#85600 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/5/11 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > A belated welcome-back from me! > Thanks, Ken. >> >> From what I have read of your writings over the years, you are very >> much a present-moment-man. I was therefore stunned and amazed :-) >> that you would contemplate a future that is driven by a need. Not that >> I disagree with that, in fact I totally agree that that is the nature >> of the future. What I don't get is where your past dogmatic assertions >> that there can only be this present moment have gone? >> > ----------- > > This might sound pompous, but the secret is to be interested in > anatta. I'm probably going to sound even more pompous, but I thought that anatta was all about, and only about, conditionality. Are you saying that dependent origination happens all at once? After that, the rest is plain sailing. I have no trouble in > seeing how the need for repeated right understanding is perfectly > compatible with a present-moment-only reality. And I am no more > intelligent than anyone else on this list. :-) > > I think most people here are happy with their beliefs in conventional > reality. And good luck to them! But they can't have it both ways. They > will inevitably find the present-moment world very hard to see - even > theoretically. I actually get the feeling that you are talking about nibbana, which does not arise or cease, dependently or otherwise. Cheers Herman Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (125) #85601 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 12:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death. was:Are the 32 body parts upasaka_howard Hi, Colette - In a message dated 5/12/2008 7:18:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ksheri3@... writes: Hi Howard, Thanks for the quick and humourous reply! > Howard: > Yes, the Tibetans depict Yama holding the wheel of samara. The > conditions of birth are certainly largely a matter of kamma, yes. > --------------------------------------------------- colette: thanks for clarifying the fact that Yama is a Tibetan diety but then you leave it open to interpretation as birth being a function of kamma and you don't even mention the rest of the triumphveret: birth life death rebirth. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: The depiction of Yama as holding the wheel is Tibetan, but Yama was originally a Hindu deity. As for kamma, it is a condition for almost everything, and very important for the details of birth. So, i don't think I left anything open to interpretation. As for mentioning other things, I didn't bring up the wheel - you did, but I did say it is the wheel of samsara. ----------------------------------------------------- Suffering or Samsara is a fundamental buildning block of the reality expereinced in all aspects THEREFORE we should be able to find complete equalities and/or duplications of the existence, in all three, or four however you choose to view it, which makes for a replication and/or a process, no? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand you, Colette. I'm sorry. -------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > I suppose most people fear death because 1) Exactly what it's nature is, > i.e., "What will happen," is unknown, colette: again, a restatement of what I've been saying all along: THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN AND THEY ARE SIMPLY COWARDS AND HOODLUMS THAT CANNOT ACCEPT THE EVENING OF THEIR DEBT. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's what I wrote? ;-) --------------------------------------------- I have, since April 10 or 11, 1978, been clearly saying that a person should live their life as much as possible; They should not sit around and allow it to be handed to them; there is simply so much out there, in the society, in other societies, in all societies, that one single person could possibly obtain access to and expereince for themselves, in a single lifetime. <.....> ----------------------------------------- and 2) With death, there is separation > from loved ones (and loved things), and, colette: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SPEAKING OF HERE? ================================ Conversation over, Colette. With metta, Howard #85602 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/5/10 Nina van Gorkom : > ------- > N: But the body is rupa paramattha dhammas, and at each moment, all > these rupas, some produced by kamma, some by citta, some by heat, > some by nutrition, fall away and are replaced so long as conditions > permit. This seems to contradict your assertion elsewhere that the lifespan of the body is entirely determined by kamma. > But the impermanence of rupas can only directly by realized > by isight. > The body is something that can be blown away, it is a mere nothing. No matter whether bodies get blown up by terrorists, whether they are cremated, whether they are buried, not one miniscule element can be destroyed. Nama, on the other hand, that's another story. It is entirely a story, come to think of it. Nama can't be destroyed either, but only because it was never there to start with. I > think of Herman's story: one moment the body was still a living body, > and within splitseconds there was only a corpse, and so > unforeseeable. No time to prepare. A corpse today, worm food next month, and in 20 years an apple tree sprouting from its guts. But the story of uncle Peter will be nowhere to be found. Cheers Herman #85603 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 1:50 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods TGrand458@... Hi Alex I don't know, if the planets are that big they may be borderline gaseous and have a hard time supporting life. LOL There's all sorts of possibilities why that stuff ended up in the canon. Maybe the Buddha was talking to idiots. And more likely it didn't have to do with the Buddha...it does not fit with his approach. I just think its not worth paying attention to...but there is so much in the teachings that are. TG In a message dated 5/12/2008 2:50:35 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: But do these rain gods, 2,500 km long fishes, geocentric world and so on exist in a Conventional sense? Ok, about fish and creatures that big I can understand. Some planets may be HUGE and can contain such monsters. But we KNOW that we do NOT live in geocentric world and scientists have figured out that rain ISN'T caused by Gods... It is so sad that some people believe in primitive indian beliefs. Also such as 31 body parts (brain was originally not included), also there arose anger in this nama when it read stuff about "heart base" in CMA (not to mention that not all rupa or nama are impermanent)i .... Note: "Anger, anger anger". No wonder why the practice is so important. Because IT matters. One of the reasons why I came to Buddhism was for its practical and rational things (I understand now that I was so wrong about the later). Best wishes, Alex #85604 From: "Alex" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods truth_aerator Hello TG and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > > Hi Alex > > > There's all sorts of possibilities why that stuff ended up in the canon. >>> Imagine what stuff could have ended up in the commentaries... Best wishes, Alex #85605 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 6:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi Howard, Larry: I take it by "entity" you mean "lasting entity". ---------------------------------------------- Howard: No, not necessarily lasting. Just as a separate, self-existent thing-in-itself, a true "being". ---------------------------------------------- It is actually very helpful to see groups as groups. It is a very easy way to understand emptiness, in that a group is not any one dhamma but it is still a group. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I completely agree with that, so long as we don't reify the group. +++++++++++++++ Larry: I don't know what "reify" means. Maybe we could say "cling to" instead. I find that I cling to pretty much everything and it is only once in a while that there is a moment of not clinging. ++++++++++++++++ Larry: However, I think Nina's point is that understanding in this way doesn't go to the heart of attachment. We are actually attached to only one dhamma at a time, not to several at once. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I don't think that's quite so. There is a summing up of such attachments into an attachment to the aggregate conceived of as an entity. Our attachment to a loved one is far stronger than our attachment to tastes, sights, and so on, per se. We become attached to "the sight of our loved one," and so on. ++++++++++++++++ Larry: Sure, we become attached to a thousand things that are signs or characteristics of a loved one, and we probably don't want to become unattached. But all those attachments are attachments to sights, sounds, perceptions, etc. There really isn't a "loved one" in there. But it's always fun to investigate ;-) Larry #85606 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 6:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . lbidd2 Hi TG, TG: "If you just read the sentence I wrote, it says. :-)" Larry: What's the difference between beliefs and "a well cultivated vision"? One can believe in conditionality and impermanence, but is that insight? Larry _______________ TG: "The difference between an insightful view and an un-insightful view isn't the belief in so-called "ultimate realities." Rather, its the well cultivated vision of conditionality and conditionality factors...impermanence, affliction, and nonself throughout every possible condition...including those felt as they are occurring in the present." Larry: "I think everyone agrees that insight isn't a theory or belief, but what does a "well cultivated vision" consist of?" #85607 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 7:52 pm Subject: Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi Herman, ----------------- <. . .> KH: > > This might sound pompous, but the secret is to be interested in anatta. H: > I'm probably going to sound even more pompous, but I thought that anatta was all about, and only about, conditionality. Are you saying that dependent origination happens all at once? -------------------- OK, we have done pompous, now I'm going to try belligerent. (Not really belligerent, just stylistically belligerent. :-) ) 'The past no longer exists and the future has never existed: there is only the present moment.' That's all I've been saying. What is so hard about that? (!!!) ---------------------- <. . .> KH: > > I think most people here are happy with their beliefs in conventional > reality. And good luck to them! But they can't have it both ways. They > will inevitably find the present-moment world very hard to see - even > theoretically. H: > I actually get the feeling that you are talking about nibbana, which does not arise or cease, dependently or otherwise. -------------------------- Twaddle! Pardon my French, but you know what I mean. Since you first joined DSG you have seen more explanations of the present moment than you have had hot dinners. And I certainly don't mean to single you out. Most of the posts here are in denial of the Abhidhamma. People want to talk about persisting entities. They are not interested in things that last for only a single moment Like I said before; it all depends on what we are interested in. Ken H #85608 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/12/2008 7:42:39 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, TG: "If you just read the sentence I wrote, it says. :-)" Larry: What's the difference between beliefs and "a well cultivated vision"? One can believe in conditionality and impermanence, but is that insight? Larry ................................. Hi Larry There is a huge difference Larry! The mind can actually see, feel, notice the causal events causing alterations, changes, and confirm the belief is this natural order of events thereby. Well, here's what the Buddha said.... “…whatever kind of form...whatever kind of feeling…whatever kind of perception…whatever kind of volitional formations…whatever kind of consciousness there is, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: a bhikkhu inspects it, ponders it, and carefully investigates it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there be in form…feeling…perception… volitional formations…consciousness?â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 952 -- 953) Example, one can believe the world is round, another can believe it is flat. If both have made a study of the world, one study has produced a correct belief because the study was most likely done correctly. The other has not. The belief in "ultimate realities" is always just going to be a superimposition onto what arises...and in addition, a superimposition that the Buddha never made. As far as I can tell, its just a form of self-view projected onto experiences considered to consist of "dhammas." Many in this group consider aspects of experiences to be ultimate realities with their own characteristics. The Buddha by contrast called experiences (and all conditioned phenomena) hollow, empty, insubstantial, coreless. Hummmmm.... Houston, we have a problem. TG #85609 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 9:35 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Skeptics, Regarding: A: "Imagine what stuff could have ended up in the commentaries..." Scott: Consider AN IV, 123: "These four kinds of persons, O monks, are found existing in the world. What four? "Here, monks, some person enters and dwells in the first jhaana, which is accompanied by thought and examination, with rapture and happiness born of seclusion. He relishes it, longs for it and finds satisfaction in it. Having become steady in it, resolved on it, often dwelling in it, without falling away from it, on passing away he is reborn in the company of the devas of Brahmaa's company. The measure of the lifespan of these devas is an aeon... "Further, monks, some person here, with the subsiding of thought and examination, enters and dwells in the second jhaana, which has internal confidence and unification of mind, is without thought and examination, and has rapture and happiness born of concentration...on passing away he is reborn in the companies of devas of Streaming Radiance... "Further, monks, some person here, with the fading away as well of rapture, dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third jhaana...on passing away he is reborn in the company of the devas of Refulgent Glory... "Further, monks, some person here, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the passing away of joy and sadness, enters and dwells in the fourth jhaana...on passing away he is reborn in the company of devas of Great Fruit..." Scott: Or, DN 33: "And the Venerable Sariputta addressed the monks, referring to this situation...This Dhamma has been well-proclaimed by the Lord, the fully-enlightened One. And so we should all recite it together without disagreement, so that this holy life my be enduring and established for a long time, thus to be for the welfare and happiness of the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare and happiness of devas and humans. And what is this Dhamma that has been proclaimed by the Lord...? "...Three kinds of rebirth in the Realm of Sense-Desire (kaamupapattiyo): There are beings who desire what presents itself to them (paccuppa.t.thita-kaama), and are in the grip of that desire, such as human beings, some devas, and some in states of woe. There are beings who desire what they have created (nimmita-kaama),...such as devas Who Rejoice In Their Own Creation (Nimmaanaratii). There are beings who rejoice in the creations of others...such as devas Having Power over Others' Creations (Paranimmita-vasavattii). "Three happy rebirths (sukhupapattiyo): There are beings who, having continually produced happiness now dwell in happiness, such as the devas of the Brahmaa group. There are beings who are overflowing with happiness, drenched with it, immersed in it, so that they occasionally exclaim: 'Oh what bliss!' such as the Radiant devas (Aabhassaraa). There are beings...immersed in happiness, who, supremely blissful, experience only perfect happiness, who, supremely blissful, experience only perfect happiness, such as the Lustrous devas (Subhaki.n.naa)..." Sincerely, Scott. #85610 From: "Phil" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 11:05 pm Subject: Re: Interview with the Dalai Lama philofillet Hi Dieter and all > just between something interesting from the mundane side.. Thanks for this, Dieter. I am very much from the mundane side these days... >>>Dalai Lama: Sometimes an angry word slips out, which is bad enough. But no, anger is foreign to me, because anger means wanting to do harm to someone. Ph: this is a bit surprising. I would have thought that the Dalai Lama would acknowledge that anger is very much native to us all, no matter how holy we are. And that wanting to do harm to someone must arise. But he is a very holy man so it doesn't for him. >>>>My faith helps me overcome such negative emotions and find my equilibrium. Each of my Buddhist rituals is part of a process of giving and taking. I receive Chinese mistrust, and I send out compassion. I must admit that it hasn't always been easy for me in recent weeks. This is the Tibetan "tonglen" meditation, I guess. Interesting. Thanks again. Metta, Phil #85611 From: "colette" Date: Mon May 12, 2008 7:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Death. was:Are the 32 body parts ksheri3 Hi Howard, You think and believe the conversation ended or could possibly end. Not so kind sir. Whether you choose to cognize that which has been and has manifested that which is is entirely your perspective. I, as an OTHER HAND, or is that on the other hand, do not allow such furtile land to go unresearched. A) we all know that students at university are the guiney pigs or test dummies, for scientific research. B) we all know that ideologies are the basis which "make the world go round". C) we all know that it is long since accepted dogma that the supposed "powers that be" run the show D) we all know that it is long since accepted dogma that "ya can't fight city hall". <...> I choose to believe the conversation/dialectic (if that word can be used) and/or debate is far from over, in fact I believe that it is getting a bit sticky for you and you choose not to involve yourself in the research I choose. Well, since I've been the test guinney pig or test dummy for so many decades I do not see any reason why it is not fair game that those that dictate my status as non-existant, non- feeling, non-person, <....> I'll be back to ya, I'm working on some stuff in another group using the mind-only school of thought. Any Buddhist will clearly agree that the mind-only school is the only way or chance to perform that oh-so Theravadan act called Meditation. toodles, colette <....> #85612 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 13, 2008 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Thanks for your further comments. Yes, I think for all of us it's a 'work-in-progress' and I appreciate the opportunities to further discuss with you and others. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > S: "...it is definitely not referring to 'reviewing knowledge', but to > its ordinary meaning of reviewing, reflecting. I haven't checked the > text carefully or the Pali, but I assume from your discussion it is > referring to the reviewing/reflecting on the body parts as part of > samatha development for those bhikkhus..." > > Scott: That makes sense. I was wondering the same thing. If this is > the case, that is if these sorts of reflections were the object of > concentration, as they would be in the development of samatha,.. ... S: I think of the development of samatha as being the development of calm. Of course, when there is calm or tranquillity (passaddhi cetasika), there is also right concentration at such times. ... >then > this would not at all be like the day-to-day development of > satipa.t.thaana. .... S: Of course samatha development and satipatthana development are not the same. However, depending on accumulations (as in the case of the bhikkhus being addressed in that section of the Satipatthana Sutta), there can be the development of satipatthana whilst (or strictly, in between moments of) developing samatha. All very naturally. Like now, there can be moments of metta with right understanding and also moments of understanding realities appearing which may include metta or wise reflection as objects. ... >Is this reviewing of the bodily part in the > development of samatha just thinking about them, where the thoughts, > as in the use of thoughts of mettaa for the development of samatha, > become the focus and condition the arising of jhaana? .... S: Any reviewing or reflecting in the development of samatha has to be with right understanding which clearly understands how such an object brings calm and understanding what wholesome calm is. So, just thinking about body parts cannot be said to be the development of samatha, just as just thinking about people cannot be said to be the development of metta or samatha either. [I'm not sure I quite understand the second part of the sentence above, if you wish to clarify further.] ... > S: ...I doubt that in context > paccavekkhana is referring to 'lower stages on the enlightenment path' > either." > > Scott: Okay. How does this differ from just thinking about something? .... S: Most thinking is not wise thinking of any kind. Metta, Sarah ========= #85613 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 13, 2008 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vinaya Pitaka sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, --- szmicio wrote: > I know Sutta Pitaka. But I've never read Abhidhamma Pitaka or Vinaya > Pitaka. Where sholud I start? Which book of Vinaya Pitaka sholud I > read first? > > Is there any profit from reading Vinaya Pitaka? ... S: Great to see your keen interest. I know Mike and others have given you a few sources/references. Like them, I think it depends on your interest. Like Mike, we have I.B.Horner's translation of the Vinaya Pitaka (PTS) and I've always enjoyed dipping into these. They are now available on-line (Connie gave a link recently). So you could look at a few of the volumes to see whether you are interested enough to purchase them. If you plan to buy several texts from the PTS, it's really worthwhile to become a member to get the discount and an annual free book (and to support them!). They also have a nice slim volume of just the Patimokkha transl. by Norman. I believe other Patimokkha translations are on-line. These are the rules for bhikkhus and quite a good place to start. In the rest of the Vinaya you learn the reasons why each rule was made, the 'stories' behind the rules. With the Abhidhamma, I recommend you read 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' by Nina (Van Gorkom). It's on line. Also, I recommend 'Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma', edited by B.Bodhi. It's a translation (with notes) of an old and famous summary of Abhidhamma, the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. Please ask any questions and share any comments with us as you've been doing. Finally, I highly recommend listening to the edited discussions with A.Sujin which you can find on www.dhammastudygroup.org. Scroll down past the archived posts to the audio section and start with the first one! Metta, Sarah p.s I also recommend checking the 'useful posts' in the files section of DSG for any topics of interest. ========== #85614 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 13, 2008 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- Alex wrote: > How does one make sure that one's "bare" observation isn't tainted by a > Avijja (gross or subtle)? > > One of the toughest thing is that a deluded person doesn't know that > s/he is deluded! :) > > ---- > > Also, how does one make sure that when one studies AP one doesn't > replace one attachement (to conventional realities) with attachement > to "Ultimate realities" ? .... S: As I see the path, it's not a matter of making sure of anything. It's a matter of understanding what has arisen anyway by conditions. So if there is avijja or attachment (on account of any object), they are just realities like seeing, visible object or any other object which can be known. Remember, no self to do or make sure of anything. Metta, Sarah ========= #85615 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 13, 2008 2:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Hi Alex, I'm not sure that anyone replied to the following (difficult!)questions, so let me have a try: --- Alex wrote: > ---- Existence of 3 segments of time argument ------ > > A) It is possible to see one's citta. .... S: There is never "one's citta". Cittas don't belong to anyone. Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta if there are the right conditions for this! .... > B) The seen state of citta cannot simulteneously arise with seeing > citta as 2 cittas cannot arise together. ... S: Correct. ... > c) However what is (lobha or dosa for example) cognized by the > Citta, MUST exist. But since the seen citta (akusala or kusala) citta > isn't found in the present - then it exists and is real in another > non-present moment of time. In this case in the past. .... S: The lobha or dosa (in your example) are understood by panna immediately after they have arisen. The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is presently apparent. It is thus said to be the *present* object. .... > D) We can see the truths about the arisen state of citta > example: > i) Anger or greed are unskillful (akusala) > ii) Akusala leads to suffering > iii) Akusala should be removed > iv) Akusala leads to future suffering > > The above i-iv involve seeing the future in some way or another. ... S: No. At the moment of directly understanding anger, it's unskilful nature is apparent. It is an aspect of the characteristic of anger. It all depends on the depth of understanding of a dhamma what is known about its *present* characteristic. ... >The > iv point cannot be seen simulteneously with Akusala itself as cause > precedes the effect. ... S: What is suffering? What is dukkha? ... > However what is cognized, as a cognition must be real, and the i-iv > points relate to the future that is TRUE (Law of Dhamma is timeless > and eternal) so the true non-present (future) is seen. .... S: I don't follow your reasoning. This is just speculation about the future. ... > Or to simplify the above: All seeing of presently arisen dhammas > require to see the past state of mind (citta). ... S: No, I wouldn't say this. I think I'll leave it there for now, as there are points that may need further clarification. Feel free to raise any of the other unanswered points again in due course. Great to see your keen interest and careful consideration of the Abhidhamma. Metta, Sarah ======== #85616 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 13, 2008 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Back to #85488 - --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, all - > > Whatever is actually experienced and not merely imagined is real, > and > could be called "a reality," provided that the meaning of that is only > that the > item is unimagined (and not that it is self-existent). However, 'real' > means > "real." Either an item is imagined/projected or is actually > experienced. .... S: It may be partly a question of language, but I find myself objecting immediately to the above. Let me try to re-state it: - What is experienced may be a reality or an idea that is imagined/projected. The former can be directly known/understood, while the latter can only ever be thought about. - ... > My body, as an aggregation, is real. ... S: Again, let me re-state this: - 'My body' is a good example of an idea that is imagined/projected and which can only ever be thought about. This is true whether it's thought about as 'an aggregation' or as anything else. - Metta, Sarah ======== #85617 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 3:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/12 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Scott: I see the fine point you are making - that the knowledge that > something is a condition for something else is not to be had. In > other words, I read you to be asserting that the experience of 'a > condition' is impossible. > Yes, you have understood me well. The "medium" of conditions is knowing, and the "medium" of experience is being. Knowing is anywhere from true to false, while being is just what it was. > In another sutta extract I posted to Nina, is the following phrase: > '...dhamma.t.thiti ~naa.na.m tampi khayadhamma.m vayadhamma.m > viraagadhamma.m nirodhadhammanti ~naa.na.m.' Bh. Bodhi renders it: > '...The knowledge: 'That knowledge of the stability of the Dhamma is > also subject to destruction, vanishing, and fading away, and > cessation.' The sutta seems to be saying that there can be knowledge > (~naa.na - a function of pa~n~naa) of one thing as being condition for > another thing. > > H: "I see a parallel here with the view that because day is always > followed by night, that therefore day is a condition for night. That > view is, however, not in line with conditionality." > > Scott: Can you elaborate? I suspect, as usual, we are defining > 'conditionality' in idiosyncratic ways. I use conditionality in the following way: A is a condition for B if when there is A, B follows AND if there is not A, B doesn't follow. Conditionality is the complex state of affairs of multiple A-like conditions having multiple B-like consequences. A consequence of this definition is that it is impossible to know from a single instance of anything what conditioned it, or what it is conditioning. It is only through the repetition of similar, but varying circumstances that some sort of conditionality can be abstracted. The Buddha notes, it seems, > that when there is birth, it is a condition for aging-and-death, this > being by the method of Dependent Origination. How is the analogy > using night following day any different? Birth, as the process of emerging from between the legs of a mother, is not a condition for aging and death. Because in the absence of the birth process, no matter how a being comes to be conceived, there will still be death. It is becoming a life, captured in the idea of conception maybe, that is a condition for death, not birth. In the same way, day is not a condition for night. An arctic summer or winter will soon demonstrate that. The rotation of the Earth around its own axis, while rotating around the Sun, is a condition for night and day following each other. Night and day are epiphenomenal in this process. > > Regarding the method of Conditional Relations, an example is given by > U Naarada (Guide To Conditional Relations, part 1, p. 6): > > "Take the case of visible object and craving. In the Conditional > Relations method when there is craving for visible object, visible > object, the conditioning state of object condition, is the cause, and > craving, the conditioned state is the effect." > > H: "It would not be in line with conditionality to think that because > the Buddha is basically the definition of right view, that therefore > all views attributed to the Buddha are right. What would be thinking > in line with conditionality, however, would be that faith about > conditionality precedes any understanding of conditionality, but does > not necessarily lead to it. Faith is akin to imagination. And > imagination certainly does not lead to reason..." > > Scott: Leaving aside the particular content of the opposing views > expressed, I think it can be said that these views have their causes. > In other words, it can be said that there are conditioning states > which are causes for these views which are, in the end, effects or > conditioned states of these causes. And, further, noting that, in > theory, these are simply views and despite one's adherence to either, > are devoid of self, I think it can be said that specific views > regarding the teachings of a Buddha are also conditioned states. > > I would be interested if you could elaborate what you mean by > 'conditionality' (when you assert that this or that is or is not in > line with 'conditionality') so I can see the details of the view > expressed. > I hope the above suffices. If not, please let me know. Cheers Herman #85618 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 3:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/13 Alex : > Hi All, > > I hope that above is a latter addition. Am I supposed to believe in > Rain Gods who rain water and such? > > Does anyone here believe in the above? > No doubt there are people who want you to believe this, and everything else written in their sacred books. But there are others, the Buddha included, who want you to critically examine everything put before you, including anything labelled "what you are supposed to believe". :-) Cheers Herman #85619 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 12, 2008 11:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/12/2008 7:42:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Nama, on the other hand, that's another story. It is entirely a story, come to think of it. Nama can't be destroyed either, but only because it was never there to start with. ==================================== Herman, are you saying that you see no differerence in kind between such phenomena as what we call feeling, attending, distractedness, fearing, and loving on the one hand, and sights, sounds, odors, pains, itches, (felt) hardness, and so on? For me the second are rupas and the first namas. I'm not talking about the recognition of these *as* named and thought about, but the phenomena themselves. With metta, Howward /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85620 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/12/2008 9:32:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, Larry: I take it by "entity" you mean "lasting entity". ---------------------------------------------- Howard: No, not necessarily lasting. Just as a separate, self-existent thing-in-itself, a true "being". ---------------------------------------------- It is actually very helpful to see groups as groups. It is a very easy way to understand emptiness, in that a group is not any one dhamma but it is still a group. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I completely agree with that, so long as we don't reify the group. +++++++++++++++ Larry: I don't know what "reify" means. Maybe we could say "cling to" instead. I find that I cling to pretty much everything and it is only once in a while that there is a moment of not clinging. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: What I meant by 'reify' (literally, "make in to a thing") is what you quoted above: (to view) as a separate, self-existent thing-in-itself, a true "being". ------------------------------------------------------ ++++++++++++++++ Larry: However, I think Nina's point is that understanding in this way doesn't go to the heart of attachment. We are actually attached to only one dhamma at a time, not to several at once. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I don't think that's quite so. There is a summing up of such attachments into an attachment to the aggregate conceived of as an entity. Our attachment to a loved one is far stronger than our attachment to tastes, sights, and so on, per se. We become attached to "the sight of our loved one," and so on. ++++++++++++++++ Larry: Sure, we become attached to a thousand things that are signs or characteristics of a loved one, and we probably don't want to become unattached. But all those attachments are attachments to sights, sounds, perceptions, etc. There really isn't a "loved one" in there. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: There is the "group" as you refer to it (the "aggregation," as I call it). In any case, though there is no actually individual but only a collection of phenomena, our mind concocts an imagined individual, and we DO cling to that mental construct and not just the phenomena from which we project a "beloved person". You know the old joke: "A neurotic builds castles in the sky, and a lunatic moves in." Well, we have taken a long-term lease. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- But it's always fun to investigate ;-) Larry ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85621 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 4:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/5/13 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > > OK, we have done pompous, now I'm going to try belligerent. (Not > really belligerent, just stylistically belligerent. :-) ) I think you have done well. And given your stylistic usage of French down below, you are very deserving of the epithet "a cunning linguist" :-) > > 'The past no longer exists and the future has never existed: there is > only the present moment.' That's all I've been saying. What is so > hard about that? (!!!) It is an extremely, extremely difficult thing you are saying. And I mean that very sincerely. I think we may have started on a discussion along these lines some time ago, and I suspect that it was cut short due to my unsubscribing from dsg without notice, which was not because of our discussion. > > H: > I actually get the feeling that you are talking about nibbana, > which does not arise or cease, dependently or otherwise. > -------------------------- > > Twaddle! Pardon my French, but you know what I mean. Since you first > joined DSG you have seen more explanations of the present moment than > you have had hot dinners. Yes, precisely, lots of explanations of the present moment. And I have dismissed all of them as imaginings. > > And I certainly don't mean to single you out. Most of the posts here > are in denial of the Abhidhamma. People want to talk about persisting > entities. They are not interested in things that last for only a > single moment > > Like I said before; it all depends on what we are interested in. > KenH, I am interested in pursuing this with you. Your sustained level of conviction about this matter deserves consideration. If we discuss, I don't want to own the discussion, I'll just ask some questions for starters. If you prefer to take it elsewhere or nowhere, go for it. How can the past be known as being past, if there is only the present? What does the Buddha mean when he talks about the not yet arisen, if there is only the present? Cheers Herman #85622 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/13/2008 5:28:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > A) It is possible to see one's citta. .... S: There is never "one's citta". Cittas don't belong to anyone. Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta if there are the right conditions for this! =============================== Sarah, do you maintain that Alex's mind states and yours are one and the same? If not, then what exactly are you asserting? These are not the same mind streams, Sarah. When the Buddha said, for example, that one is the inheritor of his/her own kamma, that pointed to the distinguishing of mind streams. Are you suddenly adopting an "amorphous unity" view of existence? The use of "me" and "mine" in distinguishing mind streams needn't presume "selves" or souls. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85623 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 5:45 am Subject: Metta, Ch 4, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, If someone has mettå he considers everybody as his friend. If there is a sincere feeling of friendship for others there can also be compassion, karunå, when someone else has to experience sorrow and misfortune. If someone else experiences happiness, if he has prosperity and success, there can be sympathetic joy, muditå. If we try to help someone but that person cannot be relieved from distress, we can develop the brahma-vihåra of equanimity, upekkhå, and then we will not have aversion about the suffering of that person. We can understand that all dhammas are dependant on their appropriate conditions. The person who has to suffer receives the result of the kamma he performed. The four brahma-vihåras are excellent qualities which support all other kinds of wholesome deeds so that these can develop and reach perfection. The brahma-vihåras can support, for example, generosity. When an opportunity for giving presents itself, we can give without partiality, whereas when we do not develop the brahma-vihåras we may be inclined to give only to a particular group of people. The brahma- vihåras are a condition for the perfecting of síla, good moral conduct through action and speech. We can perform kusala without expecting favours in return. We can forgive other people, whatever harm they did to us. Mettå can indeed support the other brahma- vihåras of compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity, if the right conditions and the proximate causes for the other brahma-vihåras are present. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Fives, Chapter XVII, §1, The putting away of Malice) that the Buddha teaches that we should develop all four brahma-vihåras. We should not believe that mettå should first be developed to a high degree and that after that the other three brahma- vihåras can be developed. The text states: Monks, there are five ways of putting away malice whereby all malice arisen in a monk ought to be put away. What five? Monks, in whatsoever person malice is engendered, in him loving-kindness ought to be made to become more. In this way malice in him ought to be put away. Monks, in whomsoever malice is engendered, in him compassion... equanimity ought to be made to become more. In this way malice in him ought to be put away. Monks, in whomsoever malice is engendered, in that man unmindfulness, inattention to it, ought to be brought about. In this way malice in him ought to be put away. Monks, in whomsoever malice is engendered he should remember that people are owners of their deeds. This should be firmly established in his mind. He should think: This, reverend sir, is of one’s own making, he is the heir of his deeds, deeds are the matrix, deeds are the kin, deeds are the foundation; whatever one does, good or bad, one will become heir to that. In this way malice in him ought to be put away. Verily, monks, these are the five ways of putting away malice. ******* Nina. #85624 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 5:54 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods egberdina Hi Uncritical Believer(s), :-) 2008/5/13 Scott Duncan : > Dear Alex, Skeptics, Commentaries on rebirth do not need to be long. See below. > > Regarding: > > A: "Imagine what stuff could have ended up in the commentaries..." > > Scott: Consider AN IV, 123: > > "These four kinds of persons, O monks, are found existing in the > world. What four? > > "Here, monks, some person enters and dwells in the first jhaana, which > is accompanied by thought and examination, with rapture and happiness > born of seclusion. He relishes it, longs for it and finds > satisfaction in it. Having become steady in it, resolved on it, often > dwelling in it, without falling away from it, on passing away he is > reborn in the company of the devas of Brahmaa's company. The measure > of the lifespan of these devas is an aeon... > > "Further, monks, some person here, with the subsiding of thought and > examination, enters and dwells in the second jhaana, which has > internal confidence and unification of mind, is without thought and > examination, and has rapture and happiness born of concentration...on > passing away he is reborn in the companies of devas of Streaming > Radiance... > > "Further, monks, some person here, with the fading away as well of > rapture, dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he > experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third > jhaana...on passing away he is reborn in the company of the devas of > Refulgent Glory... > > "Further, monks, some person here, with the abandoning of pleasure and > pain, and with the passing away of joy and sadness, enters and dwells > in the fourth jhaana...on passing away he is reborn in the company of > devas of Great Fruit..." > > Scott: Or, DN 33: > > "And the Venerable Sariputta addressed the monks, referring to this > situation...This Dhamma has been well-proclaimed by the Lord, the > fully-enlightened One. And so we should all recite it together > without disagreement, so that this holy life my be enduring and > established for a long time, thus to be for the welfare and happiness > of the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, > welfare and happiness of devas and humans. And what is this Dhamma > that has been proclaimed by the Lord...? > > "...Three kinds of rebirth in the Realm of Sense-Desire > (kaamupapattiyo): There are beings who desire what presents itself to > them (paccuppa.t.thita-kaama), and are in the grip of that desire, > such as human beings, some devas, and some in states of woe. There > are beings who desire what they have created (nimmita-kaama),...such > as devas Who Rejoice In Their Own Creation (Nimmaanaratii). There are > beings who rejoice in the creations of others...such as devas Having > Power over Others' Creations (Paranimmita-vasavattii). > > "Three happy rebirths (sukhupapattiyo): There are beings who, having > continually produced happiness now dwell in happiness, such as the > devas of the Brahmaa group. There are beings who are overflowing with > happiness, drenched with it, immersed in it, so that they occasionally > exclaim: 'Oh what bliss!' such as the Radiant devas (Aabhassaraa). > There are beings...immersed in happiness, who, supremely blissful, > experience only perfect happiness, who, supremely blissful, experience > only perfect happiness, such as the Lustrous devas (Subhaki.n.naa)..." > From the Book of Ones: 328. In the same way, Beggars, as even a Small Measure of Dung [gutho] Comes to Smell [duggandho] Bad, I do not Recommend Living [bhavam = becoming], even if for only so short a time as it takes to SNAP the Fingers. (this is repeated using urine, phlegm, pus and blood) One has to wonder, how does a concept come to smell bad? Cheers Herman #85625 From: han tun Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:23 am Subject: Patthaana (37) hantun1 Patthana (37) Dear Friends, We will now take up (8) Support Condition (nissaya paccya). Support Condition belongs to the Group of Mind-and-Matter for Mind-and-Matter. It is a condition where the conditioning state causes the conditioned states to arise by serving as the support or foundation on which they depend. The conditioning state is said to be related to the conditioned state in a manner similar to the way the earth supports trees and vegetation or a canvas supports a painting. Two main categories of Support Condition are recognized: (i) Conascence Support (sahajaata-nissaya) and (ii) Prenascence Support (purejaata-nissaya). Under this Support Condition, there are eleven points to study. (i) cattaaro khandhaa aruupino a~n~nama~n~nam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. The four immaterial aggregates are mutually related to one another by Support Condition. (ii) cattaaro mahaabhuutaa a~n~nama~n~nam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. The four great primaries are mutually related to one another by Support Condition. (iii) okkantikkhane naamaruupam a~n~nama~n~nam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. At the moment of conception, mentality and materiality are mutually related to one another by Support Condition. (iv) cittacetasikaa dhammaa cittasamutthaanaanam ruupaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. States, consciousness and mental factors, are related mind-produced matter by Support Condition. (v) mahaabhuuta upaadaaruupaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. The four great primaries are related to derived matter by Support Condition. (vi) cakkhaayatanam cakkhuvi~n~naana-dhaatuyaa tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Eye-base is related to eye-consciousness element and its associated states by Support Condition. (vii) sotaayatanam sotavi~n~naana-dhaatuyaa tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Ear-base is related to ear-consciousness element and its associated states by Support Condition. (viii) ghaanaayatanam ghaanavi~n~naana-dhaatuyaa tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Nose-base is related to nose-consciousness element and its associated states by Support Condition. (ix) jivhaayatanam jivhaavi~n~naana-dhaatuyaa tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Tongue-base is related to tongue-consciousness element and its associated states by Support Condition. (x) kaayaayatanam kaayavi~n~naana-dhaatuyaa tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Body-base is related to body-consciousness element and its associated states by Support Condition. (xi) yam ruupam nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~nanadhaatu ca vattanti tam ruupam manodhaatuyaa ca manovi~n~naanadhaatuyaa ca tamsampayuttakaana~nca dhammaanam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. Depending on this matter (i.e. heart-base), mind element and mind-consciousness element arise; that matter is related to mind element and mind-consciousness element and their associated states by Support Condition. ------------------------------- You will find very similar situation with regard to the three conditions, namely, Conascence Condition (sahajaata-paccaya), Mutuality Condition (a~n~nama~n~na-paccaya), and Support Condition (nissaya-paccaya) in some (not all) of the conditioning states and conditioned states. If you look just one case, i.e., in the case of the four mental aggregates, you will see how they condition each other by these three Conditions. Since they are very similar, the best way to remember them is by remembering their similes. (a) By Conascence Condition (sahajaata-paccaya) cattaaro khandhaa aruupino a~n~nama~n~nam sahajaata-paccayena paccayo. The four immaterial (mental) aggregates are mutually related to one another by Conascence Condition. (Simile: This is compared to the flame of a lamp which, on arising, causes the light, colour, and heat to arise along with it.) (b) By Mutuality Condition (a~n~nama~n~na-paccaya) cattaaro khandhaa aruupino a~n~nama~n~na-paccayena paccayo. The four immaterial (mental) aggregates are related to one another by Mutuality Condition. (Simile: This is compared to a tripod, each leg of which assists the other two legs reciprocally in enabling the tripod to stand upright.) (c) Support Condition (nissaya-paccaya) cattaaro khandhaa aruupino a~n~nama~n~nam nissaya-paccayena paccayo. The four immaterial (mental) aggregates are mutually related to one another by Support Condition. (Simile: The conditioning state is related to the conditioned state in a manner similar to the way the earth supports trees and vegetation.) ------------------------------ The eleven points to study under the Support Condition will be taken up in subsequent posts. Metta, Han #85626 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:29 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 258-260 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 258-260 Intro: In the following sections, analysis refers to the taking separately of the two meanings of bhava, becoming, namely, kamma process becoming and rebirth process becoming. Synthesis refers to the taking together of these two meanings of bhava. First the Visuddhimagga deals with analysis. Text Vis. 258: 'As to analysis, synthesis' means as to both the analysis and the synthesis of becoming that has clinging as its condition. The kamma with sense-desire clinging as its condition that is performed and generates sense-desire becoming is 'kamma-process becoming'. The aggregates generated by that are 'rebirth-process becoming'; similarly in the case of fine-material and immaterial becoming. So there are two kinds of sense-desire becoming with sense-desire clinging as condition, included in which are percipient becoming and five-constituent becoming. ------- N: Bhava, becoming, which includes kamma process becoming and upapatti bhava, rebirth process becoming, are taken separately and thus there are two kinds of becoming with upadaana, clinging, as condition. The Tiika mentions again (as in Vis. 250) that here, as to sense desire becoming, kaama bhava (kamma that produces sense desire becoming), the term for its fruit is used (phalavohaarena) : kamma is called becoming, since it causes becoming. In this sense, the terms sense desire becoming, fine-material and immaterial becoming can be used as referring to the kammas that produce these kinds of rebirth. The Tiika states that by the words, all kamma leading to becoming, kamma produces becoming when there is an opportunity for its ripening, and that it has upaadaana as condition. As to the words, ‘similarly in the case of fine-material and immaterial becoming’, the Tiika explains that kamma performed with sense desire clinging as condition can also produce fine-material and immaterial becoming. In this connection the Tiika emphasizes again that kamma bhava means also rebirth process becoming, namely, the khandhas produced by it. --------- Text Vis.: And there are two kinds of fine-material becoming, included in which are percipient, non-percipient, one-constituent, and five-constituent becoming. ------- N: In the same way there are two kinds of rupa bhava, fine material becoming: ruupaavacara kusala citta as well as rebirth as its result. Non-percipient pertains to ruupaavacara kusala citta and its result which is rebirth as asa~n~na satta, in a plane of existence where there is only ruupa, not naama. It is one-constituent, there is only one khandha, ruupa khandha. --------- Text Vis.: And there are two kinds of immaterial becoming, included in which are percipient becoming, neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient becoming, and four-constituent becoming. -------- N: This refers to kamma which is aruupaavacara kusala citta and rebirth as its result. The neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient becoming refers to the fourth stage of aruupaavacara kusala citta and its result. Four constituent becoming refers to rebirth with the four naamakhandhas, without ruupa khandha. --------- Text Vis.: So, together with what is included by them, there are six kinds of becoming with sense-desire clinging as condition. Similarly too with the [three] remaining kinds of clinging as condition. ------ N: As we have seen, there are four kinds of upadaana, clinging: clinging to sense-desires, to wrong view, to wrong practice and to self doctrine. -------- Text Vis.: So as to analysis, there are, together with what is included by them, twenty-four kinds of becoming with clinging as condition. ------- N: As we have seen, bhava, becoming, conditioned by clinging to sense- desires was reckoned as six. When one takes into account the other three kinds of upaadaana which are clinging to wrong view, wrong practice and self doctrine there are twenty-four kinds of becoming. -------- Text Vis. 259: 'As to synthesis', however, by uniting kamma-process becoming and rebirth-process becoming there is, together with what is included by it, one kind of sense-desire becoming with sense-desire clinging as its condition. Similarly with fine-material and immaterial becoming. So there are three kinds of becoming. -------- N: Here kamma bhava, kamma process becoming, and upapatti bhava, rebirth process becoming are taken together, and in this way one kind of sense desire becoming, kaama bhava, is mentioned. And similarly with fine-material and immaterial becoming. ------- Text Vis.: And similarly with the remaining [three] kinds of clinging as condition. So by synthesis, there are, together with what is included by them, twelve kinds of becoming with clinging as condition. -------- N: When taking into account the four kinds of clinging there are by synthesis four times three, that is, twelve kinds of becoming. --------- Text Vis. 260: Furthermore, without distinction the kamma with clinging as its condition that attains sense-desire becoming is kamma-process becoming. --------- N: The Tiika explains the words ‘without distinction’ (avisesena), that this is with regard to clinging, upaadaana. Thus, the four kinds of clinging are not separately taken. --------- Text Vis.: The aggregates generated by that are rebirth-process becoming. Similarly in the fine-material and immaterial becoming. -------- N: The Tiika adds, as to the fine-material and immaterial becoming, that with sense desire clinging as condition one performs kamma that produces fine-material and immaterial becoming, and that the aggregates generated by that kamma are rebirth-process becoming. Text Vis.: So, together with what is included by them, there are two kinds of sense-desire becoming, two kinds of fine-material becoming, and two kinds of immaterial becoming. So, by synthesis, there are six kinds of becoming by this other method. ----------- N: As to those six kinds, these are both the kamma that produces becoming as its result, as well as the becoming itself and this is to be applied to sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming and immaterial becoming. ----------- Text Vis.: Or again, without making the division into kamma-process becoming and rebirth-process becoming, there are, together with what is included by them, three kinds of becoming as sense-desire becoming, and so on. ---------- N: This means, as sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming and immaterial becoming. ----------- Text Vis.: Or again, without making the division into sense-desire becoming, etc., there are, together with what is included by them, two kinds of becoming, as kamma-process becoming and rebirth-process becoming. --------- N: In this classification kamma-process becoming includes kamma producing the three kinds of becoming and rebirth-process becoming includes sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming and immaterial becoming. ---------- Text Vis.: And also without making the division into kamma process and rebirth process there is, according to the words 'With clinging as condition, becoming', only one kind of becoming. -------- N: Here becoming includes kamma process becoming and rebirth process becoming. --------- Text Vis. :This is how the exposition of becoming with clinging as condition should be known here 'as to analysis and synthesis'. ***** Conclusion: When one reads the link: ‘clinging conditions becoming’, one may not realize that its meaning is very complex. As we have seen, bhava includes kamma process becoming and rebirth, and these can be classified in several ways, as one, as twofold, threefold, sixfold, twelvefold and twentyfourfold. We are reminded of the danger of clinging. So long as there is clinging there will be rebirth. As we have seen, sense-desire clinging is the firm state of the craving (tanhaa) described as of one-hundred-and-eight kinds with respect to visible data and so on. As we have read (Vis. 234, 235), craving can be classified as six by way of the objects experienced through the six doors and as eighteen when each of these are reckoned as sensuous craving without wrong view, and as accompanied by eternity belief or accompanied by annihilation belief. These eighteen kinds of craving can be classified as thirtysix, when seen as internal (pertaining to oneself) and external (pertaining to someone else), and as one- hundred-and-eight when reckoned as past, future and present. Evenso, sense desire clinging, kaamupaadana, which is firm grasping, can also be classified as one-hundred-and-eight kinds. We are reminded of the impact of clinging conditioned by one-hundred- and-eight kinds of craving. Its field is enormous. The Tiika to Vis. 163 explains that ignorance and craving are the ‘attendants’ (upa.t.thaana) of kamma , and so long as they are not eradicated one will continue being in the cycle of birth and death. ***** Nina. #85627 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "...The 'medium' of conditions is knowing, and the 'medium' of experience is being. Knowing is anywhere from true to false, while being is just what it was." Scott: This gives one pause, meaning I likely am misunderstanding it. The Oxford defines 'medium' as: 'a substance through which a force or other influence is transmitted.' I'm not sure that is how you mean the term. If you do, then this seems to suggest that out of 'knowing' come 'conditions' and out of 'experience' comes 'being'. Is this the intended meaning? If so, the implication seems to be that something called 'knowing' is a condition for something called 'conditions' - if it is the 'medium' for 'conditions'. In other words, I think you are saying that 'conditions' are due to 'knowing'; are a function of 'knowing'; are a by-product of 'knowing'. How is 'knowing' defined? (How is 'being' defined? I think you mean 'experience is being'.) By 'medium' I would understand 'that out of which something comes or grows'. and imagine it to come close to how I've read it in relation to the Dhamma. When I think of 'medium', I think of the Paa.li 'bhuumi'. According to the PTS PED, its figurative meaning is: '3. (fig.) ground, plane, stage, level; state of consciousness...' The understanding I have of 'conditions' differs from that expressed below (given that I consider conditions to be the set of 24 conditions set out in Pa.t.thaana,) which is fine but I think what you suggest goes beyond the particular meaning of conditions I wish to rest on. H: "I use conditionality in the following way: A is a condition for B if when there is A, B follows AND if there is not A, B doesn't follow. Conditionality is the complex state of affairs of multiple A-like conditions having multiple B-like consequences. A consequence of this definition is that it is impossible to know from a single instance of anything what conditioned it, or what it is conditioning. It is only through the repetition of similar, but varying circumstances that some sort of conditionality can be abstracted." Scott: As I understand this, the point made is that 'conditionality' is only and abstraction. H: "Birth, as the process of emerging from between the legs of a mother, is not a condition