the same kind of reason why I have the desire to become a monk- I can't really learn and practice the Buddha's path on my own. Sure, I can dabble here and there, but I can't really learn it to perfection. I just don't have the self-discipline for that. To really learn the Buddha's path I need to have a teacher who gives constant guidance; I need structured rules and discipline; I need the encouragement of fellow students who are also practicing- In other words, I need to become a monk! I can't do it on my own. On my own I just read about the Dhamma, dabble in practice here and there, spend a lot of time posting about it to DSG, but I don't really practice it to perfection. I know that there are some people who are self-disciplined; they don't need to become a monk or nun. They learn the Dhamma and practice it on their own to perfection. I am not that kind of person. Can you understand that? Why do you seem to imply that everyone must be self-motivated, independent learners? Some people just need the structure and discipline of the Sangha! I went to Wat Pah Nanachat in Thailand to ordain as a monk; spent a few days there and came back home to America. Was it because I realized that I didn't need a temple to practice (like Sarah, KS, and others)? No. It was because I discovered that it was a crappy temple! The abbott is a self-centered moron, the monks are arrogant pricks, and the entire temple/forest is infested with poisonous ants! It was just wrong, wrong, wrong!! It was like I went to a world-famous school and found that the school didn't even slightly meet its reputation. I didn't give up my desire to become a monk, my parents just didn't want me to try anymore. Nina, you can sense my frustration because you can see that I would like to become a monk but cannot. But, you really don't understand the reason for my frustration. You write, "No need to force oneself to be different or live according to an ideal image one thinks of, an imge of how one should be. That is very frustrating." You know Nina, you could give me a bit more credit. I don't want to ordain because of some fantasy in my mind, I want to ordain because I know that I need it. Nina, if you don't need it- GREAT! More power to you!! But not everyone is like you. Nina, if you want to respond to this post, please don't do so for a few days. Don't write your first thoughts; think about it some. Thanks. Metta, James #68561 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/18/07 11:21:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > I beg to differ from both of you. There is no experience of paranibbana. > > From SN41.6 Kamabhu Sutta. > > "The thought does not occur to a monk as he is attaining the cessation > of perception & > feeling that 'I am about to attain the cessation of perception & > feeling' or that 'I am attaining the cessation of perception & > feeling' or that 'I have attained the cessation of perception & > feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed > leads him to that state." > > Kind Regards > > > Herman > ========================== That ninth jhana can be experienced with one then continuing to live, AFAIK. Also, that jhana, while possibly an entry point to awakening isn't always so, and definitely is not, itself, awakening. So, why are you identifying it with parinibbana, which so far as I know is nibbana beyond the death of an arahant?. Nyanatiloka, BTW, says that technically the term is no different in basic meaning from 'nibbana'. He writes the following: > Parinibbana: 'full Nibbana', is a synonym for Nibbana; this term, > therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 groups of existence > at the death of the Holy One, though often applied to it. Cf. Nibbana With metta, Howard #68562 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat egberdina Hi Howard, On 19/02/07, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > ========================== > That ninth jhana can be experienced with one then continuing to live, > AFAIK. I agree with you. From the same text I quoted (SN41.6) "The thought does not occur to a monk as he is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to emerge from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state." > Also, that jhana, while possibly an entry point to awakening isn't > always so, and definitely is not, itself, awakening. So, why are you identifying > it with parinibbana, which so far as I know is nibbana beyond the death of an > arahant? I am equating nibbana with cessation, not with awakening. I don't actually see how awakening comes into it, but there's lots I don't see :-) Kind Regards Herman #68563 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat rameshat27 Hi Nina,James and Herman, When liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom are joined together and described as "canker-less" *(anasava),* they can be taken to indicate two aspects of the arahat's deliverance. Liberation of mind signifies the release of his mind from craving and its associated defilements, liberation by wisdom the release from ignorance: "With the fading away of lust there is liberation of mind, with the fading away of ignorance there is liberation by wisdom" "As he sees and understands thus his mind is liberated from the canker of sensual desire, from the canker of existence, from the canker of ignorance" -- here release from the first two cankers can be understood as liberation of mind, release from the canker of ignorance as liberation by wisdom. In the commentaries "liberation of mind" is identified with the concentration factor in the fruition attainment of Arahatship, "liberation by wisdom" with the wisdom factor. Since every arahat reaches Arahatship through the Noble Eightfold Path, he must have attained supra-mundane jhana in the form of right concentration, the eighth factor of the path, defined as the four jhanas. This jhana remains with him as the concentration of the fruition attainment of Arahatship, which occurs at the level of supra-mundane jhana corresponding to that of his path. Thus he always stands in possession of at least the supra-mundane jhana of fruition, called the "canker-less liberation of mind." However, this consideration does not reflect back on his mundane attainments, requiring that every arahat possess mundane jhana, where the pain is there. After attaining the stage of Nibbana, is itself a great pleasure. These stage is such a pleasurable one that Bhuddha dwelve for 7 days after enlightment under bodhi tree only just experiencing nibbanic peace. And at the time of Parinibbana, there is a Parinibbana Sutta written on that. Because it is not ordinary like death of other beings. In that It is very well explained that Buddha starts attaining jhana's from first to last and attain parinibbana, means final cessation, there will be nothing existing for him. SO like Nibbana, PariNibbana is also a stage to attain. Nibbana itself is a pleasurable stage to attain, then how can be the MahaPariNibbana will be a painfull stage. It is also a very peacefull and nibbanic bliss last stage. The period of this stage is so short as this should be attained at the last moment of cessation of Nibbana, So called as MahaPariNibbana. With Metta Ramesh Patil Mumbai, India #68564 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/19/07 12:52:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > >Also, that jhana, while possibly an entry point to awakening isn't > >always so, and definitely is not, itself, awakening. So, why are you > identifying > >it with parinibbana, which so far as I know is nibbana beyond the death of > an > >arahant? > > I am equating nibbana with cessation, not with awakening. I don't > actually see how awakening --------------------------------- Howard: Well, I think that realizing nibbana is both awakening and cessation. But there are all kinds of "cessations". The cessation of nibbana is the cessation of the three poisons and of dukkha. The ninth jhana so far as I know is "just" a jhana, though there has been some debate on that issue. ================== With metta, Howard #68565 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 10:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Dear Jiw, Han, Lodewijk & all, A.Sujin and another friend just called us while Jon was working hard on trying to complete the 2 long talks 3rd drafts(as instructed to be 20 mins and 30mins) and also incorporating some more personal comments along the lines you have both suggested. We had different topics entirely for them with the first more one women and the second more on 'Worlds' etc. Lodewijk will laugh now (and not be surprised) as I tell you the latest is that they are now to be combine both talks into 1 talk of 2 pages (15-20 mins), because now instead of the 2nd talk, there's going to be a discussion or something different:-/ Jon mentioned the confusion about the orgainsers and arrangements and suggested details of all of this should have beeen given to them. It was, it seems, but it's all with another Thai friend, so we haven't been given any of it to work with:-/ On the talk itself, just 'Dhamma' and back to them quickly, please. We are to hank the committee, that's all. Definitely nothing personal, nothing about K.Sujin herself along the lines either Han or Jiw have suggested. (We mentioned your input and ideas, but she was adamant on this.) Now we're told it's for an article in the WFB magazine....!! So back to our last drafts that didn't quite get sent off....but at least we'e smiling:-). I think next year, we may go surfing in Australia for the Chinese New Year holiday or to a remote Quebec mountain hut for some seclusion without telephone or internet, Phil! And yes, still seeing, still hearing, still kilesa to be known, still kusala to be developed, still anatta as we scribble frantically:-)) Metta, Sarah ======= > The drafts are too impersonal, which Than Achan > probably prefers it, however I am afraid that it > won't reach out to the audience. I would like to > suggest that the speech, besides the courtesy > pattern of thanking whoever and before getting > into Parami and Bhramavihara, should begin with > Than Achan's first assignment in 1956, from her > female Dhamma teacher, to teach the female > inmates at Klong Prem Prison. I think it is > appropriate to mention the group of forgotten > females in the society. It should be good to > mentioned that Than Achan have been teaching for > 50 years. #68566 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 10:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... lots of typos in my haste - apologies, S. one = on they = we hank = thank I'll let you work out any others......too much city bustle, for sure, Phil and secluded folk:-) --- sarah abbott wrote: #68567 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech rjkjp1 Dear Sarah I think a useful topic would be for Khun Sujin to stress that the Dhamma/vinaya is timeless and should not be changed to suit well meant fads in current society. And then to explain why the Bhikhhuni order is defunct and cannot be reinstated. This would be good to have on record because a common argument is that the oppressive Bhikkhus are the ones who oppose bhikkhuni reintroduction. Showing that prominent Buddhist women are also opposed can help to counter this belief. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Jiw, Han, Lodewijk & all, > > A.Sujin and another friend just called us while Jon was working hard on > #68568 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Sarah > I think a useful topic would be for Khun Sujin to stress that the > Dhamma/vinaya is timeless and should not be changed to suit well meant > fads in current society. And then to explain why the Bhikhhuni order is > defunct and cannot be reinstated. James: Would you care to explain why you think the Bhikkhuni order is defunct and cannot be reinstated? I happen to live one block from a Buddhist temple, with an adjacent Buddhist elementary school, completely run by Bhikkhunis. Perhaps you need to do some more research? > This would be good to have on record because a common argument is that > the oppressive Bhikkhus are the ones who oppose bhikkhuni > reintroduction. Showing that prominent Buddhist women are also opposed > can help to counter this belief. James: Who says that KS is opposed to the Bhikkhuni Sangha? I bet you will be surprised to find that she is not! (I can see that it is the beginning of the Year of the Pig...we seem to have a sexist pig in our midst. ;-)) > Robert Metta, James #68569 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] final venting from Phil sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Phil), --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > I was just reading the commentary to the 'Guide', the Netti, I > received in Thailand. It is about the stream of kilesas that are shut > off by sati and cut off by pa~n~naa, as the Buddha said to Ajita (p. > 25). > The Co: < sati is sati that accompanies vipassana. Sati takes up the > reality of the present moment as object. It only takes and knows rupa > and nama of the present moment. There is no self, no mine, no man, no > woman appearing in the reality (sabhava dhamma) that sati receives > and knows. The stream of defilements that take as object a concept > cannot arise. > .... S: This is a good quote. I looked again at this section in the Netti (#70ff) which I'd forgotten about and would also like to add the following quotes from it: "'The streams keep streaming everywhere' So said the venerable Ajita. 'What is it tha shuts off the streams? Whereby it is that streams are sealed'> (Sn. 1034; Pe 83) [S: and a little later...] "....according as the Blessed One said: ,'It keeps streaming', bhikkhus: this is a designation for the six bases in oneself. The eye keeps streaming to agreeable forms and resisting disagreeable forms. The ear...nose....tongue...body.....The mind keeps streaming to agreeable ideas and resisting disagreeable ideas>. So it keeps streaming on in all ways and in all manners. That is why he said 'The streams keep streaming everywhere'. ".....'What is it that shuts off the streams?' he asks about deterrence of obsession. This is cleansing....'Tell then, what is restraint of streams, Whereby it is that streams are sealed' he asks about eradication of underlying-tendencies. This is emergence. "Here are the answers: <'Whatever streams are in the world, Ajita the Blessed One said, They are shut off by mindfulness; The streams' restraint I tell, whereby They can be sealed, is understanding'> (Sn. 1035; Pe 17, 84)" [A little later, the stress on the function of panna] "..the underlying-tendencies are abandoned by understanding. When the underlying-tendencies are abandoned the obsessions are abandoned. Why with the abandoning of the underlying-tendencies? Just as, when the complete uprooting of a tree with its trunk is effected, the continuity of flowers, fruits, shoots, and buds, is severed (cf Ps ii, 218), so too, when the underlying-tendencies are abandoned, the continuity of obsessions is severed, closed, covered up. By what? By understanding. That is why the Blessed One said that 'Whereby they can be sealed is understanding." ***** Metta, Sarah ===== #68570 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: re Abh. Ch 24, death of arahat nilovg Hi James, As I understood, the term deathlessness, amata, designates nibbaana. the object of the lokuttara cittas that attain enlightenment. See Nyanatiloka under amata. Nina. Op 19-feb-2007, om 4:29 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > The Buddha > specifically called enlightenment "the deathless". #68571 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Hi Robert & James, Thx for adding your comments too, Robert. I'd meant to add your name when requesting feedback. > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah > > I think a useful topic would be for Khun Sujin to stress that the > > Dhamma/vinaya is timeless and should not be changed to suit well > meant > > fads in current society. ... S: Yes, I think the timeless theme is a good one. I think this was a major one in our 2nd Talk which now has to be incorporated and greatly reduced to fit into the 1st one:-). And then to explain why the Bhikhhuni > order is > > defunct and cannot be reinstated. .... S: I'm quite sure this is not what she would wish to raise on this occasion! ... > > James: Would you care to explain why you think the Bhikkhuni order is > defunct and cannot be reinstated? I happen to live one block from a > Buddhist temple, with an adjacent Buddhist elementary school, > completely run by Bhikkhunis. Perhaps you need to do some more > research? .... S: Meanwhile, James, if you take a look under 'bhikkhunis' in U.P., you'll get an idea of the difficulties and some past discussions:-). .... > > > This would be good to have on record because a common argument is > that > > the oppressive Bhikkhus are the ones who oppose bhikkhuni > > reintroduction. Showing that prominent Buddhist women are also > opposed > > can help to counter this belief. .... S: I'm not so sure... it may just be a condition for people not to listen to the dhamma taught by those 'prominent Buddhist women', don't you think? .... > > James: Who says that KS is opposed to the Bhikkhuni Sangha? I bet > you will be surprised to find that she is not! .... S: KS just like to talk about dhammas now, dhammas appearing through the 6 worlds, regardless of dress, sex, ordination, political ideas or bhikkhuni sangha ideas. As we know, the bhikkhuni ordination is a very touchy topic. Vinaya is very clear in this regard, I think. In this regard, just because someone sees great value in accepting and maintaining it as it is, as declared at the Great Councils, it does NOT make them 'sexist' or a 'pig' even in the Year of the Pig, even when we jest about it, I suggest!! Metta, Sarah ======== #68572 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:08 am Subject: Re: A final venting from phil, probably. philofillet Hi Mike > Now, Rose and I play cribbage and chess every day. The same (different) > dhammas arise and subside as did in the temples. Yes, that's right - the same dhammas, that's for sure. And yet, and yet...I'm very interested in the way the media we consume (as in any sensory input) conditions proliferation. Less input, less proliferation. Less proliferation, better conditions for deeper levels of concentration to arise. That's the way it would seem to me, that's the way the similes that are used in AN for the hindrances seem to me. (You know, the clear water that is either stirred up, or muddy, or algae-covered, I forget the details in the 5 different cases.) It seems to me the hindrances are fed on sensory input, and the more there is of it, the more deeply rooted they become. I think a person living in a secluded spot would definitely see his or her hindrances starved, somewhat. Same dhammas, but....less demanding or something? I don't know. It's not an option for me so I don't really think about it except when I am shooting my mouth off about it at DSG. I used to play cribbage! I forget all about that. It was fun. Naomi and I should play some games like that. Metta, Phil #68573 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:25 am Subject: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma (was Re: An Interesting Meditation) to Phil philofillet Hi Andrew > Let's bring them into the full light of day, shall we? Ph: Absolutely. You know I like the way you lay things out clearly. > 1. that people who emphasise an "understanding-led" Dhamma lose > interest in sila, perhaps at a subconscious level or perhaps even at > the level of not bothering to toss a coin to a beggar. A form of > ethical "paralysis by analysis" perhaps? Ph: I know this is considered not kosher by some, but I think it is pretty clear that there are some people, like myself, who need more active protection than others do. There are weaker tendencies towards serious forms of lobha and dosa, so it could be said that sila comes naturally for some people more than other. I know myself, and know that this is not the case. You know the line from somewhere in the suttanta - a man with no wound in his hand can hold poison. I have a wound in my hand, most definitely. The Buddha also said, in his simile of the mind as a wound, as a flash of lightning, or a diamond, that only the ariyans (flash of lightning and diamon) do not have a mind like an "open sore.". So what does one do when the Buddha has told one that one's mind is a wound, prone to festering and outbursts of hatred? Does one rely on understanding the characteristics of realities to protect one, or does one take interest in whether the conceptual action involved is wholesome or not? For me, the latter, most definitely. I think an "understanding-led" approach to Dhamma does not provide sufficient protection to the "mind like an open sore." (See AN III, 25) If