for aging and death. Because in the absence of the birth process, no matter how a being comes to be conceived, there will still be death. It is becoming a life, captured in the idea of conception maybe, that is a condition for death, not birth. In the same way, day is not a condition for night. An arctic summer or winter will soon demonstrate that. The rotation of the Earth around its own axis, while rotating around the Sun, is a condition for night and day following each other. Night and day are epiphenomenal in this process." Scott: Birth, from a Dhamma perspective (jaati) is not, as far as I see it, 'the process of emerging from between the legs of a mother'. So we agree on this. Jaati (birth) is defined in the PTS PED as: "Jaati is a condition precedent of age, sickness & death, and is fraught with sorrow, pain & disappointment. It is itself the final outcome of a kamma, resting on avijjaa, performed in anterior births; & forms thus the concluding link in the chain of the Pa.ticca samuppaada." Scott: In Visuddhimagga, VII, 16 is noted: "Clinging, etc., are the respective conditions for becoming and the rest. In what way? Here someone thinks, 'I shall enjoy sense desires'...'I shall enjoy the delights of heaven'...'I shall enjoy the delights of the Brahmaa-world'...'I shall enjoy the delights of immaterial becoming'...the kamma that is the cause of his reappearance there is kamma-process becoming, the aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming, the generating of the aggregates is birth, their maturing is ageing, their dissolution is death." Scott: Rebirth is just the moment. Sincerely, Scott. #85628 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:45 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: "From the Book of Ones: 328. In the same way, Beggars, as even a Small Measure of Dung [gutho] Comes to Smell [duggandho] Bad, I do not Recommend Living [bhavam = becoming], even if for only so short a time as it takes to SNAP the Fingers. (this is repeated using urine, phlegm, pus and blood) One has to wonder, how does a concept come to smell bad?" Scott: Good one! I like it. Sincerely, Scott. #85629 From: "connie" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:52 am Subject: Perfections Corner (151) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: Pa~n~naa which is illumination is understanding which penetrates the characteristics of realities which were never before penetrated. Formerly someone may have heard about these characteristics and understood them in theory, but he may not yet have directly realized them. Pa~n~naa can grow and it can become illumination. As we read, even when we sit in one place, the ten thousand world-spheres can appear as of one light. This means that pa~n~naa understands thoroughly and penetrates the characteristic of naama dhamma when naama dhamma appears. Naama dhamma arises in the planes of the five khandhas, in the heavenly planes, in the ruupa-brahma planes, in the aruupa-brahma planes *3, or in whatever world of the countless worldsystems, but it has one characteristic: naama dhamma is the reality which experiences, the element, dhaatu, which experiences an object. When pa~n~naa penetrates the characteristics of realities, ten thousand worldsystems appear as of one light, which means that pa~n~naa clearly understands the characteristics of realities, no matter where they arise. *3 Birth in the ruupa-brahma planes is the result of ruupa jhaana, and birth in the aruupa-brahma planes is the result of aruupa jhaana We read further on: "A man introduces an oil-lamp into a dark house; the lamp so introduced disperses the darkness, produces light, sheds lustre, makes objects visible, so, understanding as it arises dispels the darkness of ignorance, produces the light of wisdom, sheds the lustre of knowledge, makes plain the four noble Truths. Thus understanding has illuminating as its characteristic." ..The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment, to be continued, connie #85630 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 7:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Larry, > > Larry: Sure, we become attached to a thousand things that are signs or > characteristics of a loved one, and we probably don't want to become > unattached. But all those attachments are attachments to sights, sounds, > perceptions, etc. There really isn't a "loved one" in there. But it's > always fun to investigate ;-) > On the face of it, you seem to be saying that the being of phenomena cannot refer to the phenomenon of being. It's like you're saying a slice of cold meat cannot refer to a cow, nor can the sound of a whistle refer to a steam train. There really isn't a steam train, but there is a whistle? Cheers Herman #85631 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 8:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, Skeptics, > > Regarding: > > A: "Imagine what stuff could have ended up in the commentaries..." > > Scott: Consider AN IV, 123: > >>>> First of all: While I DO believe in rebirth, devas, kamma, etc. I suspect that they can't be proven to exist, especially with scientific means. While it is true that Universe is a huge place and life can come in many shapes and forms, there are some things that have been disproven (flat earth, divine origin of rain and winds, etc) However when there are clear ancient hindu delusions disproven by modern science, THAT I REJECT. While I believe (even though I don't have proof) in Devas, etc. When that goes against what we know now... Sure there could be Devas, but they DON'T cause rain, not on this planet anyways. This I have rejected. Regarding the other part of the post. There are some people who suggest that devas & co. are metaphorical description of meditators. I mean the rupa/arupa planes correspond quite well to stages of meditation, and meditators usually shine immeadetely at the end of long retreat. Also, there are suttas which look very much like satire of Hindu pantheon (for example a sutta where a monk travels to the heavens to find the answer to "where 4 elements cease" and no one, not even Brahma God can answer.) One of the requirements for satire is accurate parody of existing beliefs. Buddhist cosmology is too similiar to Hindu one, except for satirical elements and few degradations of Gods. I do believe in lit. Devas/Brahmas - although none of us can be 100% certain of what Buddha did or DID NOT teach. After all, in Kalama sutta and others he told to question things, even him! Best wishes, Alex #85632 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 10:56 am Subject: How can panna investigate non-existent past cittas? truth_aerator Hi Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > --- Alex wrote: > > > A) It is possible to see one's citta. > .... > S: There is never "one's citta". Cittas don't belong to anyone. Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta if there are the> right conditions for this! > .... By one's citta I meant that YOUR stream of cittas is different from mine. Just like oneself is the owner of Kamma, same is here. > > B) The seen state of citta cannot simulteneously arise with seeing > citta as 2 cittas cannot arise together. > ... > S: Correct. > ... Which leads to strange conclussion -> > > c) However what is (lobha or dosa for example) cognized by the > > Citta, MUST exist. But since the seen citta (akusala or kusala) citta > > isn't found in the present - then it exists and is real in another > > non-present moment of time. In this case in the past. > .... > S: The lobha or dosa (in your example) are understood by panna immediately > after they have arisen. The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is > presently apparent. It is thus said to be the *present* object. > .... But how can something which is in the past (and thus doesn't exist, since only present exists) be "presently apparent" ? The only way out is a) Admit two simulteneous citta - one citta sees the 2nd citta which may be either kusala or akusala IMMEADEATELY cooccuring at EXACT moment of time. b) Admit the existence of citta in the past which is the object of present citta. You can't see a characteristic of something presently non existent! > > D) We can see the truths about the arisen state of citta > > example: > > i) Anger or greed are unskillful (akusala) > > ii) Akusala leads to suffering > > iii) Akusala should be removed > > iv) Akusala leads to future suffering > > > > The above i-iv involve seeing the future in some way or another. > ... > S: No. At the moment of directly understanding anger, it's unskilful > nature is apparent. It is an aspect of the characteristic of anger. It all depends on the depth of understanding of a dhamma what is known about its *present* characteristic. > ... But during Satipatthana, or panna investigating the citta - the investigated citta cannot occur at EXACTLY THE PRESENT MOMENT with the investigating citta. One is supposed to be mindful of presently arisen phenomenon. But the law states that two cittas (investigating & investigated) cannot occur at once. One of them, investigated citta, has to preceed the investigating. But when investigating citta arises, investigated doesn't exist. So what is there to be aware off? Mere memory? But even then, the mere memory is a citta that is investigated which cannot occur with investigating citta. > >.. > > Or to simplify the above: All seeing of presently arisen dhammas > > require to see the past state of mind (citta). > ... > S: No, I wouldn't say this. > Then how can presently arisen panna examine itself for akusala that cannot arise simulteneously? How can citta be aware of unwholesome states that are past and gone? Best wishes, Alex #85633 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? CMA pg 262 chart nilovg Hi Alex, I do not have this edition. It relates to which part of the chapter on materiality? I have the edition with the complete commentary. Nina. Op 13-mei-2008, om 0:55 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > On page 262 of CMA there is a chart of physical phenomenon > > I have a question. As a sutta reader I understand that ALL phenomenon > is impermanent. > > However according to that chart: Essential matter, internal, base, > door > faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 > causes, 21 groupings ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS IMPERMANENT thus making > them permanent? #85634 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:09 am Subject: Re: Interview with the Dalai Lama moellerdieter Hi Phil, you wrote: 'Dalai Lama: Sometimes an angry word slips out, which is bad enough. But no, anger is foreign to me, because anger means wanting to do harm to someone. Ph: this is a bit surprising. I would have thought that the Dalai Lama would acknowledge that anger is very much native to us all, no matter how holy we are. And that wanting to do harm to someone must arise. But he is a very holy man so it doesn't for him. D: Yes, being angry sometimes is quite native to most of us ,in particular at moments when Right Effort is not practised, the arising of wanting to do harm may not be controlled and unwholesome action takes place. But I think that every reasonable monk or layman , remembering that the Buddha defined moral in simple term 'not doing harm' may be aware of it and trying to abstain. That the Dalai Lama admits that sometimes an angry word slips out , shows the frankness not yet being perfect or very holy, doesn't it? with Metta Dieter #85635 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:20 am Subject: Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard and Alex, Op 12-mei-2008, om 22:23 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > let me ask you something: When person A shoots and kills the young > person, B, are not A's murderous action and the thoughts and > emotions of A > that led to that action among the conditions that resulted in B > having a short > life? I would answer that there is NO QUESTION that they are! ------- N: Here are quotes from a post by Rob K: Dear Lucy and Howard, I thought you might be interested in some more about kamma as it relates to the sutta you posted: Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21 Moliyasivaka Sutta To Sivaka... as quoted by Alex. Rob: The view that Moliyasivaka presented to the Buddha is called pubbakatahetuvada or pubbebbetaka -hetu-ditthi, the view that all feelings in the present life is due to deeds done in former existences. It is an extreme view that is ignorant of the many other conditions operating from the past and present. Another two commonly held views are issaranimmana-hetu-ditthi, the view that a creator God is responsible for the experiences in this life ahetu-apaccaya-ditthi, the view that there is no such thing as kamma and that all feelings arise by chance. This last view is fairly common in our age with many people imagining that it is by chance that they are born as man or woman or dog or horse, and that their experiences in life happen largely by chance and present effort only. Some people hold to views which are a mix of two or even all three. In this sutta the Buddha was concerned to refute the first extreme view only. The Blessed one replied to Sivaka: "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. Produced by (disorders of the) phlegm... of wind... of (the three) combined... by change of climate... by adverse behavior... by injuries... by the results of Kamma -- (through all that), Sivaka, there arise certain kinds of feelings. That this happens can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans."endquote With regard to the statement [Nina's statement] in 'Abhidhamma in daily life' that ""when we hear unpleasant words, the moment of experiencing the sound (hearing-consciousness) is akusala vipaka, the result of an unwholesome deed we perform ourselves."" Howard wrote that"There is no doubt in my mind that what is being said there is that every unpleasant experience is the result of one's own kamma. But I do not buy that at all, nor do I believe that the Buddha did. In fact, in at least one sutta, the Buddha explicitly denied that, characterizing it as wrong view, a view of kammic determinism""" However, this is perhaps a hasty conclusion: In the Abhidhamma - as has been explained in Abhidhamma in Daily life- there are 4 types of cittas classified as jati. Vipaka(result), kiriya , akusala and kusala. In a process of cittas that experiences an object such as sound only one moment is vipaka, result. The rest are of the other jatis(not the result of kamma). The vipaka is like a flash and then many, many more moments that are not vipaka. Now that very insignificant vipaka citta is certainly conditioned by kamma, that is by kamma done at an earlier time in the same life or in previous lives. However, even that vipaka is not conditioned solely by kamma. The Sammohavinodani, chapter on Paticcasamuppada (PTS)p181 notes that there is no single fruit from a single cause: "for here there is no single nor multiple fruit of any kind from a single cause, nor is there a single fruit from multiple causes, but only multiple fruit from multiple causes. BUT with one representative fruit and cause given thus 'avijja paccaya vinnana' etc. For the blessed one uses one representative cause and fruit when it is suitable for elegance in teaching and to suit the inclinations of those being taught. And he does so in some instances because it is a basic factor and in some instances because it is obvious and in some instances because of being not shared"...."he mentioned a single cause in the passage 'diseases due to phlegm'(in the sutta above) because of obviousness,for here it is phlegm that is obvious, not kamma and so on."" --------- Nina: Howard, the example you gave today is all about situations, not about realities. If we do not study the reality at this moment, the teaching of kamma and vipaaka will all be muddled up. Take seeing now, this is vipaka, produced by 'one's own kamma' of the past. Kamma is an inward reality. Also other conditions of the present are necessary: eyesense now (also produced by kamma) visible object, light, attention. Nevertheless, seeing itself is vipaaka. It cannot be otherwise. I Used the words favorable or unfavorable, meaning: when born in an unfavorable time, time of war, of calamities, being at an unfavorable place, these are conditions that kusala kamma has no opportunity to produce result, whereas akusala kamma has. Nina. #85636 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:27 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods nilovg Hi Alex, Op 12-mei-2008, om 22:49 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > also > there arose anger in this nama when it read stuff about "heart base" > in CMA (not to mention that not all rupa or nama are impermanent). > > .... > Note: "Anger, anger anger". ------ N: It does not stay, it is impermanent:-)) Heartbase: do not mind about the name. In the planes where there are nama and rupa, each citta needs a physical base. We are bound up with the body, aren't we? Cittas arise not independently from the body. The five sense bases are the base of the sense cognitions, and the other cittas arise at another rupa, named heartbase by the commentary. The patthaana refers to it merely as: that rupa. All rupas are impermanent, but that chart may not be clear. Nina. #85637 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' nilovg Dear Herman, Op 13-mei-2008, om 1:42 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > N: But the body is rupa paramattha dhammas, and at each moment, all > > these rupas, some produced by kamma, some by citta, some by heat, > > some by nutrition, fall away and are replaced so long as conditions > > permit. > > This seems to contradict your assertion elsewhere that the lifespan of > the body is entirely determined by kamma. ------- N: When kamma stops producing rupas, also citta and nutrition cease doing this. Only heat keeps on producing rupas of the corpse. ------ H: A corpse today, worm food next month, and in 20 years an apple tree sprouting from its guts. But the story of uncle Peter will be nowhere to be found. -------- N: In another post you spoke about thinking and imagining. When I said: only thinking I meant like you said now: the story of uncle Peter. One may think and think, but this will not make uncle Peter return. Nina. #85638 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? CMA pg 262 chart truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > I do not have this edition. It relates to which part of the chapter > on materiality? > I have the edition with the complete commentary. > Nina. > Op 13-mei-2008, om 0:55 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > On page 262 of CMA there is a chart of physical phenomenon > > > > I have a question. As a sutta reader I understand that ALL phenomenon > > is impermanent. > > > > However according to that chart: Essential matter, internal, base, door > faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 > > causes, 21 groupings ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS IMPERMANENT thus making > > them permanent? > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, impermanence. According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 nutriment born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, continuity, decay, impermanence!!! $7-$22 How can this be? Best wishes, Alex #85639 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 8:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/13/2008 2:24:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Nina: Howard, the example you gave today is all about situations, not about realities. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Nina, the matter that was being addressed was the matter of having a short life, which you attributed entirely to kamma, and I took exception to that exclusiveness. I gave the example "When person A shoots and kills the young person, B, are not A's murderous action and the thoughts and emotions of A that led to that action among the conditions that resulted in B having a short life? I would answer that there is NO QUESTION that they are!" So, I was addressing exactly the matter being discussed, and I pointed to what you would call "realities" namely thoughts and emotions (motivating the killer of a young person) as conditions that are essential contributers to the short life of that young person. So, what I wrote pertained exactly to the question at hand, and I most assuredly dealt with paramattha dhammas. ------------------------------------------------- If we do not study the reality at this moment, the teaching of kamma and vipaaka will all be muddled up. Take seeing now, this is vipaka, produced by 'one's own kamma' of the past. Kamma is an inward reality. Also other conditions of the present are necessary: eyesense now (also produced by kamma) visible object, light, attention. Nevertheless, seeing itself is vipaaka. It cannot be otherwise. I Used the words favorable or unfavorable, meaning: when born in an unfavorable time, time of war, of calamities, being at an unfavorable place, these are conditions that kusala kamma has no opportunity to produce result, whereas akusala kamma has. ============================ Nina, you simply have not addressed the example I gave, and, frankly, I find it amazing that you would not consider the killer's namas as conditions for his murderous actions and the resulting shortening of the victim's life. Though you speak of "realities", Nina, I believe this perspective is utterly removed from reality. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85640 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/13 : > > > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/12/2008 7:42:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > Nama, on the other hand, that's another story. It is entirely a story, > come to think of it. Nama can't be destroyed either, but only because > it was never there to start with. > > > ==================================== > Herman, are you saying that you see no differerence in kind between such > phenomena as what we call feeling, attending, distractedness, fearing, and > loving on the one hand, and sights, sounds, odors, pains, itches, (felt) > hardness, and so on? For me the second are rupas and the first namas. > I'm not talking about the recognition of these *as* named and thought > about, but the phenomena themselves. > I agree with you that there are differences in kind between the rupas and namas you describe above. The nama I deny is the knowing of something, as a reality that is apart from the known something. Cheers #85641 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 5:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi Herman, I'm glad we are still talking. :-) -------------- <. . .> H: > KenH, I am interested in pursuing this with you. Your sustained level of conviction about this matter deserves consideration. If we discuss, I don't want to own the discussion, I'll just ask some questions for starters. If you prefer to take it elsewhere or nowhere, go for it. How can the past be known as being past, if there is only the present? What does the Buddha mean when he talks about the not yet arisen, if there is only the present? --------------- Thanks for giving me some options on how to proceed. I don't think there is any trick to the point about past and future. The past no longer exists and the future has never existed: there is only the present moment. It is as simple as anything could possibly be. So, rather than try to answer "How do we know the past is the past and the future is the future?" I will accept the option to 'take it elsewhere.' :-) Here's a question for you: Given the indisputable fact that there is only the present moment, what should we do? Should we learn more about the reality that can be known now? Or should we ignore reality and concern ourselves with stories - about things that persist from past to future? If your answer is the former then, in my opinion, DSG is the best place to be and the Dhamma is the best teaching to be studying. If your answer is the latter then . . . Well, I don't have an opinion because I think it has to be the former. :-) What say you? Ken H PS: I sent a post very similar to this one a minute ago, but got an error message. Sorry for any duplication that might occur. #85642 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > . . . > ============================ > Nina, you simply have not addressed the example I gave, and, frankly, I > find it amazing that you would not consider the killer's namas as conditions > for his murderous actions and the resulting shortening of the victim's life. > Though you speak of "realities", Nina, I believe this perspective is utterly > removed from reality. > > Hi Howard, The suttas contain several answers to your question, but they all come under the heading of 'wrong view.' Murderer A does cause the death of victim B: murderer A does not cause the death of victim B: murderer A both causes and does not cause the death of victim B, and murderer A neither causes nor does not cause the death of victim B. They are all there; take your pick! :-) Ken H #85643 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' truth_aerator Hi Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: The past no > longer exists and the future has never existed: there is only the > present moment. >>> If there is only the present moment, then where are all the past causes located at? If only the present moment exists, and only 1 citta at a time counts as being truly in "present moment", then what is it examining during satipatthana?!!!! How can you see lobha for example if it is non existent! I mean the panna citta (knowing) cannot arise simulteneously with lobha (known) citta. Either one or the other arises. Nothing can be known without the knowing, but the knowing citta cannot arise together with the known. You'll probably say that current citta takes lobha (or dosa, or moha) citta of the past. But you've just said that past NO LONGER EXISTS thus contradicting either: a) The law that only one citta arises at a given time OR b) existence of past dhammas in the past. >> It is as simple as anything could possibly be. > For those whose IQ >200 maybe. But have sad news to say, I don't have IQ that high. Best wishes, Alex #85644 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi Howard, Howard: "What I meant by 'reify' (literally, "make in to a thing") is what you quoted above: (to view) as a separate, self-existent thing-in-itself, a true "being"." Larry: Sorry, still doesn't compute. Can you put it into language the Buddha would use? Is this something other than clinging? Howard: "There is the "group" as you refer to it (the "aggregation," as I call it). In any case, though there is no actual individual but only a collection of phenomena, our mind concocts an imagined individual, and we DO cling to that mental construct and not just the phenomena from which we project a "beloved person". You know the old joke: "A neurotic builds castles in the sky, and a lunatic moves in." Well, we have taken a long-term lease. ;-)" Larry: Personality belief is a belief that a person is identical to, contained in, independent of, or an owner of one of the five khandhas. Behind every 'mental construct' is a simple experience that we are clinging to. At least that's how I interpret this. But at this point it's just a guess:-) Larry #85645 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 7:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 258-260 and Tiika. lbidd2 Hi Nina, I don't understand how clinging conditions fine material and immaterial becoming. Are we to understand also that clinging conditions all wholesome consciousness? Larry #85646 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 7:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi Herman, Larry: "Sure, we become attached to a thousand things that are signs or characteristics of a loved one, and we probably don't want to become unattached. But all those attachments are attachments to sights, sounds, perceptions, etc. There really isn't a "loved one" in there. But it's always fun to investigate ;-)" Herman: "On the face of it, you seem to be saying that the being of phenomena cannot refer to the phenomenon of being. It's like you're saying a slice of cold meat cannot refer to a cow, nor can the sound of a whistle refer to a steam train. There really isn't a steam train, but there is a whistle?" Larry: What we are attached to is the image of a cow or the sound of a train. If we investigate a cow or a train we will find an image and a sound but we won't find a cow or a train. Furthermore, when we find an image or a sound we can see that it is not a cow or a train. That is a great opening moment. Larry #85647 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 8:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . lbidd2 Hi TG, Regarding what is insight, you wrote, "The mind can actually see, feel, notice the causal events causing alterations, changes, and confirm the belief [in conditionality] is this natural order of events thereby." Larry: What causal events? The five khandhas. TG: "The belief in "ultimate realities" is always just going to be a superimposition onto what arises..." Larry: "Ultimate realities" are the 5 khandhas. They are all that arises. TG: "Many in this group consider aspects of experiences to be ultimate realities with their own characteristics." Larry: There are 5 aspects of experiences, the 5 khandhas. If they didn't have their own characteristics you couldn't tell them apart. Sound would be the same as taste. Larry #85648 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue May 13, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . TGrand458@... Hi Larry In a message dated 5/13/2008 9:03:13 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, Regarding what is insight, you wrote, "The mind can actually see, feel, notice the causal events causing alterations, changes, and confirm the belief [in conditionality] is this natural order of events thereby." Larry: What causal events? The five khandhas. ................................................ NEW TG: Causal events are anything that has arisen due to a cause. The Five Khandhas generally refer to a "individual." They certainly are included as causal events. But causal events are not limited to sentient beings by any means. If you mean that the "physical form (body) aggregate" applies to all physical formations, then maybe OK. But what about space? Is space included in the 5 aggregates? At any rate, I don't see what point you are trying to make by positing the Five Aggregates here. Is this supposed to reflect negatively on what I said above? .......................................................... TG: "The belief in "ultimate realities" is always just going to be a superimposition onto what arises..." Larry: "Ultimate realities" are the 5 khandhas. They are all that arises. .............................................................. NEW TG: Being the Buddha said when asked directly that feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness were not in truth separate things, but were merely separated for analysis, I find your comment above too dogmatic. And what are the "unrealities" or "less realities" that we are contrasting these supposed "ultimate realities" with? What arises, arises. What doesn't arise, doesn't arise. There is nothing less and nothing more. So what's the point of the label "ultimate realities"? There's no point...and the Buddha never mentions it. Isn't it weird that such a crucial point to commentary followers is not mentioned by the Buddha? Hummmm. Maybe there's a reason for that. ............................................................. TG: "Many in this group consider aspects of experiences to be ultimate realities with their own characteristics.r Larry: There are 5 aspects of experiences, the 5 khandhas. If they didn't have their own characteristics you couldn't tell them apart. Sound would be the same as taste. ............................................................ NEW TG: Everything that arises is caused by something else. How can something, totally dependent and caused by something else, have "its own" characteristics? Whatever features you are observing do not "belong" to anything. Every sound is different, every taste is different. Because the conditions of involvement are different. So what characteristic are we talking about? If there are a billion different sounds, are we to say there are a billion different "sound characteristics"? And why not? The only things that arise are composites of conditions. One of the delusions the Buddha wanted us to overcome was that of "misapprehending" the various things that appear to us as being "their own thing." They should be seen as empty, hollow, and coreless. Not as "ultimate realities." Those three descriptions are the Buddha's, not mine. TG OUT #85649 From: "Phil" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:39 pm Subject: Re: Interview with the Dalai Lama philofillet Hi Dieter and all > Ph: this is a bit surprising. I would have thought that the Dalai Lama would acknowledge that anger is very much native to us all, no matter how holy we are. And that wanting to do harm to someone must arise. But he is a very holy man so it doesn't for him. > > D: Yes, being angry sometimes is quite native to most of us ,in particular at moments when Right Effort is not practised, the arising of wanting to do harm may not be controlled and unwholesome action takes place. > But I think that every reasonable monk or layman , remembering that the Buddha defined moral in simple term 'not doing harm' may be aware of it and trying to abstain. > That the Dalai Lama admits that sometimes an angry word slips out , shows the frankness not yet being perfect or very holy, doesn't it? Yes. "Not doing harm" is the starting point. I think there is a sutta in MN in which something like 60 points are laid out, in a "I will not X I will Y" way to show choosing many options to wholesomeness, and the very first one stressed is "I will be non- harmful." That really is the starting point. BTW, speaking of the Dalai Lama, this morning I came across this from his Nobel Prize speech: "Consider the following. We humans are social beings. We come into the world as the result of others actions. We survive here in dependence on others. Whether we like it or not, there is hardly a moment of our lives when we do not benefit from others activies. For this reason it is hardly surprising that most of our happiness in the context of our relationsips with others. Nor is it remarkable that our greatestjoy should come when we are motivated by concern for others. But that is not all. We find that not only do altruistic actions bring about happiness but they also lessen our experience of suffering. Here I am not suggesting that the individual whose actions are motivated by the wish to bring others happiness necessarily meets with less misfortune that the one who does not. Sickness, old age, mishaps of one sort of another are the same for us all. But the sufferings which undermine out internal peace - anxiety, disappointment - these things are definitely less. In our concern for others, we worry less about oruselves. When we worry less about ourselves an experience of our own suffering is less intense. What does this tell us? First, because our every action has a universal dimension - a potential impact on others' happiness - ethics are necessary as a means to ensure that we do not harm others. Secondly, it tells us that genuine happiness consists in those spiritual qualities of love, compassion, patience, tolerance and forgieveness and so on. For it is these which provide bother for our happiness and others' happiness." (end) Sorry for any typos. Metta, Phil #85650 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 11:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/13 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > > H: "...The 'medium' of conditions is knowing, and the 'medium' of > experience is being. Knowing is anywhere from true to false, while > being is just what it was." > > Scott: This gives one pause, meaning I likely am misunderstanding it. > The Oxford defines 'medium' as: 'a substance through which a force > or other influence is transmitted.' I'm not sure that is how you mean > the term. If you do, then this seems to suggest that out of 'knowing' > come 'conditions' and out of 'experience' comes 'being'. Is this the > intended meaning? It was a poor choice of words on my behalf. Thanks for querying it. What I hoped to convey was that conditions are not known in the same way as experience. We previously agreed, (and I won't hold you to it :-)), that dhammas ARE their characteristic. I do not think that conditions are a characteristic. They are a relation between characteristics. I accept that my choice of words may have suggested it, but I do not mean to suggest that knowing precedes what it knows. > H: "I use conditionality in the following way: A is a condition for B > if when there is A, B follows AND if there is not A, B doesn't follow. > Conditionality is the complex state of affairs of multiple A-like > conditions having multiple B-like consequences. A consequence of this > definition is that it is impossible to know from a single instance of > anything what conditioned it, or what it is conditioning. It is only > through the repetition of similar, but varying circumstances that some > sort of conditionality can be abstracted." > > Scott: As I understand this, the point made is that 'conditionality' > is only and abstraction. > Yes, that's right. But that does not mean to imply that conditionality is not a reality. It just means that the knowledge of condtionality is abstracted. At best we may attend to just a few conditions in the isolation of a selective hindsight, and that is pure abstraction, because the very reality, of sitting there abstracting away, is a conditioned reality, the conditions of which defy all efforts at analysis. > Scott: Birth, from a Dhamma perspective (jaati) is not, as far as I > see it, 'the process of emerging from between the legs of a mother'. > So we agree on this. Jaati (birth) is defined in the PTS PED as: Cool :-) > > Scott: In Visuddhimagga, VII, 16 is noted: > > "Clinging, etc., are the respective conditions for becoming and the > rest. In what way? Here someone thinks, 'I shall enjoy sense > desires'...'I shall enjoy the delights of heaven'...'I shall enjoy the > delights of the Brahmaa-world'...'I shall enjoy the delights of > immaterial becoming'...the kamma that is the cause of his reappearance > there is kamma-process becoming, the aggregates generated by the kamma > are rebirth-process becoming, the generating of the aggregates is > birth, their maturing is ageing, their dissolution is death." > > Scott: Rebirth is just the moment. > I think that the notion of becoming is irreconcilable with the notion of a moment in isolation. Cheers Herman #85651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 258-260 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Larry, Op 14-mei-2008, om 4:27 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't understand how clinging conditions fine material and > immaterial > becoming. Are we to understand also that clinging conditions all > wholesome consciousness? -------- N: when we say: it conditions, we have to consider what type of condition. Natural decisive support-condition is clinging not yet eradicated which conditions, just as in the case of ignorance, even kusala. Then it is not conascent condiiton, it does not arise together with kusala citta. Here is the text: Vis. 268. But which is condition for which kind of becoming in what way here? Now clinging as condition for becoming, Both fine-material and immaterial, Is decisive-support; and then conascence And so on for the sense-desire kind. 269. This clinging, though fourfold, is a condition in only one way as decisive-support condition 'for becoming both fine-material and immaterial', [that is,] for the profitable kamma in the kamma-process becoming that takes place in sense-desire becoming and for the rebirth-process becoming. It is a condition, 'as conascence and so on', that is, as conascence, mutuality, support, association, presence, non-disappearance, and root-cause conditions, for the unprofitable kamma-process becoming associated with [the fourfold clinging] itself in the sense-desire becoming. But it is a condition, as decisive-support only, for that which is dissociated. #85652 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' egberdina Hi KenH (and Alex), 2008/5/14 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > I'm glad we are still talking. :-) > So am I. And that certainly is part of any reality of the present moment. IMO. > > Here's a question for you: Given the indisputable fact that there is > only the present moment, what should we do? Should we learn more > about the reality that can be known now? Or should we ignore reality > and concern ourselves with stories - about things that persist from > past to future? > > If your answer is the former then, in my opinion, DSG is the best > place to be and the Dhamma is the best teaching to be studying. If > your answer is the latter then . . . Well, I don't have an opinion > because I think it has to be the former. :-) > > What say you? > As I said, I'm up for it. I see a few difficulties ahead, and that is part of the present moment. But we are both very sane people as past experience shows, and that also constitutes the present moment. Your assertion about the present moment being indisputable, reminds me of conversations with others for whom the existence of a self was equally self-evident. And all the while I know that I deny the present moment on very solid grounds, mainly a failure to find it anywhere, just like that self-evident self. The above are just some rambling notations of the thoughts that occur while I'm typing this, Ken. I'm happy for you to suggest how we should start our study of the present moment, Ken. Initially, I suspect, I will be looking for what constitutes "presentness" for you Cheers Herman PS I do think that Alex is asking very valid questions. #85653 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:55 am Subject: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, You mentioned (off-list) how disturbing the news is in Myanmar/Burma and how helpless you feel being unable to help. I'm sure we all sympathise with these feelings. I said I'd try to write a little more here. I think the main point is that, as you well know, such thoughts and feelings are very natural and bound to be conditioned this way because of tendencies for such. What I find particularly helpful is to be reminded that even when we feel very distressed, that such thoughts and unpleasant feeling are again dhammas which can be known as such. Right understanding and awareness can slip in anytime and this helps us to come closer to understanding the real problem, the accumulated kilesa (defilements). We may not be able to do much (if anything) to relieve others from their severe hardships, but by developing metta and also equanimity (which you've been writing about in the series on Perfections), there will be less dosa, less aversion on account of the suffering of those we see and read about. It's not easy to accept and understand that those who suffer are experiencing the results of past kamma, but it is the truth which the Buddha taught us. I liked this reminder you quoted: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/77038 "The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, being without happiness and anguish, like a scale that is well-balanced. The Buddha showed that he was impartial to all beings and to all vicissitudes of life, and this degree of equanimity is not common to other people.” ... S: It's certainly not common to be impartial to the wordly conditions, the vicissitudes of life. However, I find that by reflecting on this perfection, it can be a condition to at least understand what the real problems are in life: the lobha, dosa and moha at this moment. Here is a quote which Scott shared recently which reflects similar reminders in the suttas about the value in appreciating kamma as the cause of gain/loss and birth/death and so on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/70767 Atthasaalinii (p. 259): "Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of centrality as regards beings; its function is appreciation of others; its manifestation is quieting both aversion and sycophancy; its proximate cause is seeing the heritage of the occuring kamma as 'Beings are the property to their kamma. By its influence they will attain to pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the prosperity already acquired*. Its consummation is the quieting of aversion and of sycophancy; its failure is the production of a profane and unintelligent indifference. "*The Muula-Tika: I.e., absence of knowledge (a~n~naa.na), may also be taken to be devoid of joy and grief." ... S: I like the reminder that the near enemy of equanimity is 'unintelligent indifference', not a wholesome state at all. There can only be a real understanding of kamma at the third stage of (tender) insight, but by beginning to understand seeing now, hearing now, painful and pleasant bodily feelings now and so on as they are, we begin to appreciate what the real results of kamma are and how they are distinct from the wholesome and unwholesome states which condition kamma throughout the day. I think this wise reflection can also be a condition for wisdom with samvega, understanding the urgency of the path at this moment, because we never know about the next moment. Please let me know honestly how you feel about this. Meanwhile our sympathies for all those suffering in Myanmar (and China too) at this time. Metta and best wishes to you, your wife and family, Sarah p.s. Please just write when you feel inclined to do so only ======== #85654 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 14, 2008 1:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (143) sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Han), --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Good texts from the Dhammasangani. could we say: the right efforts > arise on account of the samvega, religious emotion? ... S: In that case, what dhamma(s)is samvega? I think that was Han's original question. As I understand it, samvega must be a dhamma and not something which precedes right understanding with the 4 right efforts. It is the moment of right understanding itself, referring (I believe) to an aspect of the 4 right efforts themselves. Only developed wisdom or insight sees the urgency and escape, which is why, I believe, we come across samvega so often in the Theri-Theragatha verses. These are clearly not referring to a theoretical understanding of the unsatisfactoriness of samsara, but at that moment there is insight with samvega. This is how I've understood the texts I gave in #85468(and perhaps Han did too when he checked the Pali and Burmese?), but of course I may be wrong. Metta, Sarah ======= #85655 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 2:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 13-mei-2008, om 21:32 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). > > The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, > impermanence. > > According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung > to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 nutriment > born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, > continuity, decay, impermanence!!! $7-$22 --------- N: The misunderstanding may be with regard to Production, continuity, decay, impermanence. As to the first, this should be: arising, upacaya, not: production. The list of 28 rupas does not only include concrete matter, but also characteristics inherent in rupas. Take the characteristic of impermanence: we cannot say that this characteristic itself is impermanent. Here is what I wrote: < As we have seen, rúpas can be classified as sabhåva rúpas, rúpas with their own distinct nature and asabhåva rúpas, rúpas without their own distinct nature. The four Great Elements are sabhåva rúpas, they each have their own distinct nature and characteristic. Rúpas such as lightness, plasticity and wieldiness are asabhåva rúpas, they are qualities of rúpas. The Dhammasangaùi (§ 596) incorporates in the list of the twentyeight kinds of rúpa not only rúpas with their own distinct nature but also qualities of rúpa and characteristics of rúpa. It mentions four different rúpas which are characteristics of rúpa, lakkhaùa rúpas (lakkhaùa means characteristic). These four characteristics inherent in all sabhåva rúpas are the following: arising or origination (upacaya) continuity or development (santati) decay or ageing (jaratå) falling away or impermanence (aniccatå)> The sabhåva rúpas are also called “produced”, whereas the asabhåva rúpas are also called “unproduced” The “produced rúpas” which each have their own characteristic are, as the “Visuddhimagga” (XVIII, 13) explains, “suitable for comprehension”, that is, they are objects of which right understanding can be developed. For example, visible object or hardness have characteristics that can be objects of awareness when they appear, and they can be realized by paññå as they are, as non- self. The “unproduced rúpas” are “not suitable for comprehension” since they are qualities of rúpa such as changeability or the rúpa that delimits groups of rúpas. Thus, it may be clearer now that not all rupas are ssuitable for comprehending the three characteristics including impermanence, since these are themselves not concrete matter. Nina. #85656 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 3:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 13-mei-2008, om 21:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Nina, the matter that was being addressed was the matter of having a > short life, which you attributed entirely to kamma, and I took > exception to that > exclusiveness. I gave the example "When person A shoots and kills > the young > person, B, are not A's murderous action and the thoughts and > emotions of A > that led to that action among the conditions that resulted in B > having a short > life? I would answer that there is NO QUESTION that they are!" -------- N: The principal condition is kamma in that case, and not the kamma of someone else, no, the kamma accumulated by the victim. It was the right time for him to die. If it was not, he may have survived and these things happen, such as in a plane accident or in the rubbles of the earthquake in China. The person who shoots is only a means so that the result of kamma takes place, it is not the main condition. As to the shooter, he accumulates himself akusala kamma that will priduce a result later on for him. -------- > H: So, I was > addressing exactly the matter being discussed, and I pointed to > what you would > call "realities" namely thoughts and emotions (motivating the > killer of a young > person) as conditions that are essential contributers to the short > life of > that young person. So, what I wrote pertained exactly to the > question at hand, > and I most assuredly dealt with paramattha dhammas. > you simply have not addressed the example I gave, and, frankly, I > find it amazing that you would not consider the killer's namas as > conditions > for his murderous actions and the resulting shortening of the > victim's life. > Though you speak of "realities", Nina, I believe this perspective > is utterly > removed from reality. ------- N: The victim has painful bodyconsciousness before dying. This is vipaakacitta, produced by kamma committed formerly. Not someone else's kamma. After that there is dying-consciousness followed by rebirth-consciousness which is vipaakacitta produced by kamma, not someone else's kamma. Nina. #85657 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (143) nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 14-mei-2008, om 10:18 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > As I understand it, samvega must be a dhamma and not something which > precedes right understanding with the 4 right efforts. It is the > moment of > right understanding itself, referring (I believe) to an aspect of > the 4 > right efforts themselves. > > Only developed wisdom or insight sees the urgency and escape, which is > why, I believe, we come across samvega so often in the Theri- > Theragatha > verses. These are clearly not referring to a theoretical > understanding of > the unsatisfactoriness of samsara, but at that moment there is insight > with samvega. ------- N: Insight with samvega, that is right, not theoretical. Only it is hard to pinpoint what dhamma is samvega, as I think that it does not refer to only one dhamma. As you say: the moment of right understanding itself with right effort. Nina. #85658 From: han tun Date: Wed May 14, 2008 3:51 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your very useful post. I have no disagreement with what you have written. I was only wondering how kamma works in natural disasters of such magnitude, when thousands of people die at the same time, and I wanted to ask you about this issue. Meanwhile, Nina in her message 85635 quoted Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21 Moliyasivaka Sutta which was originally quoted by Alex. In the last paragraph of the sutta eight causes of vedanaa are mentioned. Bile, phlegm, and also wind, Imbalance and climate too, Carelessness and assault, With kamma result as the eighth. Pittam semha~nca vaato ca sannipaataa utuuni ca visamam opakkamikam kamma vipaakena atthamiiti Bhikkhu Bodhi explained that Besides, in the eight causes, the climate is one of them. So the cyclone could be one of the causes of such multiple deaths. With this, I have accepted the complexities of kamma which is difficult to understand for those who lack supernormal cognitive faculties. If you have something more to add I would be grateful to take note. Respectfully, Han > Sarah: Dear Han & all, > You mentioned (off-list) how disturbing the news is in Myanmar/Burma and > how helpless you feel being unable to help. I'm sure we all sympathise > with these feelings. I said I'd try to write a little more here. #85659 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Tue May 13, 2008 4:55 pm Subject: The Brahmans of Sala - II * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! Sakyamuni Sambuddha Vihara <...> ________________________________ Summary: The brahman householders of Sala ask the Lord Buddha why some being are re-born in unhappy destinations (e.g. hell) following death whereas why others beings are re-born in happy destinations (e.g. heavenly realms) following death. The Lord Buddha explains that beings are re-born in unhappy destinations following death due to bad actions and bad conduct (comm. in present and past lives) whereas beings are re-born in happy destinations following death due to good actions and good conduct (comm. in present and past lives).   On requested to give a detailed meaning of this, the Lord Buddha explains that there are three kinds of positive/good bodily actions done with the body (see the negative actions in the previous instalment); 1) not killing beings and being violent, but being gentle, kind and compassionate 2) not taking what is not given (stealing), 3) not engaging in sexual misconduct (adultery) with someone protected by mother, father, brother, sister, relatives, is married, someone waiting to be punished, is a in relationships or engaged.   He explains there are four kinds of good/positive verbal actions done with the mouth; 1) not lying and being truthful, 2) not speaking divisive words that causes divisions among people, but rather speaks in promotion of concord and unity 3) not speaking harsh and unkind words, but speaking loving, dear, kind and gentle words 4) not speaking empty words of little value connected with gossip, etc and only speaking words that are said in season, factual, good, connected with the Dhamma (teachings & training), words worth treasuring, well-reasoned, definite and connected with good (comm. here silence is the alternate option).   He explains that there are three kinds of positive/good mental actions done with the mind in thoughts; 1) not coveting and desiring others things, 2) not having ill-will towards other beings, but wishes them freedom from ill-will, suffering and anxiety, 3) and having an undistorted view and understanding of reality, which does not contradict the true Dhamma (teachings).   If a lay-person who acts as above wishes to be re-born in a divine plane after death, it is possible as his/her actions are good and in-line with the Dhamma. If a lay-person who acts as above wishes to gain liberation (nibbana) here and now, it is possible as his/her actions are good and in-line with the Dhamma. ________________________________ Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Ñanamoli Thera THE BRAHMANS OF SALA - II Majjhima Nikâya 41 - Saleyyaka Sutta2 Continued from previous instalment here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhamma/message/1398 11. "Householders, there are three kinds of bodily conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct. There are four kinds of verbal conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct. There are three kinds of mental conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   12. "And how are there three kinds of bodily conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct? Here someone, abandoning the killing of living beings, becomes one who abstains from killing living beings; with rod and weapon laid aside, gentle and kindly, he abides compassionate to all living beings. Abandoning the taking of what is not given, he becomes one who abstains from taking what is not given; he does not take as a thief another's chattels and property in the village or in the forest. Abandoning misconduct in sexual desires, he becomes one who abstains from misconduct in sexual desires: he does not have intercourse with such women as are protected by mother, father, (father and mother), brother, sister, relatives, as have a husband, as entail a penalty, and also those that are garlanded in token of betrothal. That is how there are three kinds of bodily conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   13. "And how are there four of verbal conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct? Here someone, abandoning false speech, becomes one who abstains from false speech: when summoned to a court or to a meeting or to his relatives' presence or to his guild or to the royal family's presence, and questioned as a witness thus, 'So, good man, tell what you know,' not knowing, he says 'I do not know,' or knowing, he says 'I know,' not seeing he says 'I do not see,' or seeing, he says 'I see'; he does not in full awareness speak falsehood for his own ends or for another's ends or for some trifling worldly end. Abandoning malicious speech, he becomes one who abstains from malicious speech: as one who is neither a repeater elsewhere of what is heard here for the purpose of causing division from these, nor a repeater to these of what is heard elsewhere for the purpose of causing division from those, who is thus a reuniter of the divided, a promoter of friendships, enjoying concord, rejoicing in concord, delighting in concord, he becomes a speaker of words that promote concord. Abandoning harsh speech, he becomes one who abstains from harsh speech: he becomes a speaker of such words as are innocent, pleasing to the ear and lovable, as go to the heart, are civil, desired of many and dear to many. Abandoning gossip, he becomes one who abstains from gossip: as one who tells that which is seasonable, that which is factual, that which is good, that which is the Dhamma, that which is the Discipline, he speaks in season speech worth recording, which is reasoned, definite and connected with good. That is how there are four kinds of verbal conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   14. "And how are there three kinds of mental conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct? Here someone is not covetous: he is not a coveter of another's chattels and property thus: 'Oh, that what is another's were mine!' He has no mind of ill-will, with the intention of a mind unaffected by hate thus: 'May these beings be free from enmity, affliction and anxiety, may they live happily!' He has right view, undistorted vision, thus: 'There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed, and there is fruit and ripening of good and bad kammas, and there is this world and the other world and mother and father and spontaneously (born) beings, and good and virtuous monks and brahmans that have themselves realized by direct knowledge and declared this world and the other world.' That is how there are three kinds of mental conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   "So, householders, it is by reason of conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, by reason of righteous conduct, that some beings here, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in the heavenly world.   15. "If a householder who observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the warrior-nobles of great property!' it is possible that on the dissolution of the body, after death, he may do so. Why is that? Because he observes conduct that is in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   16. "If a householder who observes conduct is accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the brahmans of great property!' it is possible...   17. "If a householder who observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma,...'... I might reappear in the company of householders of great property!' it is possible...   18. "If a householder who observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the gods of the Four Kings!' it is possible that on the dissolution of the body, after death, he may do so. Why is that? Because he observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   19. ...of the gods of the Realm of the Thirty-three...3   20. ...of the gods that have Gone to Bliss...   21. ...of the Contented gods...   22. ...of the gods that Delight in Creating...   23. ...of the gods that Wield Power over others' Creations...   24. ...of the gods of Brahma's Retinue...   25. ...of the Radiant gods...   26. ...of the gods of Limited Radiance...   27. ...of the gods of Measureless Radiance...   28. ...of the gods of Streaming Radiance...   29. ...of the Glorious gods...   30. ...of the gods of Limited Glory...   31. ...of the gods of Measureless Glory...   32. ...of the gods of Refulgent Glory...   33. ...of the Very Fruitful gods...   34. ...of the gods Bathed in their own Prosperity...   35. ...of the Untormenting gods...   36. ...of the Fair-to-see gods...   37. ...of the Fair-seeing gods...   38. ...of the gods who are Junior to None...   39. ...of the gods of the base consisting of the infinity of space...   40. ...of the gods of the base consisting of the infinity of consciousness...   41. ...of the gods of the base consisting of nothingness...   42. "If a householder who observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I might reappear in the company of the gods of the base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non-perception!' it is possible that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he may do so. Why is that? Because he observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.   43. "If a householder who observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct, should wish: 'Oh, that by realization myself with direct knowledge, I may here and now enter upon and abide in the deliverance of the heart and the deliverance by wisdom that are taint-free with exhaustion of taints!' it is possible that, by realization himself with direct knowledge, he may here and now enter upon and abide in the deliverance of the heart and the deliverance by wisdom that are taint-free with exhaustion of taints. Why is that? Because he observes conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct."   44. When this was said, the brahman householders of Sala said to the Blessed One:   "Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent, Master Gotama! The Dhamma has been made clear in many ways by Master Gotama, as though he were turning upright what had been overthrown, revealing the hidden, showing the way to one who was lost, holding up a lamp in the darkness for those with eyes to see forms.   45. "We go to Master Gotama for refuge, and to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of bhikkhus. From today let Master Gotama accept us as followers who have gone to him for refuge for life." Notes1. More suttas from AcessToInsight.org can be found here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html 2. This sutta can be found in full here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.041.nymo.html 3. The rendering of the various gods' names are based on the commentary to the Hadayavibhanga (in the Vibhanga, second book of the Abhidhamma: see The Book of Analysis, P.T.S. Translation Series). <....> #85660 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/13/2008 8:42:31 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: I agree with you that there are differences in kind between the rupas and namas you describe above. The nama I deny is the knowing of something, as a reality that is apart from the known something. =========================== Thanks for that clarification. :-) I understand you. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85661 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/13/2008 9:38:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, The suttas contain several answers to your question, but they all come under the heading of 'wrong view.' Murderer A does cause the death of victim B: murderer A does not cause the death of victim B: murderer A both causes and does not cause the death of victim B, and murderer A neither causes nor does not cause the death of victim B. They are all there; take your pick! :-) Ken H =============================== I don't know what you mean by "causes". I do maintain that any clinging to a view that fails to account for the fact that people interact with each other is utterly divorced from reality and is worthless. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85662 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/13/2008 10:08:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, Howard: "What I meant by 'reify' (literally, "make in to a thing") is what you quoted above: (to view) as a separate, self-existent thing-in-itself, a true "being"." Larry: Sorry, still doesn't compute. Can you put it into language the Buddha would use? Is this something other than clinging? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't see how to do much better. This is point-of-view, and most definitely a POV that conditions clinging, though I wouldn't say that it IS clinging. To understand the POV, consider the middle-way ontology the Buddha puts forward in the Kaccayanagotta Sutta. The opposite understanding is split into a nihilism and a self-existence view. Drop the nihilism of those two and what is left is reification. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: "There is the "group" as you refer to it (the "aggregation," as I call it). In any case, though there is no actual individual but only a collection of phenomena, our mind concocts an imagined individual, and we DO cling to that mental construct and not just the phenomena from which we project a "beloved person". You know the old joke: "A neurotic builds castles in the sky, and a lunatic moves in." Well, we have taken a long-term lease. ;-)" Larry: Personality belief is a belief that a person is identical to, contained in, independent of, or an owner of one of the five khandhas. Behind every 'mental construct' is a simple experience that we are clinging to. At least that's how I interpret this. But at this point it's just a guess:-) Larry ============================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85663 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Herman) - In a message dated 5/13/2008 10:41:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Herman, Larry: "Sure, we become attached to a thousand things that are signs or characteristics of a loved one, and we probably don't want to become unattached. But all those attachments are attachments to sights, sounds, perceptions, etc. There really isn't a "loved one" in there. But it's always fun to investigate ;-)" Herman: "On the face of it, you seem to be saying that the being of phenomena cannot refer to the phenomenon of being. It's like you're saying a slice of cold meat cannot refer to a cow, nor can the sound of a whistle refer to a steam train. There really isn't a steam train, but there is a whistle?" Larry: What we are attached to is the image of a cow or the sound of a train. If we investigate a cow or a train we will find an image and a sound but we won't find a cow or a train. Furthermore, when we find an image or a sound we can see that it is not a cow or a train. That is a great opening moment. Larry ============================== Larry, you are correct about the nature of reality, and you are right about the "great opening moment," but you are wrong about what unawakened folks cling to, IMO. While images and odors and sights prompt clinging, for the most part we cling to mind constructs. You seem to me to be underestimating the power of concept. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85664 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/14/2008 5:58:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Alex, Op 13-mei-2008, om 21:32 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). > > The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, > impermanence. > > According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung > to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 nutriment > born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, > continuity, decay, impermanence!!! $7-$22 --------- N: The misunderstanding may be with regard to Production, continuity, decay, impermanence. As to the first, this should be: arising, upacaya, not: production. The list of 28 rupas does not only include concrete matter, but also characteristics inherent in rupas. Take the characteristic of impermanence: we cannot say that this characteristic itself is impermanent. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's right. Nor can we say it is permanent. Here, I think, is a good example of the danger in reification. In fact, there IS NO THING called "impermanence". This sort of nominalizing of an adjective is common in speech, but is very dangerous in thought. That conditioned dhammas are impermanent, that they do not remain, is a fact. But nowhere will anyone find a thing called "impermanence" - we will only come upon phenomena that don't remain. ---------------------------------------------------------- Here is what I wrote: < As we have seen, rúpas can be classified as sabhÃ¥va rúpas, rúpas with their own distinct nature and asabhÃ¥va rúpas, rúpas without their own distinct nature. The four Great Elements are sabhÃ¥va rúpas, they each have their own distinct nature and characteristic. Rúpas such as lightness, plasticity and wieldiness are asabhÃ¥va rúpas, they are qualities of rúpas. The Dhammasangaùi (§ 596) incorporates in the list of the twentyeight kinds of rúpa not only rúpas with their own distinct nature but also qualities of rúpa and characteristics of rúpa. It mentions four different rúpas which are characteristics of rúpa, lakkhaùa rúpas (lakkhaùa means characteristic). These four characteristics inherent in all sabhÃ¥va rúpas are the following: arising or origination (upacaya) continuity or development (santati) decay or ageing (jaratÃ¥) falling away or impermanence (aniccatÃ¥)> The sabhÃ¥va rúpas are also called “producedâ€?, whereas the asabhÃ¥va rúpas are also called “unproducedâ€? The “produced rúpasâ€? which each have their own characteristic are, as the “Visuddhimaggaâ€? (XVIII, 13) explains, “suitable for comprehensionâ€?, that is, they are objects of which right understanding can be developed. For example, visible object or hardness have characteristics that can be objects of awareness when they appear, and they can be realized by paññå as they are, as non- self. The “unproduced rúpasâ€? are “not suitable for comprehensionâ€? since they are qualities of rúpa such as changeability or the rúpa that delimits groups of rúpas. Thus, it may be clearer now that not all rupas are ssuitable for comprehending the three characteristics including impermanence, since these are themselves not concrete matter. Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85665 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/14/2008 6:11:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 13-mei-2008, om 21:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Nina, the matter that was being addressed was the matter of having a > short life, which you attributed entirely to kamma, and I took > exception to that > exclusiveness. I gave the example "When person A shoots and kills > the young > person, B, are not A's murderous action and the thoughts and > emotions of A > that led to that action among the conditions that resulted in B > having a short > life? I would answer that there is NO QUESTION that they are!" -------- N: The principal condition is kamma in that case, and not the kamma of someone else, no, the kamma accumulated by the victim. It was the right time for him to die. If it was not, he may have survived and these things happen, such as in a plane accident or in the rubbles of the earthquake in China. The person who shoots is only a means so that the result of kamma takes place, it is not the main condition. As to the shooter, he accumulates himself akusala kamma that will priduce a result later on for him. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that the kamma is the principle condition, the main condition - but not the sole condition. There is an old joke with regard to planes: When one person, a fearful flyer, expressed her fear of dying in a plane crash, her friend said it doesn't matter whether she goes on a plane or not, because "When it's your time to die, it's your time to die." The fearful women then replied "Mmm, but what if it's the pilot's time?" ----------------------------------------------------- -------- > H: So, I was > addressing exactly the matter being discussed, and I pointed to > what you would > call "realities" namely thoughts and emotions (motivating the > killer of a young > person) as conditions that are essential contributers to the short > life of > that young person. So, what I wrote pertained exactly to the > question at hand, > and I most assuredly dealt with paramattha dhammas. > you simply have not addressed the example I gave, and, frankly, I > find it amazing that you would not consider the killer's namas as > conditions > for his murderous actions and the resulting shortening of the > victim's life. > Though you speak of "realities", Nina, I believe this perspective > is utterly > removed from reality. ------- N: The victim has painful bodyconsciousness before dying. This is vipaakacitta, produced by kamma committed formerly. Not someone else's kamma. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, had the person not been killed, the vipakacitta would not have occurred. It is absurd to ignore the actions of the perpetrator. They are central. ------------------------------------------------------ After that there is dying-consciousness followed by rebirth-consciousness which is vipaakacitta produced by kamma, not someone else's kamma. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The entire sequence of events, namas and rupas, included mental states of the killer among the causative conditions. If you believe otherwise, you are, IMO, purposely donning blinders. -------------------------------------------------------- Nina. ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85666 From: "connie" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Perfections Corner (152) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: While we are listening to the Dhamma at this moment, we are developing the perfection of pa~n~naa together with the perfections of energy and patience, so that in the future pa~n~naa that is illumination, that clearly understands realities, will arise. We read further on: "And as a clever surgeon knows which food is suitable, and which is not, evenso is understanding..." Here we see that pa~n~naa should be developed in daily life so that it thoroughly knows and penetrates the characteristics of realities. We read: "Evenso, understanding as it arises knows states as kusala or akusala, serviceable or unserviceable, low or exalted, black or pure, similar or dissimilar. And this was said by the 'General of the Dhamma' (Saariputta): 'It knows; thus, monk, it is in consequence called understanding. And what does it know? This is dukkha, etc. Thus it should be expanded. And thus knowing should be regarded as the characteristic of understanding.' Here is another view: Understanding has the penetration of intrinsic nature, unfaltering penetration as its characteristic, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilled archer; illumination of the object as its function, as it were a lamp; non-perplexity as its proximate cause, as it were a good guide in the forest." This is the characteristic of pa~n~naa which knows everything as it really is. When satipa.t.thaana does not arise, we spend our day with ignorance: we do not know which kind of akusala citta arises, what degree of lobha accompanies akusala citta, and we cannot clearly distinguish between attachment arising through the eyes, the ears or the mind-door. The whole day we are ignorant of the truth of realities. When pa~n~naa arises, it knows precisely which dhammas are kusala and which are akusala. There is no need to ask someone else whether it is kusala or akusala that arises, because pa~n~naa is able to understand this. Pa~n~naa knows which dhammas are beneficial and which are not. When akusala citta arises pa~n~naa clearly understands it; it knows the danger of akusala and it knows that akusala should not increase. When kusala citta arises pa~n~naa clearly understands it and it knows the benefit of kusala. As we read in the Commentary, pa~n~naa knows the characeristics of the dhammas that are low or exalted, dark or pure. We read further on: "Again, the development of pa~n~naa with the aim to realize the four noble Truths is walking a very long way, namely traversing the cycle of birth and death." If pa~n~naa arises we can understand that the cycle of birth and death we have traversed thus far is extremely long. So long as pa~n~naa has not become accomplished, the path leading to the end of the cycle is still extremely long. Thus, as we read, for the development of pa~n~naa we have an extremely long way to go. We have to go to the further shore, into the direction of nibbaana, where, according to the Commentary, "we never went yet, not even in our dreams". ..to be continued, connie #85667 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 6:11 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "I do believe in lit. Devas/Brahmas - although none of us can be 100% certain of what Buddha did or DID NOT teach. After all, in Kalama sutta and others he told to question things, even him!" Scott: You've been spared a big, long, and no doubt boring reply in which I discussed the sutta you allude to above but Yahoo chose that time, just as I was sending it, to have me confirm my password and it was all lost. Poor you, deprived of all that blah blah blah. Well, I learned a lot anyway... Sincerely, Scott. #85668 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 6:41 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods nilovg Dear Scott, you may look at concept or at waste paper basket. Maybe you find it. Nothing is really lost, we may find it. Otherwise, can you try again? We like your blah, blah blah. Nina. Op 14-mei-2008, om 15:11 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Scott: You've been spared a big, long, and no doubt boring reply in > which I discussed the sutta you allude to above but Yahoo chose that > time, just as I was sending it, to have me confirm my password and it > was all lost. Poor you, deprived of all that blah blah blah. Well, I > learned a lot anyway... #85669 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? truth_aerator Hi Nina, and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 13-mei-2008, om 21:32 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). > > > > The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, > > impermanence. > > > > According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > > Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung > > to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 nutriment > > born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, > > continuity, decay, impermanence!!! $7-$22 > --------- > N: The misunderstanding may be with regard to Production, continuity, decay, impermanence. As to the first, this should be: arising, upacaya, not: production. The list of 28 rupas does not only include concrete matter, but also characteristics inherent in rupas. > Take the characteristic of impermanence: we cannot say that this > characteristic itself is impermanent. > Impermanence IS impermanent itself. When Nibbana-without remainder is reached, than there is no longer impermanence there. Neither are there found the above categories. Unproduced Rupas??? So maybe there IS a "Self" after all that is sabhava, unproduced and not impermanent? Wow, this is something unexpected from studying what is supposed to explain the opposite. Best wishes, Alex #85670 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:17 am Subject: The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Herman) - In part of the article the author wrote "We superimpose labels onto temporary gatherings of parts, which in themselves are only other labels superimposed on a further gathering of smaller parts. Each thing only seems to be a singular entity. It appears as if we have a body and that there are material things. Yet, just because something appears to be, because something is experienced, does not mean that it truly exists." These "gatherings of parts" are examples of what I have called aggregations. (My idea of that was not borrowed, though, from any particular tradition.) Note that the author said that "each thing only seems to be a singular entity." That was my point when I said that the error with regard to aggregations is not in saying that there *are* aggregations but in conceiving (labeling) them as individuals and not mere collections. The main difference, it seems, between the author's perspective and mine is that he seems to consider that there are no phenomena other than "gatherings." I'm not sure, but I think that may be Herman's perspective as well, with "reality" being a house-of-cards emptiness of emptinesses. I find the perspective of emptiness of emptinesses quite appealing, and I actually take it as correct, *except* I do not base it entirely on the relation of whole to part. I base it, more generally, on conditionality. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85671 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 9:30 am Subject: Metta, Ch 4, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, It is natural that we are annoyed or irritated about certain people, that we find them disagreeable. Dosa may be strong and it may last for a long time, or it may be less intense and disappear soon. We should remember that even when coarse dosa, such as malice or ill-will arises, it can be subdued by the development of the four brahma-vihåras. We read in the following sutta (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fives, Chapter XVII, §2) that the venerable Såriputta said to the monks that, when anger arises, one should have wise consideration of the different people one is angry with. People are different as to their conduct through body, speech and mind. Some people may perform good deeds through the body, but their speech and thoughts are akusala. Some people perform akusala kamma (bad deeds) through body and mind but their speech is wholesome. Some people are impure as to their actions through body and speech but they can have mental calm, they listen to the Dhamma and they are interested in it. Although they develop calm their impurity as to body or speech appears from time to time. We can think of these people without anger, annoyance can be subdued by the development of mettå. There can be mettå when we think only of someone’s good qualities which appear, we should not pay attention to what he does wrong because then we will have aversion. It can happen that someone is gentle in his behaviour and that he has agreeable speech but that his way of thinking is not in accordance with his conduct through body and speech. When we know this we should pay attention only to his good qualities, his wholesome conduct through body and speech, and then mettå can arise. Some people may have compassion when they think of someone else, they think of his good qualities, for example, his wholesome conduct through body and speech, or, if he has bad conduct through body and speech but he has mental calm, they think of that quality. They may have compassion and may wish to help the other person. This shows that they have made progress with the development of the brahma- vihåras. We may not be angry with someone else, but can there be compassion, do we really wish to help him if he is in trouble? Can we have sympathetic joy when someone with whom we were annoyed has prosperity, honour, praise and happiness? If people can rejoice at such an occasion it shows that they have made progress with the development of the brahma-vihåras. ****** Nina. #85672 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 14-mei-2008, om 15:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Unproduced Rupas??? So maybe there IS a "Self" after all that is > sabhava, unproduced and not impermanent? Wow, this is something > unexpected from studying what is supposed to explain the opposite. ------ N: See this: Rúpas can be classified as sabhåva rúpas, rúpas with their own distinct nature, and asabhåva rúpas, rúpas without their own distinct nature. The twelve gross rúpas and six among the subtle rúpas that are: cohesion, nutrition, life faculty, heart-base, femininity and masculinity are rupas each with their own distinct nature and characteristic, they are sabhåva rúpas. The other ten subtle rúpas do not have their own distinct nature, they are asabhåva rúpas. Among these are the two kinds of intimation, bodily intimation and speech intimation, which are a “certain, unique change” in the eight inseparable rúpas produced by citta. Moreover, the three qualities of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness can be classified together with the two rúpas of intimation as vikåra rúpas (rúpa as changeability or alteration). Furthermore, the rúpa that is space (akåsa or pariccheda rúpa) delimits the groups of rúpa. Also included are the four rúpas that are characteristics of rúpa, namely birth, continuity, decay and impermanence. Rúpas can be classified as produced rúpas, nipphanna rúpas, and unproduced rúpas, anipphanna rúpas. The sabhåva rúpas are also called “produced”, whereas the asabhåva rúpas are also called “unproduced”. The two kinds of intimation produced by citta, the three qualities of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness produced by citta, temperature or nutrition and space which delimits the groups of rúpa produced by the four factors and therefore originating from these four factors, are still called “unproduced”, anipphanna, because they themselves are not rúpas with their own distinct nature, they are not “concrete matter”. The “produced rúpas” which each have their own characteristic are, as the “Visuddhimagga” (XVIII, 13) explains, “suitable for comprehension”, that is, they are objects of which right understanding can be developed. Nina. #85673 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:26 am Subject: Re: Interview with the Dalai Lama moellerdieter Hi Phil, thanks for the quotation.. how very true to point out the importance for the care of our fellow beings, which actually all great religions request. I think the Dalai Lama provides an outstanding example as an international representative of the Buddha Dhamma, regardless of the different schools and it is very regrettable when he is slandered due to short-sighted and questionable political reasons. Unfortunately some leaders still cling to the view that ' religion is poison for the people'.. with Metta Dieter #85674 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 14-mei-2008, om 15:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Unproduced Rupas??? So maybe there IS a "Self" after all that is > > sabhava, unproduced and not impermanent? Wow, this is something > > unexpected from studying what is supposed to explain the opposite. > ------ > N: See this: > Rúpas can be classified as sabhåva rúpas, rúpas with their own > distinct nature, and asabhåva rúpas, rúpas without their own distinct nature. >>> Thank you for the lists, but you haven't answered the question. How can certain things be unproduced, permanent, without decay and so on - qualities that some people attribute to "Self". Everything is Anicca, and that MUST include ALL rupa phenomenon. Best wishes, Alex #85675 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-mei-2008, om 14:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I agree that the kamma is the principle condition, the main > condition - > but not the sole condition. ------- N: so we agree here. But not entirely, I believe. ----- H: The entire sequence of events, namas and rupas, included mental states of the killer among the causative conditions. If you believe otherwise, you are, IMO, purposely donning blinders. ------- N: Some time ago we had a similar discussion where you emphesized the cittas of the killer as cause. I am not sure we see eye to eye here. You said yourself some time ago that kamma is volition. Not the volition of a person who happens to come along and hurt you. As I said, kamma, volition, is accumulated in the citta. That produces result. When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is not external. A woman had tied a pot of sand to her dog's neck and thrown it into the water. Later on she was on a ship that got aground. To make it move again someone had to be thrown out and the lot fell on her, the captain's wife. The captain tied a pot of sand to her neck and threw her into the water. One can never escape from kamma wherever one may be, even in mid ocean or the sky (Expositor II, p. 361). Right understanding of cause and effect is important for siila: one will not accuse others who do wrong to oneself. They are not the real, the fundamental cause of what one has to suffer. Take the parable of the saw: evil people saw off all one's limbs and even then one can have metta. That is very strongly put. But if there is firm understanding of cause and effect one can be prepared to undergo any kind of vipaaka. In the ultimate sense there are no persons, only conditioned dhammas, they are all dhammas. Whatever has to happen, let it happen. Sooner or later in everyone's life there will be events hard to bear and therefore we should not delay the understanding that whatever presents itself is a mere dhamma, a conditioned dhamma. Nina #85676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 14-mei-2008, om 20:28 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Thank you for the lists, but you haven't answered the question. How > can certain things be unproduced, permanent, without decay and so on - > qualities that some people attribute to "Self". > > Everything is Anicca, and that MUST include ALL rupa phenomenon. ------- N: The classification is merely to distinguish concrte rupas and qualities of rupa that are on the list but are not concrete matter. It is not said that they are permanent. You may read my list again, you answer sooo fast. Nina. #85677 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 12:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. truth_aerator Hello Nina and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, > Op 14-mei-2008, om 14:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > > I agree that the kamma is the principle condition, the main > > condition - > > but not the sole condition. > ------- > N: so we agree here. But not entirely, I believe. > ----- > H: The entire sequence of events, namas and rupas, included mental > states of the killer among the causative conditions. If you believe otherwise, you are, IMO, purposely donning blinders. > ------- > N: Some time ago we had a similar discussion where you emphesized the > cittas of the killer as cause. I am not sure we see eye to eye here. > You said yourself some time ago that kamma is volition. Not the > volition of a person who happens to come along and hurt you. As I > said, kamma, volition, is accumulated in the citta. That produces > result. I have a question: Does the killer-to-be have any choice in deciding to pull the trigger (and kill) or not (abstain)? > When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' > kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is not external. >>> But results in a way can be attenuated. Ex: Angulimala. Best wishes, Alex #85678 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/14/2008 2:16:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Rúpas can be classified as produced rúpas, nipphanna rúpas, and unproduced rúpas, anipphanna rúpas. The sabhÃ¥va rúpas are also called “producedâ€?, whereas the asabhÃ¥va rúpas are also called “unproducedâ€?. =========================== WHY are they called "unproduced"? Do they exist? Do they arise? Do they cease? Are they conditioned? As far as I know, the Buddha taught only one dhamma that exists but neither arises nor ceases and is unconditioned. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85679 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/14/2008 2:35:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 14-mei-2008, om 14:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I agree that the kamma is the principle condition, the main > condition - > but not the sole condition. ------- N: so we agree here. But not entirely, I believe. ----- H: The entire sequence of events, namas and rupas, included mental states of the killer among the causative conditions. If you believe otherwise, you are, IMO, purposely donning blinders. ------- N: Some time ago we had a similar discussion where you emphesized the cittas of the killer as cause. I am not sure we see eye to eye here. You said yourself some time ago that kamma is volition. Not the volition of a person who happens to come along and hurt you. As I said, kamma, volition, is accumulated in the citta. That produces result. When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is not external. --------------------------------------------- Howard: The kamma (i.e., intention/intentional activity) of the killer is not the kamma of the victim, but without that intention and action of the killer, there would not have been the killing. That makes the killer's intentions conditions for the shortened life of the victim. If not, then 'condition for' has no meaning, and meaningless terms aren't worth the time or effort to listen to or to read. ---------------------------------------------- A woman had tied a pot of sand to her dog's neck and thrown it into the water. Later on she was on a ship that got aground. To make it move again someone had to be thrown out and the lot fell on her, the captain's wife. The captain tied a pot of sand to her neck and threw her into the water. One can never escape from kamma wherever one may be, even in mid ocean or the sky (Expositor II, p. 361). ------------------------------------------------ Howard: All well and good, but kamma comes to fruition only when requisite supportive conditions have also occurred. (BTW, whoever wrote the Expositor must have had contact with whoever wrote the story of Jonah! ;-) ----------------------------------------------- Right understanding of cause and effect is important for siila: one will not accuse others who do wrong to oneself. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Wrong actions are wrong actions, and courts should not be abolished. ------------------------------------------ They are not the real, the fundamental cause of what one has to suffer. ----------------------------------------- Howard: They are not the sole condition, but they ARE conditions, and important ones at that. ------------------------------------------- Take the parable of the saw: evil people saw off all one's limbs and even then one can have metta. That is very strongly put. But if there is firm understanding of cause and effect one can be prepared to undergo any kind of vipaaka. In the ultimate sense there are no persons, only conditioned dhammas, they are all dhammas. --------------------------------------------- Howard: If we have made it to such a point, we will be without hate. That is fine. -------------------------------------------- Whatever has to happen, let it happen. ------------------------------------------- Howard: That is NOT fine! First of all. we do not know what "has" to happen. If someone were about to attack someone (my wife, for example) and I could prevent it but did nothing to prevent it then I should go straight to hell! If someone were about to push Lodewijk to the ground - and I pray that nothing such should *ever* happen, would you permit it to occur, thinking "Whatever has to happen let it happen"? SHOULD that be your response, Nina? Would that be "good"? I think your position is absurdly off the mark! --------------------------------------------- Sooner or later in everyone's life there will be events hard to bear and therefore we should not delay the understanding that whatever presents itself is a mere dhamma, a conditioned dhamma. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I see that you believe in the efficacy of mantas (Skt 'mantra'), Nina. --------------------------------------------- Nina ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85680 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 2:16 pm Subject: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. kenhowardau Hi Howard, --------------- <. . .> H: > I don't know what you mean by "causes". ---------------- I am not talking only about causes, I am talking about any kind of doing that would imply ultimate existence or efficacy. We know from the suttas that "I will be reborn" and "I will not be reborn" (for example) are wrong views. Therefore I am saying that "person A can/cannot cause the death of person B" is wrong view *if it attributes any kind of ultimate efficacy to concepts*. I am not saying anything you don't already know and agree with. The difference is that I see the implications as being more far-reaching than you see them. (After my trip to Thailand I have had to rethink some of my understanding of concepts-and-realities, but this one has not changed. :-) ) ----------------------------- H: > I do maintain that any clinging to a view that fails to account for the fact that people interact with each other is utterly divorced from reality and is worthless. ----------------------------- Pardon me but isn't this just silly-talk? No one here is saying that right view stops people from functioning rationally in the conventionally known world. You know no one is arguing this - it has been explained a thousand times - and yet you keep coming back to it. I think the same thing is happening with all the formal-meditators at DSG - not only with you. We need to discuss the real differences in our understanding, and they have nothing to do with this point about functioning in society. Ken H #85681 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 2:38 pm Subject: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. truth_aerator Hi Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > ----------------------------- > H: > I do maintain that any clinging to a view that fails to account for the fact that people interact with each other is utterly divorced from reality and is worthless. > ----------------------------- > > Pardon me but isn't this just silly-talk? No one here is saying that right view stops people from functioning rationally in the > conventionally known world. >>> So are you saying that people with "right" view may act irrationally such as standing in the middle of a free way without worriyng a bit ("Hey no one will die") or drive through red light ("hey who cares about conventional truths? No accident, no one gets hurt.") > > I think the same thing is happening with all the formal-meditators at DSG - not only with you. We need to discuss the real differences in our understanding, and they have nothing to do with this point about functioning in society. > > Ken H > I think that it is very irresponcible to chalk every volition to mere causes and conditions. The real difference is not being afraid of using conventional terms (while remembering the anatta). Buddha very often said that so and so was reborn here and there. "And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Bhikkhus, it is through not realizing, through not penetrating the Four Noble Truths that this long course of birth and death has been passed through and undergone by me as well as by you. " 6. Then the Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One and, after greeting him respectfully, sat down at one side. And he said to the Blessed One: "Here in Nadika, Lord, there have passed away the bhikkhu Salha and the bhikkhuni Nanda. Likewise there have passed away the layman Sudatta and the laywoman Sujata; likewise the layman Kakudha, Kalinga, Nikata, Katissabha, Tuttha, Santuttha, Bhadda, and Subhadda. What is their destiny, Lord? What is their future state?" 7. "The bhikkhu Salha, Ananda, through the destruction of the taints in this very lifetime has attained to the taint-free deliverance of mind and deliverance through wisdom, having directly known and realized it by himself. 17 "The bhikkhuni Nanda, Ananda, through the destruction of the five lower fetters (that bind beings to the world of the senses), has arisen spontaneously (among the Suddhavasa deities) and will come to final cessation in that very place, not liable to return from that world. "The layman Sudatta, Ananda, through the destruction of the three fetters (self-belief, doubt, and faith in the efficacy of rituals and observances), and the lessening of lust, hatred, and delusion, has become a once-returner and is bound to make an end of suffering after having returned but once more to this world. "The laywoman Sujata, Ananda, through the destruction of the three fetters has become a stream-enterer, and is safe from falling into the states of misery, assured, and bound for Enlightenment. "The layman Kakudha, Ananda, through the destruction of the five lower fetters (that bind beings to the world of the senses), has arisen spontaneously (among the Suddhavasa deities), and will come to final cessation in that very place, not liable to return from that world. "So it is with Kalinga, Nikata, Katissabha, Tuttha, Santuttha, Bhadda, and Subhadda, and with more than fifty laymen in Nadika. More than ninety laymen who have passed away in Nadika, Ananda, through the destruction of the three fetters, and the lessening of lust, hatred, and delusion, have become once-returners and are bound to make an end of suffering after having returned but once more to this world. "More than five hundred laymen who have passed away in Nadika, Ananda, through the complete destruction of the three fetters have become stream-enterers, and are safe from falling into the states of misery, assured, and bound for Enlightenment. 8. "But truly, Ananda, it is nothing strange that human beings should die. But if each time it happens you should come to the Tathagata and ask about them in this manner, indeed it would be troublesome to him. Therefore, Ananda, I will give you the teaching called the Mirror of the Dhamma, possessing which the noble disciple, should he so desire, can declare of himself: 'There is no more rebirth for me in hell, nor as an animal or ghost, nor in any realm of woe. A stream-enterer am I, safe from falling into the states of misery, assured am I and bound for Enlightenment.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html --- Best wishes, Alex #85682 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 2:51 pm Subject: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? truth_aerator Regarding "Samatha" . Many meditators at some point in their career have thought "exactly what is the point of calming the mind? How will it lead to insight?" etc etc. Isn't it a pointless waste of time? Points to make: 1st) Samatha removes hindrances (which obstruct seeing as it is) 2nd) Calculation power of the mind really multiples by many factors during and or immeadetely after Jhana. Immeadetely after deepest meditation levels, when the mind is is 99-100% free it operates full strength as opposed to having less than 3%! computation mind power available to it. For example: It is calculated that human mind has maximum speed capacity of 100 million MIPS. The most powerful automated chess program (Deep Blue) beat Garry Kasparov (world chess champion) in a chess game, although eventually Garry was able to barely defeat a computer 2-1. The speed of Deep Blue Chess Machine? 3 million MIPS or approximately 1/30 of what human mind is capable off. So, what happened to 97% of supposed computational power of a human mind? Another example: A common mouse has almost as much computational power as a 1996 Teraflop SUPERCOMPUTER. A 1985 Home computer (probably somewhat equal to some calculators) has less computing power than a nematode WORM. Question arises: A human has 100 million more times computing power than a calculator, WHY DOES CALCULATOR CAN CALCULATE MUCH QUICKER THAN HUMAN?Even if you take the most basic calculator it can calculate numbers such as 999x999 much MUCH quicker than a human being. The answer is simple: Unlike a calculator that is burdened with ONE task, a human mind has much MORE tasks to perform (probably as much as 97-99% may be spent on maintenance of the body AND 5 SENSES ALONE) with a very meager left over to do a specific task. The video channel we call vision can easily take up 10 million point images per second of precious bandwidth. Sounds, smells, tastes, touches and thoughts use up a LOT of bandwidth - not to mention the hindrances. What happens is that not only the mind may be clouded and thwarted by Hindrances, but it is also overworked! Calculators don't have millions of MB per second externeous and non essential data to compute outside of their main task. They are "one-pointed" on ONE task, rather than many. Imagine if the burden of hindrances, distractions, sensory data would be removed. So much more processing power! So much more observation power would be freed up. The more things are happening, the less attention can the mind harness towards them. You simply can't observe 6 things as well as 1 thing. A good and testable example is this. In MS Windows there is a screensaver called "starfield". There you can choose the amount of stars and their speed of motion on a black screen. The more stars you have, and the faster they are flying - the harder it is to see them and the harder is to see their characteristic. Also the hindrances: We can pair them into 2 pairs + 1 extra. #1) Sensuality/Anger #2)Restlessness/Sleepiness #3)Doubt When the mind has sensuality in it, then it tends to see ONLY the positive sides of the object - ignoring the negative. And since it sees only the positive side, that reinforces the belief and lust toward that object. Ex: a boy is madly in love with a girl and doesn't see or avoids to consider her negative sides. When the mind is angry, then it is the exact opposite. Only the negative characteristics are seen, a positive characteristics are overlooked. Ex: a husband is angry at his ex. Since he sees only her negative sides, that reinforces his negative and one sided opinion of her. The above two examples show that mind can selectively filter out information that it doesn't like. Incomplete, partial and biased information can't lead to Nibbana. The hindrances in #2 category have a similiar function of not making the object seen clear. Either the mind spends too little time on one thing and thus the object is blurry (have you ever tried to take a photo of rapidly moving object using camera? The image is blurred!), or the image is in a fog (sleepiness) and not seen vividly and properly as well. Doubt makes one doubt what is seen, and doubt the liberating teaching of the Buddha. So the question isn't "is samatha neccesery", but how much of it should be developed considering all the sense-bombardment in todays society. In times long long ago there weren't the media, all the sensual stimulus, and so on. Life was much slower and less "colourful" , it was much easier to slow down the mind, there weren't as much noise going on (no construction trucks, airplanes or cars). So people needed less samatha and maybe more insight. Today we have lots of smart, intelligent people, but they are assailed by distracting and mind disturbing sense bombardment and thus need even more tranquility. Best wishes, Alex #85683 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:06 pm Subject: Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi Herman (and Alex), -------------- KH: > > I'm glad we are still talking. :-) > > H: > So am I. And that certainly is part of any reality of the present moment. IMO. --------------- Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by that. It sounds a bit like "I will not let the Abhidhamma take the good things out of life." That would be the sort of red herring (or is it a straw man?) I have been complaining about to Howard and Alex et al. -------------------------------- <. . .> H: > Your assertion about the present moment being indisputable, reminds me of conversations with others for whom the existence of a self was equally self-evident. --------------------------------- Yes, I take your point. Until we have learnt the Buddha's perspective on the world even our 'obvious' 'indisputable' observations are very wide of the mark. For example, it is 'obvious' that we are either reborn after death (and live eternally) or annihilated. Nothing could be more obvious - there is no room for a third logical option. That is, until we have heard the Buddha's perspective on reality. Then - and only then - we can see a third (or middle) way. And the same applies to what I have been talking about - 'the past no longer exists: the future has never existed: there is only the present moment.' Everyone can agree on that. (Unless they have been watching too much Dr Who!) However, until they have heard the Dhamma they will probably have the idea that the present moment contains people, trees and motor-cars - somehow frozen in a moment of time. But it doesn't, does it? It contains *specialised* momentary, mental and physical phenomena. :-) ----------------------------- H: > And all the while I know that I deny the present moment on very solid grounds, mainly a failure to find it anywhere, just like that self-evident self. The above are just some rambling notations of the thoughts that occur while I'm typing this, Ken. I'm happy for you to suggest how we should start our study of the present moment, Ken. Initially, I suspect, I will be looking for what constitutes "presentness" for you ------------------------------ I am trying to learn the Buddha's teaching on "presentness," so please, let's not bother with what presentness means for me - an uninstructed worldling! :-) -------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > PS I do think that Alex is asking very valid questions -------------------------------------- Yes, but isn't it time he started listening to the answers? (No offence intended, Alex.) Ken H #85684 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Larry, 2008/5/14 : > Hi Herman, > > > Larry: What we are attached to is the image of a cow or the sound of a > train. If we investigate a cow or a train we will find an image and a > sound but we won't find a cow or a train. Furthermore, when we find an > image or a sound we can see that it is not a cow or a train. That is a > great opening moment. > An opening moment into what? Never, ever will whatever appears not be a synthetic totality. It will always be possible to analyse appearances into components. But each analysed component is again an appearance that is a synthetic totality that hangs together in a certain way with every other appearance. Your "opening moment" is unable to differentiate between what is real and what is imagined, and therefore seems an opening into idealism of a very nasty kind :-) Cheers Herman #85685 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:28 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex (and Nina), As Nina suggested, I've found the missing post: Thanks for the reply, A: "...I do believe in lit. Devas/Brahmas - although none of us can be 100% certain of what Buddha did or DID NOT teach. After all, in Kalama sutta and others he told to question things, even him!" Scott: I don't doubt the existence of other realms and the beings that dwell there. I see animals and humans everyday, for example (not ghosts thankfully). I did want to explore this notion that the Kesamuttisutta.m suggests that we 'question things, even [the Buddha's teachings]'. I've heard this enough, but I don't think it is correct. Bh. Bodhi translates the Paa.li as: "...Don't go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher'. But when you know for yourselves, 'These things are wholesome, these things are blameless; these things are praised by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practised, lead to welfare and happiness', then you should engage in them." "Iti kho kaalaamaa yanta.m avocumha. Etha tumhe kaalaamaa maa anussavena, maa paramparaaya, maa itikiraaya, maa pi.takasampadaanena, maa takkahetu, maa nayahetu, maa aakaaraparivitakkena, maa di.t.thinijjhaanakkhantiyaa, maa bhabbaruupataaya, maa sama.no no garuu'ti. Yadaa tumhe kaalaamaa attanaa'va jaaneyyaatha, ime dhammaa kusalaa, ime dhammaa anavajjaa, ime dhammaa vi~n~nuppasatthaa, ime dhammaa samattaa samaadinnaa hitaaya sukhaaya sa.mvattantii'ti. Atha tumhe kaalaamaa upasampajja vihareyyaatha." Scott: The operative phrase is 'but when you know for yourselves'. The Paa.li is 'jaaneyyaatha'. *Subject to correction from true Paa.li scholars*, this is a compound and is made up of 'jaanaati' and '~neyya'. The PTS PED gives: Jaanaati: "...Intrs. to know, to have or gain knowledge, to be experienced, to be aware, to find out..." ~Neyya: "Grd. ~neyya as nt.=knowledge (cp. ~naa.na)..." Scott: This, then, is about the knowing that is a function of pa~n~naa (~naa.na). This is not at all about 'questioning everything'. That, in my opinion, is mere teenage rebellion and is only for perennial adolescents, hippies and punks - ground for Cool Music but not in anyway an attitude recommended by the Buddha. The context in which this sutta was given was that the Kaalaamaas were beset by a host of ascetics and brahmins, each who would 'explain and elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile, and vilify the doctrines of others'. The point of the sutta, as I see it, is to let the 'knowing for yourselves' (the impersonal and uncontrollable development of pa~n~naa) be the final test. I don't see it as including the Dhamma in with the teachings of the 'ascetics and brahmins'. I think the Buddha was clear that the Dhamma was truth. I don't think the Buddha meant to suggest that the Dhamma he taught was to be 'questioned', but that it is to be known, not by conventional means ('by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher'), but through the workings of pa~n~naa. The situation of the Kaalaamaas of Kesaputta is just like DSG, as I see it. I think, for one thing that sometimes there is too much disparagement, debunking, reviling and vilification, going on. I prefer the calmer resort to logical reasoning, inferential reasoning, studying a collection of scriptures, reflection on reasons, and pondering of views. And I don't think for a moment that these activities for which I state a preference are any 'practise' of any sort. These activities, unless accompanied by pa~n~naa, don't bring the kind of understanding that equates to the 'knowing [for] yourselves' the Buddha referred to. Bh. Bodhi uses the word 'practise' to render, I think, the Paa.li 'upasampajja vihareyyaatha'. Again, *subject to correction by true Paa.li scholars*, this also seems to be two compounds, one made up of 'viharati' and 'yaatha', the other of 'upa' and 'sampajjati'. The PTS PED gives: "Viharati [vi+harati] to stay, abide, dwell, sojourn (in a certain place); in general: to be, to live; appld: to behave, lead a life..." "Yathaa (adv.)...as, like, in relation to, after (the manner of). -- As prep. (with acc.): according (to some condition, norm or rule)..." "Upa...on upon, up...higher, above...close by, close to, near" "Sampajjati [saÅ‹+pajjati] 1. to come to, to fall to; to succeed, prosper...-- 2. to turn out, to happen, become..." Scott: I point this out to demonstrate that the 'knowing for yourselves' does not depend on an actual 'practise' in the modern sense of a deliberate doing of something. Thanks for the chance to study, please ignore if it seems too much like I was just writing to myself. Sincerely, Scott. #85686 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:35 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods truth_aerator Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex (and Nina), > > As Nina suggested, I've found the missing post: > > Thanks for the reply, > > A: "...I do believe in lit. Devas/Brahmas - although none of us can > be 100% certain of what Buddha did or DID NOT teach. After all, in > Kalama sutta and others he told to question things, even him!" > > Scott: I don't doubt the existence of other realms and the beings > that dwell there. I see animals and humans everyday, for example (not > ghosts thankfully). > > I did want to explore this notion that the Kesamuttisutta.m suggests > that we 'question things, even [the Buddha's teachings]'. I've heard > this enough, but I don't think it is correct. Bh. Bodhi translates > the Paa.li as: > > "...Don't go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by > a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential > reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after > pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you > think, 'The ascetic is our teacher'. But when you know for > yourselves, 'These things are wholesome, these things are blameless; > these things are praised by the wise; these things, if undertaken and > practised, lead to welfare and happiness', then you should engage in > them." > > "Iti kho kaalaamaa yanta.m avocumha. Etha tumhe kaalaamaa maa > anussavena, maa paramparaaya, maa itikiraaya, maa pi.takasampadaanena, > maa takkahetu, maa nayahetu, maa aakaaraparivitakkena, maa > di.t.thinijjhaanakkhantiyaa, maa bhabbaruupataaya, maa sama.no no > garuu'ti. Yadaa tumhe kaalaamaa attanaa'va jaaneyyaatha, ime dhammaa > kusalaa, ime dhammaa anavajjaa, ime dhammaa vi~n~nuppasatthaa, ime > dhammaa samattaa samaadinnaa hitaaya sukhaaya sa.mvattantii'ti. Atha > tumhe kaalaamaa upasampajja vihareyyaatha." > > Scott: The operative phrase is 'but when you know for yourselves'. > The Paa.li is 'jaaneyyaatha'. *Subject to correction from true Paa.li > scholars*, this is a compound and is made up of 'jaanaati' and > '~neyya'. The PTS PED gives: > > Jaanaati: "...Intrs. to know, to have or gain knowledge, to be > experienced, to be aware, to find out..." > > ~Neyya: "Grd. ~neyya as nt.=knowledge (cp. ~naa.na)..." > > Scott: This, then, is about the knowing that is a function of pa~n~naa (~naa.na). > Where does it talk about panna? Buddha has often stressed DIRECT knowing rather than simply having read or pondered over it. >>>>>> > This is not at all about 'questioning everything'. That, in my > opinion, is mere teenage rebellion and is only for perennial > adolescents, hippies and punks - ground for Cool Music but not in > anyway an attitude recommended by the Buddha. > > The context in which this sutta was given was that the Kaalaamaas were > beset by a host of ascetics and brahmins, each who would 'explain and > elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile, and > vilify the doctrines of others'. The point of the sutta, as I see it, is to let the 'knowing for yourselves' (the impersonal and > uncontrollable development of pa~n~naa) be the final test. >>>> Panna isn't 100% uncontrollable. If it is, then what are you doing here since it can't be developed? Aren't you trying to develop it through putting in the causes (studying)? Is kusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not? Is akusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not? Best wishes, Alex #85687 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/13 sarah abbott : > Hi Howard, > > > - 'My body' is a good example of an idea that is imagined/projected and > which can only ever be thought about. This is true whether it's thought > about as 'an aggregation' or as anything else. - > What would be useful to me is an example of something, anything that isn't covered by the above. And by that I mean to exclude any abstracted freeze-frame snapshots of what never is static, analysed into components which are never separate, followed by a dogmatic conclusion that these idealised "states" must be there. Cheers Herman #85688 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 6:50 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: Kesamuttisutta.m "...Don't go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher'. But when you know for yourselves, 'These things are wholesome, these things are blameless; these things are praised by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practised, lead to welfare and happiness', then you should engage in them." "Iti kho kaalaamaa yanta.m avocumha. Etha tumhe kaalaamaa maa anussavena, maa paramparaaya, maa itikiraaya, maa pi.takasampadaanena, maa takkahetu, maa nayahetu, maa aakaaraparivitakkena, maa di.t.thinijjhaanakkhantiyaa, maa bhabbaruupataaya, maa sama.no no garuu'ti. Yadaa tumhe kaalaamaa attanaa'va jaaneyyaatha, ime dhammaa kusalaa, ime dhammaa anavajjaa, ime dhammaa vi~n~nuppasatthaa, ime dhammaa samattaa samaadinnaa hitaaya sukhaaya sa.mvattantii'ti. Atha tumhe kaalaamaa upasampajja vihareyyaatha." A: "Where does it talk about panna? Buddha has often stressed DIRECT knowing rather than simply having read or pondered over it." Scott: As I mentioned in the previous post, "the operative phrase is 'but when you know for yourselves'." I offered, tentatively and subject to correction, the following: Me: "The Paa.li is 'jaaneyyaatha'. *Subject to correction from true Paa.li scholars*, this is a compound and is made up of 'jaanaati' and '~neyya'. The PTS PED gives: Jaanaati: "...Intrs. to know, to have or gain knowledge, to be experienced, to be aware, to find out..." ~Neyya: "Grd. ~neyya as nt.