the commentary is to believed, that is all of us who are not sotapanna. > 2. in practical terms, what is the difference between considering > before, during and after actions of mind whether they are leading to > one's welfare and that of others, and wanting to understand > (intellectually or at a deeper level) the realities of the present > moment and whether they are kusala or akusala? Ph: I will be writing about this when I get back to Jon's post. That won't be for a few days, at least. Really, I'll just be repeating the above kind of thing. It just comes down to my thinking that panna does not provide sufficient protection to a mind which has not developed sila and samadhi very deeply yet. Metta, Phil #68574 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech egberdina Hi Sarah, > > As we know, the bhikkhuni ordination is a very touchy topic. Vinaya is > very clear in this regard, I think. In this regard, just because someone > sees great value in accepting and maintaining it as it is, as declared at > the Great Councils, it does NOT make them 'sexist' or a 'pig' even in the > Year of the Pig, even when we jest about it, I suggest!! > If they were discussing women at the Great Councils, there mustn't have been any sati going on. Same for the dudes that wrote the Vinaya, given the following... > The Co: < sati is sati that accompanies vipassana. Sati takes up the > reality of the present moment as object. It only takes and knows rupa > and nama of the present moment. There is no self, no mine, no man, no > woman appearing in the reality (sabhava dhamma) that sati receives > and knows. The stream of defilements that take as object a concept > cannot arise. > .... >S: This is a good quote. What made these councils great? Kind Regards Herman #68575 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A final venting from phil, probably. egberdina Hi Mike, On 19/02/07, m. nease wrote: > > Now, Rose and I play cribbage and chess every day. The same (different) > dhammas arise and subside as did in the temples. > Is this profundity? Or gibberish? Are Rose dhammas same or different to cribbage dhammas to chess dhammas to temple dhammas? Kind Regards Herman #68576 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech buddhatrue Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > If they were discussing women at the Great Councils, there mustn't > have been any sati going on. Same for the dudes that wrote the Vinaya, > given the following... > > > The Co: < sati is sati that accompanies vipassana. Sati takes up the > > reality of the present moment as object. It only takes and knows rupa > > and nama of the present moment. There is no self, no mine, no man, no > > woman appearing in the reality (sabhava dhamma) that sati receives > > and knows. The stream of defilements that take as object a concept > > cannot arise. > > .... > >S: This is a good quote. > > > What made these councils great? I like your posts a lot! They are very striking in the way they point out ridiculous propositions! Very zen. Anyway, the Buddha specifically taught that one shouldn't believe something just because it is written in ancient texts, and yet that is exactly what Sarah and Robert are doing. They will believe anything just because it is found in ancient texts; and that isn't admirable, that is just crazy. In the Vinaya there is a story about how the Bhikkhuni Sangha was established. I won't go into all the details but it states that the Buddha didn't want to establish the Bhikkhuni Sangha but he finally relented after Ananda begged him too. However, the Buddha said that because the Bhikkhuni Sangha has been established, the Buddhasasana will last only 500 years rather than 1000 years. There are so many holes in this story that it is practically swiss cheese! No one should believe that this is what happened- it doesn't make sense and it doesn't lead to the ending of suffering; actually, this story has caused great suffering for women for hundreds of years. Obviously this story was concocted by sexist men and inserted into the Vinaya after the paranibbana of the Buddha. One shouldn't automatically believe something just because it is written in ancient texts! If KS believes that this story is true, she should reject that award because there obviously can't be any outstanding women in Buddhism. Metta, James #68577 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > If they were discussing women at the Great Councils, there mustn't > have been any sati going on. ... S: I disagree. Sati can arise anytime, any place, any topic being discussed. See all the messages I (and others) have ever written here, including all those on 'seclusion'! .... >Same for the dudes that wrote the Vinaya, > given the following... > > > The Co: < sati is sati that accompanies vipassana. Sati takes up the > > reality of the present moment as object. It only takes and knows rupa > > and nama of the present moment. There is no self, no mine, no man, no > > woman appearing in the reality (sabhava dhamma) that sati receives > > and knows. The stream of defilements that take as object a concept > > cannot arise. > .... S: As we've seen in the therii series, vipassana and even enlightenment can occur while burning the dinner, falling down in old age, listening to the Buddha - anytime. As I'm writing this, I'm also running to and from the window to watch the Chinese New Year fireworks which I can also hear as I type. No question but that sati can arise and be aware even whilst typing and watching fireworks:-) Visible objects, sounds, smells, thinking - so many realities. 6 worlds to be known, one at a time -- see our Draft Acceptance Speech which I'm about to send through. .... > .... > >S: This is a good quote. > > > What made these councils great? .... S: What made them great was preserving the Buddha's realization and teaching about these very simple and yet very profound 6 worlds appearing - showing us the illusion of our ideas of the conventional world which we take for being reality and as having any kind of permanence, happiness or atta. Back to the fireworks before I miss the finale - I'd like to pursue this topic with you, going through steps to see where the difficulty is or rather lack of clarity in what I've expressed. Thx Herman - good topic. Metta, Sarah ======= #68578 From: Trasvin Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech trasvin Dear Sarah, No surprise about Than Achan's reaction regarding anything personal. I tried it once when working on a book about her (and tried my best not to have her in the book!) I support Robert's suggestion on the Dhamma being timeless. I don't think there is need to touch on Bhikkhuni issue. Thank you very much for all the work you have been doing on the speech. Best wishes, Jiw --- sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Jiw, Han, Lodewijk & all, > > A.Sujin and another friend just called us while > Jon was working hard on > trying to complete the 2 long talks 3rd > drafts(as instructed to be 20 mins > and 30mins) and also incorporating some more > personal comments along the > lines you have both suggested. <....> #68579 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:16 am Subject: Outstanding Women Acceptance Speech -draft 3 sarahprocter... All, [the two speeches are now combined into one in 2 parts. Comments and further feedback most welcome!] Outstanding Women in Buddhism Award Draft3 Acceptance speech [Part A – Acceptance remarks] I am honoured to have been chosen to receive this recognition from the Awards Committee to mark the United Nations International Women's Day. In accepting this award, I would first like to say a few words about women and Buddhism. Many people associate Buddhism with Buddhist monks. Although the Buddha highly praised the monk's life properly lived, he also made clear that his teaching was for everyone regardless of living situation or gender. Thus he described his followers as comprising 4 categories of persons: • monks and nuns (bhikkhus and bhikkhuniis), and • male and female lay-followers. Besides, it is not the outer form that marks the true renunciate. As the Buddha said [Dhammapada 142]: Even though he be well-attired, Yet if he is poised, calm, controlled and established in the holy life, Having set aside violence towards all beings - He, truly, is a holy man, a renunciate, a monk. So a lay-follower may be a holy man or woman, a monk or nun, in the truest sense. During the Buddha's lifetime there was a large order of nuns (bhikkhuniis) and there were many eminent female lay-followers. Some of these women gained the highest levels of attainment; some were teachers of the Dhamma to other followers. Some women attained enlightenment as nuns; some attained various levels of enlightenment as lay-followers and continued living as lay-followers after their attainment. I would like to mention two shining examples from the time of the Buddha of lay-women who developed the path. Visaakhaa was the daughter of a rich merchant. When she was only 7 years old she visited the Buddha, listened to his teaching and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life, marrying and having 10 sons and 10 daughters, each of whom had a similar number of children, and so on down to the fourth generation. She visited the Buddha frequently to listen to his discourses and attended daily to the needs of monks. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among the female lay disciples who ministered to the Order. Khujjuttaraa was a slave-woman to Queen Saamaavati. One day she heard the Buddha preach and attained the first of the four levels of enlightenment. She too remained a lay-follower for the rest of her life. She continued living in the same household, teaching to the Queen and the Queen's five hundred women attendants the Dhamma she heard on her frequent visits to the Buddha. She was declared by the Buddha to be the foremost among lay women with knowledge of the teachings. These truly were `outstanding women in Buddhism'. So does gender play a role in the development of the path? In the ultimate sense, no, despite the very significant role it plays in the conventional world. Mara, the personification of evil, taunted Theri Soma that no woman could reach "the high ground of the wise" because the only thing that women know how to do is cook. Theri Soma replied [SN 5:2]: What matters being a woman If with mind firmly set One grows in the knowledge Of the Dhamma, with insight? Any one who has to question Am I a woman or am I a man And does not oneself really know Over such a one will Mara triumph. As Theri Soma points out, being a man or being a woman isn't important at all; it is the development of insight that defines a person's progress on the path. The path taught by the Buddha is available to both women and men, and I would like to encourage as many people as possible to become interested in understanding the Buddha's teachings. [to be contd] #68580 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Outstanding Women Acceptance Speech -draft 3 sarahprocter... All, again comments and further suggestions, most welcome! Sarah (& Jon). =============================================== > Draft3 contd > Acceptance speech [Part B – Talk about the Dhamma] In order to consider more what the Buddha's teaching is, we need to understand the terms he used and then consider whether the world as he described it is the same as the conventional world as we know it. The name ‘Buddha’ comes from the word meaning ‘enlightened’. The Buddha was enlightened to the way things truly are. The way things truly are is called the Dhamma. From the time of his enlightenment until his death some 45 years later, the Buddha taught the Dhamma to those who were able to receive and understand it, regardless of gender or background. Thus the word Dhamma means both: • the way things are in reality, and • the teaching of the Buddha as a description of the way things are in reality. Another meaning of the word ‘dhamma’ is: anything that is real in the ultimate sense. Things that are real in the ultimate sense are things that have an identifying characteristic that can be known by direct experience, without the need for description or explanation. This is a different meaning of 'real' than the conventional meaning. But then, the world as described by the Buddha is quite different to the conventional world we know. The Buddha was asked [SN 35:68]. "Venerable sir, it is said, 'the world, the world.' In what way, venerable sir, might there be the world or the description of the world?" The Buddha's answer speaks of not one world but six: "Where there is the eye, where there are [visible] forms, eye-consciousness, things to be cognized by eye-consciousness, there the world exists or the description of the world. "Where there is the ear …, the nose …, the tongue …, the mind …, , there the world exists or the description of the world." The Buddha realised that the conventional world is, in the ultimate sense, the dhammas appearing through the six doorways: the dhammas appearing through the eye-door, the dhammas appearing through the ear-door, the dhammas appearing through the nose-door, the dhammas appearing through the tongue-door, the dhammas appearing through the mind-door. Six worlds in all, but never more than one world being experienced at a time. The Buddha realised the truth that the world of men and women, or the universe, changes from moment to moment, and his teaching concerns the development of understanding of the truth about these presently occurring dhammas of the six worlds. This, he taught, is the path to liberation and enlightenment, and the way to make the world a better place. But the development of an understanding of the truth about dhammas is a long and gradual process. It includes both intellectual understanding and direct understanding. To directly understand the six worlds we need to realise that intellectual understanding is just the beginning. The dhammas of the present moment are, of course, always present. But because of our lack of developed understanding, we take these dhammas to be people and things, places and occasions; the world in general at this very moment. The Buddha taught in great detail about how this understanding is to be developed, and what are the conditions for that development to occur. In a nutshell, those conditions are simply: • hearing the teachings, and • appreciating the value of gaining a better understanding of the teachings. If these two factors occur frequently in a person’s life, there can be the development of the path. That development is independent of almost everything else: one’s age, education, occupation or livelihood, IQ, marital status, state of health, mode of living, personality. And yes, independent of one’s gender, too. All those things that we tend to see as being so important are really neither a help nor a hindrance when it comes to the development of the path. As the Buddha himself put it [SN 55:55-61]: “Bhikkhus, these four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the obtaining of wisdom,…to the growth of wisdom,….to the expansion of wisdom,…to the realization of the fruit of stream-entry,…to the realization of the fruit of arahantship. What four? • Association with superior persons, • hearing the true Dhamma, • careful attention, • practice in accordance with the Dhamma…….” We should know the purpose of listening to the Dhamma. The purpose is not to obtain something for oneself, it is not honour or fame; it is not being admired as a clever person who is full of wisdom. The purpose is knowing oneself, realizing one’s lack of understanding of dhammas, one’s ignorance of, for example, visible object that appears through the eyes or sound that appears through the ears now. Understanding the teachings, and helping others to understand and see the value of the teachings, is the most important thing in the world. Social support is endless – it doesn't bring peace of mind. Only the understanding of the six worlds brings real peace. It's the only effective way. Without an understanding of the Buddha's teaching it's impossible to really alleviate suffering because we never get to the roots of the problems, the real cause of ignorance, greed and mental anguish in our worlds. The truth of our common suffering was perfectly penetrated and expounded by the Buddha. It is not a truth known by men in one way, and by women another way. It is a truth that applies to all living beings. Nor is there a two-fold cause for this suffering, one for men, and a different one for women. At the root of the suffering of all beings is the seemingly unquenchable thirst and craving for the six worlds. The truth of this reality of craving as the root of suffering was also perfectly penetrated and expounded by the Buddha. By understanding the cause of the problems in the world as we know it, he appreciated that the only effective way to overcome problems is to understand the realities of the six worlds, in order to make the world a better place for men and women. [AN V,194:] "Just as if there were a beautiful pond with a pleasant shore, its water clear, agreeable, cool, and limpid, and a man came by, scorched and exhausted by the heat, fatigued, parched, and thirsty, and he would step into the pond, bathe and drink, and thus all his affliction, fatigue, and feverishness would be allayed, so too, dear sir, whenever one hears Master Gotama's Dhamma, be it discourses, mixed prose, expositions or marvellous accounts, all one's affliction, fatigue and feverish burning are allayed." I wish everyone a peaceful world with more and more understanding. **************** #68581 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Robert, >. > > James: Would you care to explain why you think the Bhikkhuni order is > defunct and cannot be reinstated? _____________ Dear James This thread on my site gives the gist: http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=59 Robert #68582 From: connie Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:56 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (29) nichiconn Dear Sisters Enthusiasts, Aparaasaamaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa / The commentary on the verses of another Therii Saamaa *RD: Cf. Ps. iii. and xxiii. Tikanipaate pa.n.naviisativassaaniiti-aadikaa aparaaya saamaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m kusala.m upacinantii vipassissa bhagavato kaale candabhaagaaya nadiyaa tiire kinnarayoniya.m nibbatti. In the section of groups of three [verses, the verses] beginning Twenty-five years are the verses of another Therii Saamaa. She too did meritorious deed[s] under previous Buddhas and accumulated good [actions] as her basis for release. At the time of the Blessed One Vipassii, she was reborn in the womb of a kinnarii on the banks of the river Candhabhaagaa. Saa tattha kinnarehi saddhi.m kii.laapasutaa vicarati. Athekadivasa.m satthaa tassaa kusalabiijaropanattha.m tattha gantvaa nadiitiire ca"nkami. Saa bhagavanta.m disvaa ha.t.thatu.t.thaa sa.lalapupphaani aadaaya satthu santika.m gantvaa vanditvaa tehi pupphehi bhagavanta.m puujesi. And she lived there intent on play together with the other kinnaras. One day, the Teacher went there to plant the seeds of meritorious deeds in her. He walked up and down the banks of the river. When she saw the Blessed One, she was happy and pleased. She took sa.lala flowers, went up to the Teacher, paid homage to him, and honoured the Blessed One with those flowers. *RD: Sala.la-pupphaani, possibly shoots of the Indian pine (sarala). Saa tena pu~n~nakammena devamanussesu sa.msarantii imasmi.m buddhuppaade kosambiya.m kulaghare nibbattitvaa vayappattaa saamaavatiyaa sahaayikaa hutvaa tassaa matakaale sa.mvegajaataa pabbajitvaa pa~ncaviisati vassaani cittasamaadhaana.m alabhitvaa mahallikaakaale sugatovaada.m labhitvaa vipassana.m va.d.dhetvaa saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Then she journeyed on among devas and men as a result of that meritorious deed. In this Buddha era, she was born in the home of a [good] family in Kosambi. When she came of age, she was a friend of Saamaavatii. At the time of the latter's death, a profound stirring arose in her, and she went forth. For twenty-five years she did not attain mental concentration. When she was an old woman she received instruction from the Sublime One, increased her insight, and attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. Tena vutta.m apadaane (apa. therii 2.2.22-29)- "Candabhaagaanadiitiire, ahosi.m kinnarii tadaa; addasaaha.m devadeva.m, ca"nkamanta.m naraasabha.m. "Ocinitvaana sa.lala.m, buddhase.t.thassadaasaha.m; upasi"nghi mahaaviiro, sa.lala.m devagandhika.m. "Pa.tiggahetvaa sambuddho, vipassii lokanaayako; upasi"nghi mahaaviiro, pekkhamaanaaya me tadaa. "A~njali.m paggahetvaana, vanditvaa dvipaduttama.m; saka.m citta.m pasaadetvaa, tato pabbatamaaruhi.m. "Ekanavutito kappe, ya.m pupphamadadi.m tadaa; duggati.m naabhijaanaami, buddhapuujaayida.m phala.m. As it is said in the Apadaana: At that time I was a kinnarii on the banks of the river Candabhaagaa, and I saw the Deva of Devas, the Bull Among Men, walking up and down. I picked sa.lala [flowers] and gave them to the Best of Buddhas. The Great Hero smelled the sa.lala [flowers] which had a divine odour. The Fully Awakened One Vipassii, the Leader of the World, accepted [the flowers]. Then the Great Hero smelled [them] as I looked on. I paid respects with raised hands together, paid homage to the Supreme One Among Bipeds. My mind was gladdened, then I climbed the mountain. In the thirty-one aeons since I gave that flower I am not aware of [birth in] any realm of misery. This is the consequence of honouring the Buddha. "Kilesaa jhaapitaa mayha.m {, bhavaa sabbe samuuhataa; naagiiva bandhana.m chetvaa, viharaami anaasavaa. "Svaagata.m vata me aasi, buddhase.t.thassa santike; tisso vijjaa anuppattaa, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m. "Pa.tisambhidaa catasso, vimokkhaapi ca a.t.thime; cha.labhi~n~naa sacchikataa,} kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti. 