=knowledge (cp. ~naa.na)..." Scott: I then suggested, based on the above - and especially as there seemed (again subject to correction) to be a link between '~neyya' and '~naa.na' - the following: "This, then, is about the knowing that is a function of pa~n~naa (~naa.na)." It is clear for sure that the sutta does not instruct us to 'question everything. It is stated that one must know for one's self. And, since this is conventional language, the 'knowing' - again especially given the above (~neyya/~naa.na) - would be the characteristic of pa~n~naa. A: "Panna isn't 100% uncontrollable. If it is, then what are you doing here since it can't be developed? Aren't you trying to develop it through putting in the causes (studying)?" Scott: I'm very glad you have put this into words, Alex. I've been wanting to opine on what I find to be a stumbling point for you, and the above encapsulates it in a nice, brief phrase. First of all, pa~n~naa develops, but the development of pa~n~naa is not subject to 'anyone's' control. It is my opinion that one can become so caught up in seeing things in terms of 'practise' that one then seems to think that everything one does in relation to the Dhamma must be 'practise'. You imagine that I am here to 'develop [pa~n~naa] through putting in the causes (studying)'. I don't in any way think that I'm practising anything here. I'm not doing anything to get anything or make something happen. I don't know of anyone here who suggests that studying Dhamma here is some sort of deliberate practise. It is not. I'm just studying Dhamma. I'm taking the chance to look into the various aspects of the Dhamma that come up while pursuing this or that post. That's it. It is not a practise. Its just studying. Just conventional, everyday, studying. Reading the texts is just reading the texts. It is not reading the texts to make wisdom happen, or whatever one might imagine a 'practise' involving the reading of texts would be for. I think that it is a very unusual view to consider that the study of texts is 'practise' of any kind, and I've heard this misconception stated many, many times. Again, studying is not a practise. It is simply studying. Period. A: "Is kusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not?" Scott: Kusala development is not controllable to any degree. A: "Is akusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not?" Scott: Akusala development is not controllable to any degree. The development of any dhamma, kusala or akusala, takes place only due to conditions. Sincerely, Scott. #85689 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 7:04 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods truth_aerator Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Scott: As I mentioned in the previous post, "the operative phrase is > 'but when you know for yourselves'." I offered, tentatively and > subject to correction, the following: > > Me: "The Paa.li is 'jaaneyyaatha'. *Subject to correction from true Paa.li scholars*, this is a compound and is made up of 'jaanaati' and '~neyya'. The PTS PED gives: > > Jaanaati: "...Intrs. to know, to have or gain knowledge, to be > experienced, to be aware, to find out..." > > ~Neyya: "Grd. ~neyya as nt.=knowledge (cp. ~naa.na)..." > > Scott: I then suggested, based on the above - and especially as there > seemed (again subject to correction) to be a link between '~neyya' and > '~naa.na' - the following: "This, then, is about the knowing that is a > function of pa~n~naa (~naa.na)." > > It is clear for sure that the sutta does not instruct us to 'question > everything. It is stated that one must know for one's self. And knowing for oneself implies that one has DIRECT experience. > First of all, > pa~n~naa develops, but the development of pa~n~naa is not subject to > 'anyone's' control. > > A: "Is kusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not?" > > Scott: Kusala development is not controllable to any degree. > > A: "Is akusala development controllable (to a degree of course) or not?" > > Scott: Akusala development is not controllable to any degree. > > The development of any dhamma, kusala or akusala, takes place only due to conditions. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > So according to you if someone murders and rapes innocent girls, than it is all due to causes and conditions where there was NO freedom of volition for the Rapist to not do it. Thus no immorality was performed (since it couldn't have happened otherwise and no one was responsible). Heck, there was no one to suffer! So Devadatta isn't to blame for the schism and for what he did, it wasn't his choice either.... The holocaust, "ah its just causes and conditions. Noone died, no one caused it. It was inevitable"... Kamma is illusion since it is all impersonal and uncontrollable processess (you cant blame non existent killer/victim for the choice that wasn't made). The school shooters? Don't blame 'em. No one died and no one was pulling the trigger. It was all due to causes and conditions... Yhe right, dream on. The above things you suggest are worst of the worst. No sensible person should hold the above fatalism/determinism. Buddha has rejected this Ajivikism (all Ajivakas go to hell). This is heresy! Please don't launch the semantic steamroller. Kamma implies volition that isn't 100% predetermined (otherwise it wouldn't be called volition, since nothing wills) Best wishes & condolences, Alex #85690 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 7:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . lbidd2 Hi TG, TG: "So what's the point of the label "ultimate realities"?" Larry: "Ultimate" in the sense of being the basic elements of experience. TG: "And what are the "unrealities" or "less realities" that we are contrasting these supposed "ultimate realities" with?" Larry: Wrong views and perceptions assert unrealities, as in "I am this thinking". Ultimate realities are also contrasted with composites of ultimate realities, sometimes called "compact wholes". TG: "So what characteristic are we talking about? If there are a billion different sounds, are we to say there are a billion different "sound characteristics"? And why not?" Larry: It is enough to see that sound is sound, not perception or desire. In that way we can understand that sound is not me or you. Sound isn't even music, a compact whole. But the more fundamental insight is that sound is not me. There can be no insight with self view. That is where we should begin. Larry #85691 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 7:17 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "So according to you if someone murders and rapes innocent girls, than it is all due to causes and conditions where there was NO freedom of volition for the Rapist to not do it. Thus no immorality was performed (since it couldn't have happened otherwise and no one was responsible). Heck, there was no one to suffer! So Devadatta isn't to blame for the schism and for what he did, it wasn't his choice either....The holocaust, "ah its just causes and conditions. No one died, no one caused it. It was inevitable"...Kamma is illusion since it is all impersonal and uncontrollable processess (you cant blame non existent killer/victim for the choice that wasn't made). The school shooters? Don't blame 'em. No one died and no one was pulling the trigger. It was all due to causes and conditions...Yhe right, dream on. The above things you suggest are worst of the worst. No sensible person should hold the above fatalism/determinism. Buddha has rejected this Ajivikism (all Ajivakas go to hell). This is heresy! Please don't launch the semantic steamroller. Kamma implies volition that isn't 100% predetermined (otherwise it wouldn't be called volition, since nothing wills)" Scott: I'm not saying anything like this, Alex. Sincerely, Scott. #85692 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 7:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/5/15 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman (and Alex), > > -------------- > KH: > > I'm glad we are still talking. :-) >> > > > H: > So am I. And that certainly is part of any reality of the > present moment. IMO. > --------------- > > Hmmm, I'm not sure what you mean by that. It sounds a bit like "I > will not let the Abhidhamma take the good things out of life." No, certainly not. But if we're going to do Abhidhamma, let's do it properly. The present moment, which you are going to demonstrate to me as being something more than a thought, is not only whatever phenomenon characterises it, it is also the conditions that bring that phenomenon about. The Dhammasangani (analysis) without the Patthana (synthesis) would be a grave distortion of the reality we are studying, not? > > And the same applies to what I have been talking about - 'the past no > longer exists: the future has never existed: there is only the > present moment.' Everyone can agree on that. (Unless they have been > watching too much Dr Who!) However, until they have heard the Dhamma > they will probably have the idea that the present moment contains > people, trees and motor-cars - somehow frozen in a moment of time. > > But it doesn't, does it? It contains *specialised* momentary, mental > and physical phenomena. :-) Well, at this point I only have your say-so on that. But tell me, if it turns out that a phenomenon and the conditions for that phenomenon are not simultaneous, of what value would it be to say that these two realities co-exist as one moment? Cheers Herman #85693 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 7:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 258-260 and Tiika. lbidd2 Hi Nina, Nina: "when we say: it conditions, we have to consider what type of condition. Natural decisive support-condition is clinging not yet eradicated which conditions, just as in the case of ignorance, even kusala. Then it is not conascent condition, it does not arise together with kusala citta." Larry: Ah, I see. It's coming up in 264-267 how the various kinds of clinging condition kusala citta. I should have looked more carefully :-)) Clinging conditions kusala citta as the underlying motivation, hence the natural decisive support condition. Larry #85694 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 8:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi Howard, Howard: "This [reification] is point-of-view, and most definitely a POV that conditions clinging, though I wouldn't say that it IS clinging. To understand the POV, consider the middle-way ontology the Buddha puts forward in the Kaccayanagotta Sutta. The opposite understanding is split into a nihilism and a self-existence view. Drop the nihilism of those two and what is left is reification." Larry: I think it is classified as an object of clinging in the clinging to views category. It is a failure to recognize impermanence and is characterized as eternalism. But that isn't what you meant. I wonder if we could find reification in perception. I think if a mental construct is something that is experienced, it must be either a perception or a view. Visible data > person > loved one. Something like that? Larry #85695 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 8:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi again Howard (and Herman), Howard: "You seem to me to be underestimating the power of concept." Larry: It gave me a headache thinking about concepts. So I decided "concept" meant "word", period. This is word as word, not as discursive thought (vitakka-vicaara), which is included in the sankhara khandha. U-oh, headache coming on---> Larry #85696 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 9:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced lbidd2 Hi Howard, Howard: "Note that the author said that "each thing only seems to be a singular entity." That was my point when I said that the error with regard to aggregations is not in saying that there *are* aggregations but in conceiving (labeling) them as individuals and not mere collections." Larry: I think abhidhamma would call an unexamined aggregation a "compact whole" or possibly simply a perception. As I understand it perception can single out one element of an aggregation, take that element as a sign of that aggregation and link that sign with other associations. The main fault with all that, apart from all the wrong identifications, is that impermanence gets left out. Larry #85697 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 9:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' lbidd2 Hi Herman, Herman: "An opening moment into what?" Larry: Nonattachment. A loosening of the grasp. Where does analyzing the analysis get you? Larry ---------------------- Larry: What we are attached to is the image of a cow or the sound of a train. If we investigate a cow or a train we will find an image and a sound but we won't find a cow or a train. Furthermore, when we find an image or a sound we can see that it is not a cow or a train. That is a great opening moment. Herman: An opening moment into what? Never, ever will whatever appears not be a synthetic totality. It will always be possible to analyse appearances into components. But each analysed component is again an appearance that is a synthetic totality that hangs together in a certain way with every other appearance. Your "opening moment" is unable to differentiate between what is real and what is imagined, and therefore seems an opening into idealism of a very nasty kind :-) #85698 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed May 14, 2008 5:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . TGrand458@... Hi Larry In a message dated 5/14/2008 8:06:29 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, TG: "So what's the point of the label "ultimate realities"?" Larry: "Ultimate" in the sense of being the basic elements of experience. .............................................. NEW TG: That's what the word "element" is for. ............................................ TG: "And what are the "unrealities" or "less realities" that we are contrasting these supposed "ultimate realities" with?" Larry: Wrong views and perceptions assert unrealities, as in "I am this thinking". Ultimate realities are also contrasted with composites of ultimate realities, sometimes called "compact wholes". ................................................................ NEW TG: Wrong views and perceptions do not "assert" this "I am." This "I am" never arises. It is just the deluded perception and wrong view "itself." In other words, the false delusion is not an "unreality." Just as an eye, or consciousness, the "false delusion" does arise, does change in accordance to conditions, and will cease when the conditions supporting it cease. You see, its a conditioned thing just like the so-called "ultimate realities." Now we could just say that -- "Elements form the basis by which experiences are formed." We don't need to add to that. The "side stepping" toward "ultimate realities" is an error on many levels IMO. .......................................................................... TG: "So what characteristic are we talking about? If there are a billion different sounds, are we to say there are a billion different "sound characteristics"characteristics Larry: It is enough to see that sound is sound, not perception or desire. In that way we can understand that sound is not me or you. Sound isn't even music, a compact whole. But the more fundamental insight is that sound is not me. There can be no insight with self view. That is where we should begin. .................................................................. NEW TG: "That is where we should begin"? Is that a page out of Nina's playbook? ;-) I'm not interested in beginning. I'm interested in ending. Sound is not only "not" you and me, it is also "not" sound too!!!!!!!!!! If we think "sound" is "its own thing," we sadly miss the point of Dependent Arising, and nonself. If we miss that, that Buddha's teachings crumble into gibberish. If we think elements are "their own things" with "their own characteristics," then we have replaced one self-view with hundreds. That doesn't seem like an equitable trade to me. BTW, this is why the commentarial crowd just hates using terms like void, empty, coreless, hollow, 'like a mirage,' 'like a trick,' etc. as applied to the elements...as the Buddha did. Why? Because their "dhammas" theory doesn't support it. "Ultimate Realities" requires a substantialist viewpoint that can't digest these terms. TG OUT Larry #85699 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] More Disturbing News.... egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/14 sarah abbott : > Dear Han & all, > > > We may not be able to do much (if anything) to relieve others from their > severe hardships, We can do plenty to relieve others from their severe hardships, and those so inclined just go and do it. No pontification necessary. but by developing metta and also equanimity (which > you've been writing about in the series on Perfections), THAT is something we cannot do. there will be > less dosa, less aversion on account of the suffering of those we see and > read about. It is a curious position, to try and be unaffected by the suffering of others. > It's not easy to accept and understand that those who suffer > are experiencing the results of past kamma, but it is the truth which the > Buddha taught us. Whether suffering is caused by previous kamma or not, is immaterial as to how we react to that suffering. Cheers Herman #85700 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > .... > But if we're going to do Abhidhamma, let's do it > properly. The present moment, which you are going to demonstrate to me > as being something more than a thought, is not only whatever > phenomenon characterises it, it is also the conditions that bring that > phenomenon about. > > The Dhammasangani (analysis) without the Patthana (synthesis) would be > a grave distortion of the reality we are studying, not? > > > > . . . if > it turns out that a phenomenon and the conditions for that phenomenon > are not simultaneous, of what value would it be to say that these two > realities co-exist as one moment? > ---- Hi Herman, This discussion is not going the way I would like it. I am out of my depth in these philosophical matters. And happily so! :-) I just want to hear the Dhamma and consider it. To me, this means understanding the difference between concepts and realities and then learning about the realities. Admittedly, I do get into arguments occasionally over formal meditation. :-) And so I stray from my stated aims in that respect. But that is basically in order to explain my understanding. According to my understanding the Way is to have right understanding now. (And this will be possible if the right conditions have been put in place.) I do not believe in performing rituals in order that enlightenment may (supposedly) happen later. I am a big disappointment to anyone who wants to get into deep philosophical discussions. I'd rather be out surfing, or at home playing my ukulele. Or listening to Dhamma. (That's good too.) :-) So, can we bring the discussion back to the difference between concepts and realities? What else is there that's worth talking about? Ken H talking about *on DSG* that is :-) #85701 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 14, 2008 11:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi KenH (and Howard), 2008/5/15 kenhowardau : > Hi Howard, > > > ----------------------------- > H: > I do maintain that any clinging to a view that fails to account > for the fact that people interact with each other is utterly divorced > from reality and is worthless. > ----------------------------- > > Pardon me but isn't this just silly-talk? No one here is saying that > right view stops people from functioning rationally in the > conventionally known world. You know no one is arguing this - it has > been explained a thousand times - and yet you keep coming back to it. > > I think the same thing is happening with all the formal-meditators at > DSG - not only with you. We need to discuss the real differences in > our understanding, and they have nothing to do with this point about > functioning in society. > Howard is spot-on in his assessment. Furthermore, the basic problems in communication or understanding have nothing to do with whether one is a formal meditator or not. The basic problem is that there are two irreconcilable uses of kamma in play here, one is kamma as action, the other is kamma as intention. Never the twain shall or can meet. Because action is instrumentality in the world, and intention isn't. So there you have it :-) Cheers Herman #85702 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 2:00 am Subject: Metta, Ch 4, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, In the “Mettå-sutta” (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fours, Chapter XIII, §5) we read about the results of the development of the four brahma-vihåras. When someone develops calm and attains jhåna with mettå as meditation subject and the jhåna does not decline, he is reborn in the plane of the “Devas of the Brahma-group” and there the life-span is about one kappa. When someone develops jhåna with compassion as subject and the jhåna does not decline he is reborn in the plane of the “Radiant Devas” and there the life-span is about two kappas. When someone develops jhåna with sympathetic joy as subject and the jhåna does not decline, he is reborn in the plane of the “Ever-radiant Devas” and there the life-span is about four kappas. When someone develops jhåna with equanimity as subject and the jhåna does not decline he is reborn in the plane of the “Vehapphala Devas” and there the life-span is about five hundred kappas. The development of mettå has many benefits, it supports other ways of kusala, such as the “ways of showing sympathy”, which are: liberality, kindly speech, beneficial actions and impartiality, as explained in the teachings. Mettå conditions generosity in giving and it conditions kind, agreeable speech. It makes one abstain from rude, disgracious conduct, from doing wrong to others. We can help people with kindness and we can consider them as fellow- beings who are friends. We can learn not to think of them with conceit, as strangers who are different. We will learn not to think of them in terms of “he” and “me”, or to consider them as superior or as inferior in comparison with ourselves, because that is conceit. When we investigate the characteristic of our citta we will know from our own experience that kusala citta is completely different from akusala citta. ******* Nina. #85703 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 2:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- On Wed, 14/5/08, han tun wrote: >Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your very useful post. I have no disagreement with what you have written. I was only wondering how kamma works in natural disasters of such magnitude, when thousands of people die at the same time, and I wanted to ask you about this issue.< … S: I’d like to raise two points straight away: a) It seems that thousands of people die at the same time and in ordinary language this is so. However, when we are precise and consider cittas and in particular, cuti citta (death consciousness), then we see that each cuti citta arises at a particular moment, according to its own conditions. b) As others are discussing, we are used to thinking in terms of supporting conditions for kamma to bring its result in these examples, such as natural or man-made disasters, but in terms of conditions as detailed in the Patthana (which you’re studying), the main cause is kamma and the supporting conditions are pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition), anantara and samanantara paccaya (proximity and contiguity condition), arammana paccaya (object condition) and many others. We think in terms of a story about the flooding or being hit on the head by concrete or a bullet wound, but actually there are just different moments of body-consciousness experiencing various tangible objects with many other kinds of citta in between. The moments of body-consciousness with painful feeling experiencing hardness and so on are vipaka cittas, the result of kamma. They are conditioned by past kamma and bring their result accordingly at the appropriate time. Kammasakata panna is the knowledge of kamma and its results. When we say that “each has his/her own kammaâ€?, it doesn’t mean that in reality there is a self. So, as you know, there are only 6 doorways. If it is not a reality being experienced now, it’s a concept. … H: >Meanwhile, Nina in her message 85635 quoted Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.21 Moliyasivaka Sutta which was originally quoted by Alex. In the last paragraph of the sutta eight causes of vedanaa are mentioned. Bile, phlegm, and also wind, Imbalance and climate too, Carelessness and assault, With kamma result as the eighth. Pittam semha~nca vaato ca sannipaataa utuuni ca visamam opakkamikam kamma vipaakena atthamiiti < … S: The sutta is given in worldly terms (lokohaaro). The feelings arising with body-consciousness are actually the result of kamma. (Btw, Nina translated this sutta and commentary before: # 13094). In another old post, #64622 on the same topic, I wrote: “……………You say that your difficulty 'is about interactions between us "beings" and what is not "being", like natural phenomenas: earthquake for example.....' Yes, the earthquake rupas are conditioned by temperature, but whether or not we are hit on the head or caught by fire will depend on our past kamma at that moment. 'Being in the wrong place at the wrong time...' Like those affected or hurt in a war too - it's a result of kamma, supported by other conditions. Not everyone will be affected. Reflecting on kamma can condition equanimity when we hear or read about atrocities. I think the reason it's hard to accept is because we're used to think about 'events' and 'situations' rather than about momentary good and bad intentions which lead to actions and bring results in the way of momentary sense experiences.â€? … H: >Bhikkhu Bodhi explained that >However, the Buddha’s line of argument also implies that he is not denying kamma may induce the illnesses, etc., that serve as the immediate causes of painful feelings; for this level of causality is not immediately perceptible to those who lack supernormal cognitive faculties.>< … S: I would rather say that kamma conditions the painful bodily feelings associated with what we refer to as various illnesses. The aversion on account of these particular feelings is not conditioned by kamma, but rather by natural decisive support condition as discussed before. … H: >Besides, in the eight causes, the climate is one of them. So the cyclone could be one of the causes of such multiple deaths.< … S: So what is climate now? There is the experience of temperature through the body, there is the sight of a particular visible object and there is the thought about climate and cyclones. … H: >With this, I have accepted the complexities of kamma which is difficult to understand for those who lack supernormal cognitive faculties.< … S: This is definitely true, so I’ll leave it on this good point of agreement. I’d be glad to receive your further feedback which is also helpful to others. Metta, Sarah ======== #85704 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, I think you've misunderstood the chart. --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Alex wrote: > > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). > > > > The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, > > impermanence. > > > > According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > > Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , clung > > to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 nutriment > > born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, > > continuity, decay, impermanence! !! $7-$22 .... S: (Incidentally, as I mentioned before, the charts were contributed by U Silananda. B.Bodhi is the editor of the text). The chart is at the end of the chapter on rupas, ch VI. Let me try to explain simply: On the left-hand side, the 28 rupas are listed, starting with earth element (pa.thaviidhaatu) and finishing with the 4 characteristics of rupas (lakkha.naruupa). These 4 characteristics are: -production (upacaya) -continuity (santati) -decay (jarataa) -impermanence (aniccataa) So taking the earth element, it has these 4 characteristics referring to its arising, occurrence, decaying and falling away. The aniccataa of a rupa is said to manifest as the destruction and falling away of that rupa. Back to the chart: Across the top of the chart various classifications (16) and groupings (21) are given as you can see. The classifications start with "essentials, derived, internal, external...." Now the characteristics of rupas just referred to are not "essentials". The essentials are the 4 primary rupas (mahaabhuuta ruupa) only, i.e earth, water, fire and air elements (pa.thavii-, sspo-, tejo-, vaayodhaatu) All the other 24 rupas are referred to as derived (upaadaaya). As it said at the beginning of the chapter, apart from the 4 primary rupas, all other rupas are derived from and dependent on the 4 primary rupas. This includes the 4 lakkhana rupas. Now these 4 lakkhana rupas are not said to be internal, because the term is only used here to refer to the 5 kinds of sense-base (which are also the doors for the seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and bodily-experiencing. We could go on to discuss all the other categories, but I think you can now work them out. Let me know if it still isn't clear. Actually, I never look at charts on my own, so I'm happy to take a look with you:-). Metta, Sarah ======== #85705 From: han tun Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:00 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your two very useful posts, the last one and the one before. Both posts are very deep and profound for me and I will have to take time to digest them. Besides, I have just downloaded messages 13094 and 64622 which you have referred to, and I will have to study them also. So I do not have any feedback right now on the points you have mentioned. But I have another question on kamma which is not directly connected to the points you have mentioned. This is as follows: A man is pious, honest, and of good moral character. But he is poor and facing severe hardships in life. Another man is not honest and does all evil deeds. And yet he is prosperous and successful in life. How would you explain the two situations by citing sutta references? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #85706 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 3:50 am Subject: The 7 Noble Goals! bhikkhu0 Friends: Completion of 7 Things initiates The Noble 8-fold Way! Human beings are special as they can train, learn, & educate themselves to elevating progress! The Blessed Buddha once explained: Completion of 7 things is the seed, initiator, & precursor for developing the Noble 8-fold Way! What are they? 1. Having a Good and Beautiful Friend (KalyÄ?na-mitta): Such friend has a pure and beautiful mind, which by simply being a good example will influence & encourage all other beings to improve their mentality, behaviour and understanding. Such good friend encourages one to learn, train, and develop one self towards individual & social harmony. 2. Completion of Pure Morality (SÄ«la-sampadÄ?): Having a minimum of 5-precept moral discipline is the indispensable foundation of right life. This means living harmlessly & helpfully, and not exploitatively, both within the material and social environment, by using the four necessities of food, clothing, shelter and medicine as well as any technology, so they enhance a true quality of one's own & others beings life, by promoting education, constructive action, merit-making & the state of balance in nature. 3. Consummation of Motivation (Chanda-sampadÄ?): Having a mind that is motivated by withdrawal and good-will, which aims at learning and doing good. Not obsessed by only wanting more, getting new, and low consumer pleasure... Instead, one uses all one's abilities in joyous learning of how to do only good things, avoid all evil things and purify one's mind into a subtle radiant excellence. 4: Perfection of One-self (Atta-sampadÄ?): By dedicating oneself to the realization of one's full human potential through daily meditation . One views all difficulties, hardships, obstacles and problems as good training grounds to test & improve one's mind, intelligence and abilities toward the realization of one's full potential, through a comprehensive refinement, that encompasses mentality, behaviour, & understanding. 