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. arahatta.m pana patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanavasena- 39. "pa.n.naviisati vassaani, yato pabbajitaaya me; naabhijaanaami cittassa, sama.m laddha.m kudaacana.m. 40. "Aladdhaa cetaso santi.m, citte avasavattinii; tato sa.mvegamaapaadi.m, saritvaa jinasaasana.m. 41. "Bahuuhi dukkhadhammehi, appamaadarataaya me; ta.nhakkhayo anuppatto, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m; ajja me sattamii ratti, yato ta.nhaa visositaa"ti.- Imaa gaathaa abhaasi. After attaining Arahatship and looking over her attainment, she spoke thse verses as a solemn utterance: 39. Twenty-five years have passed since I went forth. I am not aware of having obtained peace of mind at any time. 40. Without peace of mind, without self-mastery over the mind, then I reached a state of being profoundly stirred, remembering the teaching of the Conqueror. 41. Delighting in vigilance because of many painful objects, I have obtained the annihilation of craving. I have done the Buddha's teaching. Today is the seventh day since my craving was dried up. CAF R-D: Full five-and-twenty years since I came forth! But in my troubled heart in no way yet Could I discern the calm of victory. (39) The peace of mind, the governance of thoughts Long sought, I found not; and with anguish thrilled I dwelt in memory on the Conqueror's word. (40) To free my path from all that breedeth Ill I strove with passionate ardour, and I won! Craving is dead, and the Lord's will is done. To-day is now the seventh day since first Was withered up within that ancient Thirst. (41) Tattha cittassa samanti cittassa vuupasama.m, cetosamathamaggaphalasamaadhiiti attho. 39. There, peace of mind means: calmness of mind, the mental serenity of the concentration of the paths, and the fruition states. That is the meaning. Tatoti tasmaa cittavasa.m vattetu.m asamatthabhaavato. Sa.mvegamaapaadinti satthari dharantepi pabbajitakicca.m matthaka.m paapetu.m asakkontii pacchaa katha.m paapayissaamiiti sa.mvega.m ~naa.nutraasa.m aapajji.m. Saritvaa jinasaasananti kaa.nakacchapopamaadisatthu-ovaada.m (sa.m. ni. 5.1117; ma. ni. 3.252) anussaritvaa. Sesa.m vuttanayameva. Aparaasaamaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. 40. Then (tato) means: after that time (tasmaa), due to the fact I was unable to set up control of my mind. I reached a state of being profoundly stirred means: if I am not able to reach the summit of the duty of one who has gone forth while the Teacher was alive, how will I attain it afterwards? Profoundly stirred [means:] I became agitated about knowledge. Remembering (saritvaa) the teaching of the Conqueror means: having remembered (anussaritvaa) the instruction of the Teacher such as the simile of the blind turtle, etc.* The meaning of the rest has been explained. *RD: The Commentary holds that, by 'word' or teaching (saasana) here were meant passages of doctrine declaring how rare was the opportunity, and brief, of birth as a human, when Nibbana might be won, illustrated by similes like that of the blind tortoise (Majjh., iii. 169; infra, 500) Here ends the commentary on the verses by another Therii Saamaa. ======== peace, connie #68583 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:30 am Subject: Bhikkhuni Ordination (Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech) upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Robert) - In a message dated 2/19/07 3:39:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > >Dear Sarah > >I think a useful topic would be for Khun Sujin to stress that the > >Dhamma/vinaya is timeless and should not be changed to suit well > meant > >fads in current society. And then to explain why the Bhikhhuni > order is > >defunct and cannot be reinstated. > > James: Would you care to explain why you think the Bhikkhuni order is > defunct and cannot be reinstated? I happen to live one block from a > Buddhist temple, with an adjacent Buddhist elementary school, > completely run by Bhikkhunis. Perhaps you need to do some more > research? ------------------------------------------ Howard: Is it a Theravadin place? I would guess not. The Mahayanist Bhikshuni Sangha has not died out, but the Theravadin Sangha did. There are bhikkhus in numerous countries, including the U.S., however, who have and who do ordain bhikkhunis. The orthodox Theravadin perspective is that since it is officially required that some bhikkhunis participate in bhikkhuni ordination, and not just bhikkhus, that makes it impossible to ordain new bhikkhunis, a ridiculous catch-22 in my opinion, motivated in some quarters, I'm certain, by (possibly unrealized) misogyny. [I do NOT mean Robert in this regard.] The "hard liners", BTW, reject any means of restarting the Bhikkhuni Sangha, including allowing Chinese bhikshunis with similar, even close to identical, patimokkha rules, to satisfy the "presence of bhikkhunis" requirement. --------------------------------------------------- > > > This would be good to have on record because a common argument is > that > >the oppressive Bhikkhus are the ones who oppose bhikkhuni > >reintroduction. Showing that prominent Buddhist women are also > opposed > >can help to counter this belief. > > James: Who says that KS is opposed to the Bhikkhuni Sangha? I bet > you will be surprised to find that she is not! (I can see that it is > the beginning of the Year of the Pig...we seem to have a sexist pig > in our midst. ;-)) ------------------------------------------ Howard: Perhaps she is opposed based on literal observance of regulations. I'd be interested to find out. ----------------------------------------- > > >Robert > > Metta, > James > > ======================= With metta, Howard #68584 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi Howard, Sorry about the delay in responding: Howard: "...I say that there is an aggregate of interrelated dhammas that is called a person - like the proverbial chariot, but that it is merely a convention to do so, that all that is present at any time are those dhammas, and that no entity of any sort exists. They are mere fleeting experiences - conditioned, dependent and empty. An entity is a self-existent reality. I know of none...(I will add, as an aside, BTW, that when one takes any of those dhammas as a self-existent entity, that also is an atta-view.)" Okay, the terms of this stance are becoming clearer. I'm wondering if the focus on dhammas as experience reflects the Mahayana influence, which, it seems, gives rise to an alternative way of understanding the meaning of dhamma and sabhaava. In other words, can it be clarified why a consideration of experience seems to have precedence over one of function when it comes to dhammas (as it seems to here )? I assume that to note that dhammas are not 'self-existent entities' suggests a sense that I see them that way. This, I think, reflects this experience versus function argument detectable in the statement. I do think in terms of impersonal functions as far as dhammas go, though. Howard: "There is a (fuzzy) trans-temporal stream of interrelated dhammas that it is a convention to refer to as a unity with the concept-name 'person'. When one goes beyond that mere conventional usage and takes seriously the unity notion, presuming an entity of some sort, some self-existent individual something beyond the mere dhammas, that is an atta-view. Please reread what Karunadasa had to say about the puggalavadins." Here is a bit more from the essay by Karunadasa: "...What interests us, however, is that in denying that the person is known in a real and ultimate sense, the Theravadins admit that the khandhas or dhammas are known in a real and ultimate sense. Thus in their view what is real and ultimate is not the person but the khandhas or dhammas that enter into its composition. "Now the use of the two words, saccikattha and paramattha (" real and ultimate" ) as indicative of the nature of dhammas seems to give the impression that in denying the reality of the person the Theravadins have overstressed the reality of the dhammas. Does this amount to the admission that the dhammas are real and discrete entities existing in their own right? Such a conclusion, it appears to us, is not tenable. For if the dhammas are defined as real and ultimate, this means, not that they partake of the nature of absolute entities, but that they are not further reducible to any other reality, to some kind of substance which underlies them. That is to say, there is no "behind the scenes" substance from which they emerge and to which they finally return. This means, in effect, that the dhammas represent the final limits of the Abhidhammic analysis of empirical existence. Hence this new definition does not erode the empirical foundation of the dhamma theory as presented by the Theravadins. Moreover, this view is quite consonant with the statement occurring in the earlier texts that the dhammas come to be without having been (ahutva sambhonti) and disappear without any residue (hutva pativenti). "Why, unlike the dhammas, the person (puggala) is not recognized as real and ultimate needs explanation. Since the person is the sum total of the causally connected mental and corporeal dhammas that constitute the empiric individual, it lends itself to further analysis. And what is subject to analysis cannot be an irreducible datum of cognition. The opposite situation is true of the dhammas. This brings into focus two levels of reality: that which is amenable to analysis and that which defies further analysis. Analysability is the mark of composite things, and non-analysability the mark of the elementary constituents, the dhammas." This can be compared and contrasted with the below, should one wish: Visuddhimagga, VII, 39: "As to the shortness of the moment: in the ultimate sense the life moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurence of a single conscious moment. Just as a chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls [that is touches the ground] only on one point of [the circumference of] its tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a single conscious moment. When that consciousness has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according as it was said: 'In a past conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a future conscious moment not he did live, not he does live. In a present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will live. "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return. No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow' (Nd.1,42)." N. 11 (~Naa.namoli): "'Person' (atta-bhaava) is the states other than the already-mentioned life, feeling and consciousness. The words 'just these alone' mean that it is unmixed with self (attaa) or permanence' (Pm. 242). Attaa-bhaava as used in the Suttas and in this work is more or less a synonym for sakkaaya in the sense of person (body and mind) or personality, or individual form. "'When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead': just as in the case of the death-consciousness, this world is also called 'dead' in the hightest (ultimate) sense with the arrival of any consciousness whatever at its dissolution, since its cessation has no rebirth-linking (is 'cessation never to return'). Nevertheless, though this is so, 'the highest sense this concept will allow' (pa~n~natti paramatthiyaa)' - the ultimate sense will allow this concept of continuity, which is what the expression of common usage 'Tissa lives, Phussa lives' refers to, and which is based on consciousnesses [momentarily] existing along with a physical support; this belongs to the ultimate sense here, since, as they say, 'It is not the name and surname that lives' (Pm 242 and 801)." Given the points made by both Karunadasa and Ven. Buddhaghosa regarding the flickering impermanence of 'person', I'd like to ask how a consideration of 'person' might be important; in other words, how is the concept to be applied? Is what is noted below part of this? H: "My point was that our convention of treating complexes as unities is based on the reality of the interrelationships holding among the dhammas involved. We're not talking about random, grab-bag collections dhammas, but integrated complexes of related phenomena. The relations really hold among the dhammas, and they are the reason we are *able* to construct percepts of trees, people, parents, children, and emails." Again, I'm not sure of what the application of the ability to construct concepts might be. (To make a point of it, the 'perception' of a tree or a person is, to me, not 'perception' but construction.) Howard: "All that is required, IMO, for compassion is to be aware of streams of dhammas including sorrow. That grief, and even just dissatisfaction, arises is sufficient cause for compassion. It doesn't require countenancing self, core, essence, or unity in dhammic streams. Knowing dukkha in 'oneself' is sufficient basis for the impulse to ease it in 'others'." Perhaps here is where one can discuss the application of a consideration of the concept 'person'. Can it be said that 'compassion' actually is 'adosa', the absence of hate, and that this is root-condition? How might this dhamma, adosa, relate to 'person'? Sincerely, Scott. #68585 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/19/07 10:39:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Given the points made by both Karunadasa and Ven. Buddhaghosa > regarding the flickering impermanence of 'person', I'd like to ask how > a consideration of 'person' might be important; in other words, > how is the concept to be applied? Is what is noted below part of this? -------------------------------------- Howard: I like a good deal of what you posted from Buddhaghosa, not new to me, BTW, and all of what you posted from Karunadasa, who I think gives a wonderful presentation of "Theravada as I like it"! ;-) As for how the concept of person is applied, it is applied as all well grounded concepts are - for thinking, communicating, and surviving in the world. It's basis lies in the relations holding among the directly experienced (non-conceptual) intricately interrelated phenomena underlying it. [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not to believe there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.] ------------------------------------------------ > > H: "My point was that our convention of treating complexes as unities > is based on the reality of the interrelationships holding among the > dhammas involved. We're not talking about random, grab-bag collections > dhammas, but integrated complexes of related phenomena. The relations > really hold among the dhammas, and they are the reason we are *able* > to construct percepts of trees, people, parents, children, and emails." > > Again, I'm not sure of what the application of the ability to > construct concepts might be. > --------------------------------------- Howard: You could not live without doing so! Is that adequately useful? --------------------------------------- (To make a point of it, the 'perception'> > of a tree or a person is, to me, not 'perception' but construction.) ----------------------------------------- Howard: The percept is a construct. ----------------------------------------- > > Howard: "All that is required, IMO, for compassion is to be aware of > streams of dhammas including sorrow. That grief, and even just > dissatisfaction, arises is sufficient cause for compassion. It doesn't > require countenancing self, core, essence, or unity in dhammic > streams. Knowing dukkha in 'oneself' is sufficient basis for the > impulse to ease it in 'others'." > > Perhaps here is where one can discuss the application of a > consideration of the concept 'person'. Can it be said that > 'compassion' actually is 'adosa', the absence of hate, and that this > is root-condition? How might this dhamma, adosa, relate to 'person'? -------------------------------------- Howard: As I understand Pali usage, 'adosa' denotes not the mere absence of dosa, but its opposite. --------------------------------------- > > Sincerely, > Scott. > =================== With metta, Howard #68586 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:48 am Subject: Bhikkhuni Ordination (Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech) buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James (and Robert) - > > In a message dated 2/19/07 3:39:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > > Hi Robert, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > > >Dear Sarah > > >I think a useful topic would be for Khun Sujin to stress that the > > >Dhamma/vinaya is timeless and should not be changed to suit well > > meant > > >fads in current society. And then to explain why the Bhikhhuni > > order is > > >defunct and cannot be reinstated. > > > > James: Would you care to explain why you think the Bhikkhuni order is > > defunct and cannot be reinstated? I happen to live one block from a > > Buddhist temple, with an adjacent Buddhist elementary school, > > completely run by Bhikkhunis. Perhaps you need to do some more > > research? > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Is it a Theravadin place? I would guess not. The Mahayanist Bhikshuni > Sangha has not died out, but the Theravadin Sangha did. No, it is a Mahayanist Bhikkhuni Sangha. Robert didn't specify and a Sangha is a Sangha to me, Mahayanist or Theravada. It is very unfortunate about the Theravada Bhikkhuni Sangha. If any of the minor rules of the Vinaya should be dropped, those extra rules for the Bhikkhuni Sangha should be the first to go!! Metta, James #68587 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:15 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination (Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech) upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 2/19/07 11:50:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > It is very unfortunate about the Theravada Bhikkhuni Sangha. If any > of the minor rules of the Vinaya should be dropped, those extra rules > for the Bhikkhuni Sangha should be the first to go!! > ====================== The irony is that the original purpose of having bhikkhunis participate was, would guess, an avoidance of full male control! With metta, Howard #68588 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons TGrand458@... Hi Howard and Scott In a message dated 2/19/2007 9:34:44 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/19/07 10:39:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, _scduncan@..._ (mailto:scduncan@...) writes: > Given the points made by both Karunadasa and Ven. Buddhaghosa > regarding the flickering impermanence of 'person', I'd like to ask how > a consideration of 'person' might be important; in other words, > how is the concept to be applied? Is what is noted below part of this? -------------------------------------- Howard: I like a good deal of what you posted from Buddhaghosa, not new to me, BTW, and all of what you posted from Karunadasa, who I think gives a wonderful presentation of "Theravada as I like it"! ;-) As for how the concept of person is applied, it is applied as all well grounded concepts are - for thinking, communicating, and surviving in the world. It's basis lies in the relations holding among the directly experienced (non-conceptual) intricately interrelated phenomena underlying it. [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not to believe there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.t ------------------------------------------------ TG: I do believe there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization. Feelings come before percepts or concepts. (I will elaborate on a separate post re: mindfulness and conceptualization.) > > H: "My point was that our convention of treating complexes as unities > is based on the reality of the interrelationships holding among the > dhammas involved. We're not talking about random, grab-bag collections > dhammas, but integrated complexes of related phenomena. The relations > really hold among the dhammas, and they are the reason we are *able* > to construct percepts of trees, people, parents, children, and emails." > > Again, I'm not sure of what the application of the ability to > construct concepts might be. > --------------------------------------- Howard: You could not live without doing so! Is that adequately useful? --------------------------------------- TG: Agreed Howard! (To make a point of it, the 'perception'> > of a tree or a person is, to me, not 'perception' but construction. ----------------------------------------- Howard: The percept is a construct. ----------------------------------------- TG: That's right again. Oh this is just too much agreeing with Howard, I gotta go now. TG #68589 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:15 am Subject: Mindfulness and Conceptualization TGrand458@... In a message dated 2/19/2007 9:34:44 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not to believe there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.t Hi Howard, Scott, Herman, I started writing and realized I was probably off-point of the post I was responding to but decided to post these thoughts anyway... Let's talk about a serious Buddhist practitioner who has studied, thought, and pondered "actuality" for years. Then let's say, due to his/her knowledge, this human was able to be mindful directly without conceptualizing. Is this mindfulness "unmediated" by conceptualization? I'd say no. Although the conceptualizations may have mutated into an intuitive insight, past conceptualization conditioned the foundation for that directly-mindful ability. IMO, such direct knowledge is using previous conceptualization as if it were a computer program operating "under the surface." During direct mindfulness, the mind is not actively conceptualizing. Yet this direct mindfulness is still riding the wave of conceptualization, so to speak. If the mind were wiped clean, so all its conceptual background were erased, it would not have the ability to practice mindfulness. So IMO, there is no such thing as practicing "direct experience" without concepts (memories and perceptions for those who rather) being a factor in that practice. So a new born baby may be able to see a "palate of colors" without conceptualizing. (However, if taken to a more extreme, we may have to credit past life conceptualizations but let's leave that aside for now.) However, I don't think you and I are able to "see a palate of color" pure and simple without learning to do so. Technically, yes; what we do se is a palate of color. But we wouldn't have the ability to know that without the knowledge garnered through conceptualizing. So I believe that conceptualization is part of the practice and I don't consider conceptualization a dirty word like many Buddhists. Hell, Abhidhamma is about as conceptual as anything in the world!!! In fact, the Abhidhamma compilers seemed to set out to Hyper-conceptualize the Suttas. TG #68590 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Persons scottduncan2 Hi Howard and TG, TG: "Oh this is just too much agreeing with Howard, I gotta go now." Highly amusing! Me: "...Again, I'm not sure of what the application of the ability to construct concepts might be." Howard: "You could not live without doing so! Is that adequately useful?" TG: "Agreed Howard!" Me: "(To make a point of it, the 'perception' of a tree or a person is, to me, not 'perception' but construction.)" Howard: "The percept is a construct." TG: "That's right again." No, really, there is so much agreement here because these statements are self-evident, (although conceptualisation seems more a conditioned than a conditioning factor vis-a-vis 'living'). I, as well as you, am aware of the general, mundane aspects of conceptualisation. The answer is too general for the question; apologies that it was worded in a way that lead to the above. I was actually trying to ask a legitimate question. What I was getting at was the possibility of pursuing a discussion about 'persons' and how an ability to perceive or construe a 'person' relates to, say compassion, or to the idea of 'being compassionate' to 'someone'. By the way, Howard, in Dhammasa"nga.ni, under the Group on Root Condition, 'adosa' is, I think, 'absence of hate': "[1056] What is the absence of hate? "The absence of hate, hating, hatred; love, loving, loving dispostion; tender care, forbearance, considerateness; seeking the [general] good, compassion; the absence of malice, of malignity; that absence of hate which is the root of good (kamma)." Sincerely, Scott. #68591 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:29 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 8, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Sometimes while watching a movie mindfulness of realities can arise, but this depends on the accumulated understanding. There can be study with awareness of visible object, that which appears through the eyes. When we are absorbed in the story we are thinking of concepts. The thinking is conditioned by seeing. When we stay home in order to study the Dhamma there may not be any awareness at all, how could it be planned? Perhaps we fall asleep or there may be distractions. As you say, there can always be attachment to "my practice", but this is a conditioned nåma and it can be realized as such. You have understood that our goal should not be merely the accumulation of kusala but rather the understanding of all realities, sati and paññå included, as anattå. When we try to induce sati by doing particular things we shall never see that it is anattå. Someone wrote that a teacher said to his pupils that there should be continuous mindfulness. However, this is not realistic. We cannot help seeing and hearing time and again, these cittas just arise, whether we want it or not. Seeing and hearing arise in processes of cittas and in these processes there are, shortly after seeing or hearing has fallen away, kusala cittas or akusala cittas, but most of the time akusala cittas. Often we may not pay attention to seeing or hearing, they just pass. Also the akusala cittas which arise shortly after seeing and hearing just pass, we do not notice them. Cittas arise and fall away very rapidly. Therefore, it is hard to know whether the citta at this moment is kusala or akusala. You were wondering about the types of citta which arise when you are absorbed in a Dhamma subject. Nobody else can tell you, you have to find out yourself. When you study the Dhamma in order to understand realities there are kusala cittas, but also akusala cittas are bound to arise. When you study the Dhamma there are also seeing and hearing, and you have to find out whether kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise after seeing or hearing, which are vipåkacittas, results of kamma. There is likely to be clinging to seeing, to visible object, to concepts we form up on account of what was seen. We believe that we do not particularly like what is seen, but we are still attached to all objects. We are attached to all the familiar things around us, to books, paper and pen, to the chair we are sitting in. However, when we study the Dhamma we can be reminded to be aware of whatever reality appears. Then we do not forget the goal of our study: to understand what appears now. ******* Nina. #68592 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:25 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 24, no 9 nilovg Dear friends, When someone has become an arahat there will be no more rebirth for him. When someone has attained enlightenment to the stage of the sotåpanna, he has become an ariyan, but he has not reached the end of rebirth. The sotåpanna will be reborn, but not more than seven times; thus, eventually there will be an end to rebirth for him. If we do not develop vipassanå, the number of rebirths will be endless. It was out of compassion that the Buddha spoke about the dangers of rebirth; he wanted to encourage people to develop right understanding. We read in the Kindred Sayings (V, Mahå-vagga, Book XII, Kindred Sayings about the Truths, chapter V, §6, Gross darkness) that the Buddha said to the monks: ``Monks, there is a darkness of interstellar space, impenetrable gloom, such a murk of darkness as cannot enjoy the splendour of this moon and sun, though they be of such mighty magic power and majesty.'' At these words a certain monk said to the Exalted One: ``Lord, that must be a mighty darkness, a mighty darkness indeed! Pray, lord, is there any other darkness greater and more fearsome than that?'' ``There is indeed, monk, another darkness, greater and more fearsome. And what is that other darkness? Monk, whatsoever recluses or brahmins understand not, as it really is, the meaning of: This is dukkha, this is the arising of dukkha, this is the ceasing of dukkha, this is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha, such take delight in the activities which conduce to rebirth. Thus taking delight they compose a compound of activities which conduce to rebirth. Thus composing a compound of activities they fall down into the darkness of rebirth, into the darkness of old age and death, of sorrow, grief, woe, lamentation and despair. They are not released from birth, old age and death, from sorrow, grief, woe, lamentation and despair. They are not released from dukkha, I declare. But, monk, those recluses or brahmins who do understand as it really is, the meaning of: This is dukkha, this is the arising of dukkha, this is the ceasing of dukkha, this is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha, such take not delight in the activities which conduce to rebirth... They are released from dukkha, I declare. Wherefore, monk, an effort must be made to realize: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha.'' ----------- (the end) Nina. #68593 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and TG) - In a message dated 2/19/07 1:43:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > By the way, Howard, in Dhammasa"nga.ni, under the Group on Root > Condition, 'adosa' is, I think, 'absence of hate': > > "[1056] What is the absence of hate? > > "The absence of hate, hating, hatred; love, loving, loving dispostion; > tender care, forbearance, considerateness; seeking the [general] good, > compassion; the absence of malice, of malignity; that absence of hate > which is the root of good (kamma)." > ================= And the full definition includes in part "love, loving, loving disposition; tender care, forbearance, considerateness; seeking the [general] good, compassion," which, as I said, is the pposite of hate. The prefix 'a' in Pali is sometimes a mere negation operation and other times an opposition operator. With metta, Howard #68594 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness and Conceptualization upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Scott & Herman) - In a message dated 2/19/07 1:20:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi Howard, Scott, Herman, > > I started writing and realized I was probably off-point of the post I was > responding to but decided to post these thoughts anyway... > > Let's talk about a serious Buddhist practitioner who has studied, thought, > and pondered "actuality" for years. Then let's say, due to his/her > knowledge, > this human was able to be mindful directly without conceptualizing. Is > this > mindfulness "unmediated" by conceptualization? I'd say no. Although the > conceptualizations may have mutated into an intuitive insight, past > conceptualization conditioned the foundation for that directly-mindful > ability. IMO, > such direct knowledge is using previous conceptualization as if it were a > computer program operating "under the surface." ------------------------------------------ Howard: I'm not sure that your scenario applies to what we are discussing. I don't believe that conceptual processing is involved in smelling an odor or hearing a sound or seeing a sight etc. (I DO believe it is involved in *recognizing* them, however, at least for nonarahants.) ------------------------------------------ > > During direct mindfulness, the mind is not actively conceptualizing. Yet > this direct mindfulness is still riding the wave of conceptualization, so to > > speak. If the mind were wiped clean, so all its conceptual background were > > erased, it would not have the ability to practice mindfulness. ------------------------------------------- Howard: For us, being mindful, in the sense of a mental monitoring that enables "staying present, guarding against getting lost in thought or stupor, may well depend on conceptuality. At least willfully engendering such mindfulness does. But that isn't what was at issue. What was at issue was mere consciousness of sense-door objects, and I do not think concept processing required for that. -------------------------------------------- > > So IMO, there is no such thing as practicing "direct experience" without > concepts (memories and perceptions for those who rather) being a factor in > that > practice. > > So a new born baby may be able to see a "palate of colors" without > conceptualizing. (However, if taken to a more extreme, we may have to > credit past > life conceptualizations but let's leave that aside for now.) However, I > don't > think you and I are able to "see a palate of color" pure and simple without > > learning to do so. Technically, yes; what we do se is a palate of color. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: That's all there is to the seeing, per se. Anything more goes beyond mere vi~n~nana. --------------------------------------- But > > we wouldn't have the ability to know that without the knowledge garnered > through conceptualizing. So I believe that conceptualization is part of > the > practice and I don't consider conceptualization a dirty word like many > Buddhists. --------------------------------------- Howard: Well, neither do I. We wouldn't have any clue of any aspect of the Dhamma at all were it not for conceptualization. --------------------------------------- > > > Hell, Abhidhamma is about as conceptual as anything in the world!!! In > fact, the Abhidhamma compilers seemed to set out to Hyper-conceptualize the > > Suttas. ---------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! You get no argument from me on this! ;-) ---------------------------------------- > > TG > ==================== With metta, Howard P.S. Talking about conceptualization reminds me of something I've been considering writing about onlist. I'll just say a word or two here: I've noticed for a long time, and much more so recently, that, for me, much of thinking is becoming literally painful! Especially during meditation, I've been discerning the flow of thoughts as actually painful - dukkha. I don't mean that there is upset at the fact that thinking is going on. I mean that the thinking itself is dukkha. When the thinking ceases or when it "slides by" freely without the slightest attachment, it is like a crushing burden has been removed. #68595 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons egberdina Hi Howard and TG, On 20/02/07, TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi Howard and Scott > [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not > to believe > there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.t > ------------------------------------------------ > It is not so much a matter of belief, but probably more a matter of being self-evident, that there is no form without name, and no name without form. Name and form are inseperable. They arise together as one. But they are not one. I hope I have understood you, Howard. > > TG: I do believe there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization. > Feelings come before percepts or concepts. (I will elaborate on a separate > post re: mindfulness and conceptualization.) > The following from MN43 indicates to me that what we believe we can seperate is really just a well-mixed soup :-) "Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them." Furher, I believe that even at the highest level of jhana there is still conceiving happening. From AN 9:34. "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of nothingness, that is an affliction for him. Now, the Blessed One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this line of reasoning it may be known how pleasant Unbinding is." Even nothingness is a concept. Kind Regards Herman #68596 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/19/07 3:47:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > > [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not > >to believe > >there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.t > >------------------------------------------------ > > > > It is not so much a matter of belief, but probably more a matter of > being self-evident, that there is no form without name, and no name > without form. Name and form are inseperable. > They arise together as one. But they are not one. I hope I have > understood you, Howard. > ========================= I think you are being far too literal in your understanding of 'nama' as "name". All 'nama' refers to is "mental operation" or "mentality". You are identifying it with conceptualization, which is much too much of a restriction. With metta, Howard #68597 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Persons egberdina Hi Howard, On 20/02/07, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 2/19/07 3:47:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > > [Note: Herman and (maybe) TG seem not > > >to believe > > >there are experiences unmediated by conceptualization.t > > >------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > It is not so much a matter of belief, but probably more a matter of > > being self-evident, that there is no form without name, and no name > > without form. Name and form are inseperable. > > They arise together as one. But they are not one. I hope I have > > understood you, Howard. > > > ========================= > I think you are being far too literal in your understanding of 'nama' > as "name". All 'nama' refers to is "mental operation" or "mentality". You are > identifying it with conceptualization, which is much too much of a > restriction. > I hope I am not as literal as all that :-). To me, there is no mental operation without object. And to be an object of mental operation is to already have been conceived as such. Perhaps I misunderstand you, but it seems that you allow room for some unconscious consciousness, or some unexperienced experience. Nama without rupa is void of any characteristic. Kind Regards Herman #68598 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Acceptance speech egberdina Hi Sarah, I think you missed my point. On 19/02/07, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Herman, > > --- Herman Hofman wrote: > > If they were discussing women at the Great Councils, there mustn't > > have been any sati going on. > ... > S: I disagree. Sati can arise anytime, any place, any topic being > discussed. See all the messages I (and others) have ever written here, > including all those on 'seclusion'! > .... You and Nina agreed that people cannot be the objects of sati. What are these Great Council people doing writing books about and for people? Obviously each moment of writing about persons, or to persons, is not a moment of sati. Cheers Herman #68599 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness and Conceptualization egberdina Hi TG and Howard, Just for the record, I agree with TG here, but that is neither here nor there. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > For us, being mindful, in the sense of a mental monitoring that > enables "staying present, guarding against getting lost in thought or stupor, may > well depend on conceptuality. At least willfully engendering such mindfulness > does. But that isn't what was at issue. What was at issue was mere consciousness > of sense-door objects, and I do not think concept processing required for > that. > -------------------------------------------- I disagree here. I think that the "mere" consciousness of a sense-door object is very much a compounded concept. I believe that this is demonstrated by the jhanas, when at a certain point sense-objects cease to arise. But with that ceasing, what remains is what is essential for a sense-object to be possible. And they are the phenomena / dimensions such as nothingness, unbounded space, unbounded consciousness, you know the drill. A bare phenomenon is not quite as bare as it may seem :-) Kind Regards Herman