5. Clarification of View (Ditthi-sampadÄ?): Seeing that all things has a cause and an effect is adhering to the principle of conditionality . This comprehension of the vast mutual dependency of all mental & material states in the universe comes from repeated reasoning, thorough examination and excellence of rational analysis. This enables mental clarity and intellectual independence, neither being impulsive, nor over-reactive, not allowing oneself to drift along the stream of public hysteria and banal common priorities. 6. Achievement of Alertness (Appamada-sampadÄ?): To be acutely and constantly aware of the inevitable impermanence , inherent instability, transience, fleeting evanescence and total insubstantiality of all life, all things and all phenomena, which are constantly changing according to their causes and conditions, both internally and externally, will establish oneself in alertness. One realizes, that one cannot afford to be complacent. One sees the preciousness of time and strives to learn about, prevent and rectify the causes of decline and bring about the causes of growth & prosperity, using all one's time, night & day to the greatest advantage! 7. Fulfillment of Rational Attention (Yoniso-manasikara-sampadÄ?): Attending wisely so as to what is the cause of any phenomena or state, will make one advantageously realize the real truth. To investigate, by intelligently examining, investigating, tracing, analyzing and researching into the very proximate cause of any given situation, will make one able to solve problems & do things successfully through intelligent methods, that allows one to be independent, self-reliant & at the same time - by that self-sufficiency - become a helping refuge to many other people & beings. As dawn is the forerunner for the rising of the sun, even and exactly so do these 7 things seed, initiate and begin the development and completion of the Noble 8-Fold Way! The Noble 8-fold Way culminates in NibbÄ?na - the Deathless State - ! These 7 things are therefore indeed Noble Goals! Source: Samyutta NikÄ?ya V 29-31 & the classical commentary on that, which inspired: A constitution for Living. Buddhist Principles for a Fruitful and Harmonious Life. Ven. P.A. Payutto. Thailand. Buddhist Publication Society 2007: BP 620S http://www.bps.lk The 7 Noble Goals! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) <.....> #85707 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:36 am Subject: Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "What I hoped to convey was that conditions are not known in the same way as experience. We previously agreed...that dhammas ARE their characteristic. I do not think that conditions are a characteristic. They are a relation between characteristics...I do not mean to suggest that knowing precedes what it knows." Scott: I think this is correct, as far as I see it: dhammas are their characteristics, and conditions are relations between dhammas, where dhammas are either conditioning or conditioned states, and the relations are the ways in which these states are cause and effect. H: "...But that does not mean to imply that conditionality is not a reality..." Scott: Yes, and I'm sort of fuzzing over the troublesome term 'reality' because I think I know what you mean - paccaya is not pa~n~natti. I think that conditionality is 'real', not conceptual, since a dhamma, with its own characteristic, and being that characteristic, when it serves as, say, conditioning state for the arising of another dhamma, with its own characteristic and being that characteristic, 'really' does serve to contribute to the qualitative differences in that subsequent state. H: "...It just means that the knowledge of conditionality is abstracted. At best we may attend to just a few conditions in the isolation of a selective hindsight, and that is pure abstraction, because the very reality, of sitting there abstracting away, is a conditioned reality, the conditions of which defy all efforts at analysis." Scott: Are you saying that the 'workings' of conditionality cannot be known? I think I get what you mean about 'abstracting away'. H: "I think that the notion of becoming is irreconcilable with the notion of a moment in isolation." Scott: I'm not sure I quite follow, but why would these be irreconcilable? I'm probably not understanding 'becoming' in the sense you mean to use it. At any rate, 'moment in isolation' is not how it is, as I understand it. I'd say that conditionality, that is the ways in which states relate to each other as cause and effect, demonstrates that any given moment can never be 'taken in isolation' since each moment is 'multiply conditioned' and 'multiply conditioning', if you know what I mean. I still consider that one moment follows the last(and is so, in fact, due to conditions - namely anantara and samanantara paccaya), but this is complicated. Sincerely, Scott. #85708 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Larry) - In a message dated 5/14/2008 10:06:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, TG: "So what's the point of the label "ultimate realities"?" Larry: "Ultimate" in the sense of being the basic elements of experience. TG: "And what are the "unrealities" or "less realities" that we are contrasting these supposed "ultimate realities" with?" Larry: Wrong views and perceptions assert unrealities, as in "I am this thinking". Ultimate realities are also contrasted with composites of ultimate realities, sometimes called "compact wholes". TG: "So what characteristic are we talking about? If there are a billion different sounds, are we to say there are a billion different "sound characteristics"? And why not?" Larry: It is enough to see that sound is sound, not perception or desire. In that way we can understand that sound is not me or you. Sound isn't even music, a compact whole. But the more fundamental insight is that sound is not me. There can be no insight with self view. That is where we should begin. Larry ================================= For whatever value you may accord it, my take on the term 'ultimate realities' is that this term names those phenomena that, among all "realities" (i.e., experienced, not just imagined. phenomena), are the ones that do not have other phenomena as components. (Herman, I believe, and perhaps you as well, disbelieve in such not-further-decomposable phenomena.) So, for me, an instance of (experienced) hardness is compositionally irreducible in that there are no other phenomena of which it is composed, and that is what makes it a paramattha dhamma. The ultimacy of a so-called ultimate reality doesn't pertain to "how real" it is - real is real, but to the fact that it is not a collection of phenomena. Note: With regard to ultimacy of "realities," I speak only of dependence on components (or lack of such), but not of other forms of dependency. As I see it, NO phenomena are independent and self-existent. While phenomena are not all the same and *can* be distinguished, there being, for example, easy distinguishing of a sight from hardness, all phenomena are aspects of a vast net of interdependency, and reality (singular term) as it is, and not as it appears, is seamless. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85709 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/14/2008 11:23:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, Howard: "This [reification] is point-of-view, and most definitely a POV that conditions clinging, though I wouldn't say that it IS clinging. To understand the POV, consider the middle-way ontology the Buddha puts forward in the Kaccayanagotta Sutta. The opposite understanding is split into a nihilism and a self-existence view. Drop the nihilism of those two and what is left is reification." Larry: I think it is classified as an object of clinging in the clinging to views category. It is a failure to recognize impermanence and is characterized as eternalism. But that isn't what you meant. I wonder if we could find reification in perception. I think if a mental construct is something that is experienced, it must be either a perception or a view. Visible data > person > loved one. Something like that? Larry ================================ It is a viewing/conceiving. and it arises again and again due to the deep-seated tendency to reification, or self-making. (When I speak of "self", I don't refer only to personal self, but to an alleged core of identity and self-existence in anything.) With metta, Howard #85710 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Sorry for the delay; thanks for the reply: S: "...Of course samatha development and satipatthana development are not the same. However, depending on accumulations (as in the case of the bhikkhus being addressed in that section of the Satipatthana Sutta), there can be the development of satipatthana whilst (or strictly, in between moments of) developing samatha. All very naturally. Like now, there can be moments of metta with right understanding and also moments of understanding realities appearing which may include metta or wise reflection as objects." Scott: As I've been looking at the Kesamuttisutta.m with Alex, I think that the above point is being made there. I've isolated the phrase "But when you know for yourselves (jaaneyyaatha)" I'm seeing this 'knowing for yourself' as being a natural process. I think the 'practise' one is to 'engage' in (upasampajja vihareyyaatha) refers to the natural way the 'knowing for yourselves' would arise, according to conditions and accumulations. S: "Any reviewing or reflecting in the development of samatha has to be with right understanding which clearly understands how such an object brings calm and understanding what wholesome calm is. So, just thinking about body parts cannot be said to be the development of samatha, just as just thinking about people cannot be said to be the development of metta or samatha either." Scott: Okay. S: "Most thinking is not wise thinking of any kind." Scott: Yes. Sincerely, Scott. #85711 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- On Thu, 15/5/08, han tun wrote: >A man is pious, honest, and of good moral character. But he is poor and facing severe hardships in life. Another man is not honest and does all evil deeds. And yet he is prosperous and successful in life. How would you explain the two situations by citing sutta references? < ------ 1)Firstly, as you know, the results in life come about because of past kamma. The character and habits are due to accumulated tendencies. Can we judge a person's accumulations? What about the asaya-anusaya (the tendencies that are not manifesting at this time)? In the Migasala Sutta -AN, Bk of 6s,v.44 (PTS, Hare transl)we read: “And the measurers measure them, saying: ‘His stature (Dhammaa) is just this, the other’s just that; in what way is one wanting, one exalted?’ And that measuring, Ananda, is to the measurers’ harm and hurt for many a day.â€? Later the Buddha says further to Ananda: “....But who save the Tathagata can judge this difference? Wherefore, Ananda, be no measurer of persons; measure not the measure of persons. Verily, Ananda, he digs a pit for himself who measures the measure of persons. I alone, Ananda, can measure their measure - or one like me.â€? ----- 2. As we know kamma is very complicated and we don't know when good deeds will bring particular results, but it does bear fruit. I liked this post Ken O wrote before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/60708 >K: We wont know what is our next jati. A good moral behaviour in this life does not guarantee a good rebirth in the next life, but it will still bear fruits. MN 136, Greater Exposition of Action <<20. Therein Ananda, as to the person who abstains from killing living beings ... and holds right view, and on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappears in a state of deprivation...even in hell; either earlier he did an evil action to be felt as painful or later he did an evil action to be felt as painful, or at the time of death he acquired and undertook wrong view. Because of that, on the dissolution of death of the body, after death he has reappeared in a state of deprivation...even in hell. But since he has here abstained from killing living beings...and held right view, he will experience the result of that either here and now, or in his next rebirth or in some subsequent existence.>> <...> >K: Everyone is responsible for their own actions, according to Abhidhamma, an volition cause now could bear fruits in 100,000 aeons later. MN 135 Shorter Exposition of Action <<20. Beings are owners of their actions, student, heirs of their actions; they originate from their actions, are bound to their actions, have their actions as their refuge. It is action that distinguishes beings as inferior and superior>> AN 131 A Penetrative Exposition <>< -------- 3. The following sutta is also relevant. Here I'm quoting from where it's quoted in ADL by Nina: >We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Fours, chapter IX, §5, Darkness): Monks, these four persons are found existing in the world. What four? He who is in darkness and bound for darkness; he who is in darkness but bound for light; he who is in light but bound for darkness; he who is in light and bound for light. And how, monks, is a person in darkness bound for darkness? In this case a certain person is born in a low family, the family of a scavenger or a hunter or a basket-weaver or wheelwright or sweeper, or in the family of some wretched man hard put to it to find a meal or earn a living, where food and clothes are hard to get. Moreover, he is ill-favoured, ugly, dwarfish, sickly, purblind, crooked, lame or paralysed, with never a bite or sup, without clothes, vehicle, without perfumes or flower-garlands, bed, dwelling or lights. He lives in the practice of evil with body, speech and thought; and so doing, when body breaks up, after death, he is reborn in the waste, the way of woe, the downfall, in hell. Thus, monks, is the person who is in darkness and bound for darkness. And how, monks, is a person in darkness but bound for light? In this case a certain person is born in a low family... without bed, dwelling or lights. He lives in the practice of good with body, speech and thought... and so doing, when body breaks up, after death he is reborn in the happy bourn, in the heaven-world. And how, monks, is a person in light but bound for darkness? In this case a certain person is born in a high family... And that man is well-built, comely and charming, possessed of supreme beauty of form. He is one able to get clothes, vehicle, perfumes and flower-garlands, bed, dwelling and lights. But he lives in the practice of evil with body, speech and thought. So doing, when body breaks up, after death he is reborn in the waste, the way of woe, the downfall, in hell. Thus, monks, is the person who is in light but bound for darkness. And how, monks, is a person who is in light and bound for light? In this case a person is born in a high family... able to get clothes... bed, dwelling and lights. He lives in the practice of good with body, speech and thought. So doing, when body breaks up after death, he is reborn in the happy bourn, in the heaven-world. Thus, monks, is one who is in light and bound for light. These, monks, are the four persons found existing in the world.< ------ 4. Actions now will bring their results in future. Actually, there are so many relevant suttas. Here is just the link (as the post is already long) to another quoted by Ven Samahita from AN: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/67944 -------- I think another point to consider is whether kusala vipaka can really be measured in terms of conventional prosperity and success in life and vice versa. Perhaps you'd like to share your further comments on all/any of these aspects. As you suggest, this is a deep topic. Metta, Sarah ====== #85712 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 5/14/2008 11:36:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi again Howard (and Herman), Howard: "You seem to me to be underestimating the power of concept." Larry: It gave me a headache thinking about concepts. So I decided "concept" meant "word", period. This is word as word, not as discursive thought (vitakka-vicaara), which is included in the sankhara khandha. U-oh, headache coming on---> ------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! Well, Larry, just take two aspirin and ... Nah, forget it, how could two pa~n~natti help anything? There are actually no such things as aspirin, right? Not "realities," right? Just imagined? Hmm, wonder whether Nina ever takes aspirin. I guess not. ;-) Just having fun, Nina, but with what I think are valid points. ------------------------------------------ Larry ======================= With metta, Howard #85713 From: "connie" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:03 am Subject: Perfections Corner (153) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing ch.4: We need all ten perfections, because we have such an amount of defilements. It is not sufficient only to develop the perfection of pa~n~naa. If we do not understand what the perfections are and in what way we should develop them in our daily life, we cannot realize the four noble Truths, but we have merely vain expectations of achieving their realization. We do not know ourselves and we do not understand that we need the perfections which are a supporting condition for the development of kusala and for the elimination of akusala dhammas. When we have understood that satipa.t.thaana should be developed together with the perfections, there are conditions for the perfection of generosity, the giving away of things for the benefit of someone else, for the perfection of siila, the abstention from akusala kamma and the perfection of renunciation: detachment from visible object, sound and the other sense objects. This is a very gradual process, but at times someone may notice that he is inclined to become more de tached from sense objects, that he has had already enough of them, and that he should not indulge in them too much. With regard to the perfection of pa~n~naa, most people are longing for pa~n~naa, but the perfection of pa~n~naa, that is, pa~n~naa that understands the characteristics of realities, cannot arise if one does not try to develop it. Generally people wish to know the truth of realities, but they should carefully investigate whether, at the moment of seeing, of the experience of the other sense objects or of thinking, they have the sincere desire (chanda) to know and to understand the characteristics of the realities that are appearing at those very moments. When someone really sees the benefit of pa~n~naa he needs to have energy and endurance, because the development of pa~n~naa is a difficult task which takes an endlessly long time. Understanding of the level of listening is only a foundation, it is not the perfection of pa~n~naa that is the condition for the realization of the four noble Truths. The perfection of pa~n~naa evolves with the development of the understanding of the characteristics of realities that are appearing. This includes the development of understanding of the level of listening, of considering realities, and also of the level of awareness of realities at this moment. ..to be continued, connie #85714 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 1:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/15/2008 12:09:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, Howard: "Note that the author said that "each thing only seems to be a singular entity." That was my point when I said that the error with regard to aggregations is not in saying that there *are* aggregations but in conceiving (labeling) them as individuals and not mere collections." Larry: I think abhidhamma would call an unexamined aggregation a "compact whole" or possibly simply a perception. As I understand it perception can single out one element of an aggregation, take that element as a sign of that aggregation and link that sign with other associations. The main fault with all that, apart from all the wrong identifications, is that impermanence gets left out. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: It may well be, though it needn't be. I see the main fault being that of viewing a collection as a singular entity with identity and self-existence, i.e., atta-view. We think, for example, of the namarupic stream called "Larry" or "Howard" as a singular entity that changes yet remains "the same person". The impermanence can be readily seen, yet our clinging to identity and core (i.e., to self) is impervious to that perception of change. The problem is that the impermanence is seen only at a gross, macroscopic level, and inferentially, and not directly at the radical, microscopic level required for dis-enchantment and dis-illusionment to set in. -------------------------------------------- Larry ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85715 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Larry, 2008/5/15 : > Hi Herman, > > Herman: "An opening moment into what?" > > Larry: Nonattachment. A loosening of the grasp. Where does analyzing the > analysis get you? Analysis-paralysis :-) But my point re: differentiating between what is real and what is imagined stands. No such differentiation can follow from taking each image or sound independently from every other appearance. All such appearances can only be accorded the same status. It is only a correct understanding of conditionality that allows the identification of the real and the imagined. But it goes further. Anatta, anicca and dukkha cannot be known if appearances are not related to one another. For these are not characteristics of individual appearances, but are characteristics of relationships between appearances. The "being" of the tilakkhana requires the "being" of groups or sequences of appearances. And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the realisation of the tilakkhana that leads to non-attachment? Cheers Herman > Larry > ---------------------- > Larry: What we are attached to is the image of a cow or the sound of a > train. If we investigate a cow or a train we will find an image and a > sound but we won't find a cow or a train. Furthermore, when we find an > image or a sound we can see that it is not a cow or a train. That is a > great opening moment. > > Herman: An opening moment into what? Never, ever will whatever appears > not be a synthetic totality. It will always be possible to analyse > appearances into components. But each analysed component is again an > appearance that is a synthetic totality that hangs together in a certain > way with every other appearance. > Your "opening moment" is unable to differentiate between what is real > and what is imagined, and therefore seems an opening into idealism of a > very nasty kind :-) > #85716 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/5/15 kenhowardau : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: >> > > This discussion is not going the way I would like it. I am out of my > depth in these philosophical matters. And happily so! :-) > I have probably been very unclear, or perhaps you understand me all too well :-) > I just want to hear the Dhamma and consider it. To me, this means > understanding the difference between concepts and realities and then > learning about the realities. > > So, can we bring the discussion back to the difference between > concepts and realities? What else is there that's worth talking about? > Allow me to use different words to try and convey exactly the same meaning as in my last post. If we can just get to a point where I know that you understand what I'm getting at, then at least we can agree to disagree, but as it stands, we are not on the same page. After that I'll be happy to talk about anything you want, including surfing whilst playing the ukelele :-) What do you mean when you talk about the self-evident present moment? Is it whatever reality is appearing at the moment? Or is it the conditions that brought that about? Or both? Or neither? In answering, please consider the following. We look skywards, and see the sun. That appears at the moment. Yet that sun we see is the sun as it was 8 minutes ago. That is the conditionality of that appearance. What is the present moment? Cheers Herman #85717 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:07 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Thanks for the reply: > > A: "So according to you if someone murders and rapes innocent girls, > than it is all due to causes and conditions where there was NO freedom > of volition for the Rapist to not do it. Thus no immorality was > performed (since it couldn't have happened otherwise and no one was > responsible). Heck, there was no one to suffer! So Devadatta isn't > to blame for the schism and for what he did, it wasn't his choice > either....The holocaust, "ah its just causes and conditions. No one > died, no one caused it. It was inevitable"...Kamma is illusion since > it is all impersonal and uncontrollable processess (you cant blame non > existent killer/victim for the choice that wasn't made). The school > shooters? Don't blame 'em. No one died and no one was pulling the > trigger. It was all due to causes and conditions...Yhe right, dream > on. The above things you suggest are worst of the worst. No sensible > person should hold the above fatalism/determinism. Buddha has > rejected this Ajivikism (all Ajivakas go to hell). This is heresy! > Please don't launch the semantic steamroller. Kamma implies volition > that isn't 100% predetermined (otherwise it wouldn't be called > volition, since nothing wills)" > > Scott: I'm not saying anything like this, Alex. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Dear Scott, You are IMPLYING that. I personally believe and see that Buddha has taught MORAL RESPONCIBILITY. While it is true that some things are predetermined such as aging-death-suffering. The choice to pull a trigger or NOT, are up to your citta. Both actions CAN happening, but it is up to YOU to chose either one or the other. After all, Kamma IS VOLITION. Volition implies that it can be changed from akusala to kusala, or vice versa. Otherwise it wouldn't really be volition, will. Best wishes, I hope you and everyone make Kusala choices, Alex #85718 From: han tun Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:32 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, Once again, I thank you very much for your very impressive response. I will study it more carefully taking time to digest it. But on reading through quickly, I find that the sutta references show the results of the actions in this life ripening in the next life or subsequent lives. What I wanted to know is how to explain a person doing unwholesome deeds in this life getting good results in this life, while another person who is doing wholesome deeds in this life getting bad results in this life. I will read your post slowly and see whether it contains what I wanted to know. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #85719 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-mei-2008, om 21:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Rúpas can be classified as produced rúpas, nipphanna rúpas, and > unproduced rúpas, anipphanna rúpas. The sabhåva rúpas are also called > “produced”, whereas the asabhåva rúpas are also called “unproduced”. > =========================== > WHY are they called "unproduced"? Do they exist? Do they arise? Do > they > cease? Are they conditioned? > As far as I know, the Buddha taught only one dhamma that exists but > neither arises nor ceases and is unconditioned. -------- N: Quote from Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 229, 230: . Do not be misled by the term unproduced. These are not concrete matter: space which delimits the groups of rupa, two which are verbal and bodily communication (these are a change in the great elements, not a separate rupa), three of alteration: lightness of rupa, plasticity and wieldiness (not seperate rupas), fourfold characteristics of rupas just discussed. Nina. #85720 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:47 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "...I personally believe and see that Buddha has taught MORAL RESPONCIBILITY. While it is true that some things are predetermined such as aging-death-suffering. The choice to pull a trigger or NOT, are up to your citta. Both actions CAN happening, but it is up to YOU to chose either one or the other." Scott: I'm not speaking of 'predetermination'. This is not the same as conditionality. From a deeply conventional viewpoint, the pulling of or the not pulling of the trigger occurs. There is just no one who pulls or does not pull the trigger. And this is because of anatta. When one speaks of 'your citta', one misunderstands anatta. One is referring to ownership, which leads to fantasies of control. When one thinks 'it is up to you to choose', one misunderstands anatta. When one has a deep anxiety regarding a threat of a unarisen akusala, one lacks calm and the view that one must at all times be in control is sure to follow. The corollary is true, that when one has a deep anxiety regarding the need for unarisen kusala to arise, the view that one can control this is also bound to appear. Kusala and akusala is a real and valid dichotomy. It is due to complex impersonal conditions that dhammas with either quality arise. A: "After all, Kamma IS VOLITION. Volition implies that it can be changed from akusala to kusala, or vice versa. Otherwise it wouldn't really be volition, will." Scott: Kusala and akusala is a valid dichotomy. Action leads to result. Cetanaa is anatta. It is still cetanaa (will) although no one wills. The trigger, as you say, is still pulled or not pulled. Sincerely, Scott. #85721 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 7:44 am Subject: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Thanks for the reply: > > A: "...I personally believe and see that Buddha has taught MORAL > RESPONCIBILITY. While it is true that some things are predetermined > such as aging-death-suffering. The choice to pull a trigger or NOT, are up to your citta. Both actions CAN happening, but it is up to YOU to chose either one or the other." > > Scott: I'm not speaking of 'predetermination'. This is not the same > as conditionality. Please explain If conditionality is 100% sufficient (as opposed to nessesery), then there is NO difference between predetermination and conditionality. From a deeply conventional viewpoint, the pulling > of or the not pulling of the trigger occurs. There is just no one who > pulls or does not pull the trigger. And this is because of anatta. >>> "So there is no killer, and no killed. No need to punish anyone since the crime wasn't commited, and besides it was conditioned! Not my fault!" Yeh Right. I denounce the above heresy and so did the Buddha. Do you see how this can lead a foolish person strait to Hell? #85722 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex, Scott, All In a message dated 5/15/2008 8:45:09 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: There is just no one who > pulls or does not pull the trigger. And this is because of anatta. >>> "So there is no killer, and no killed. No need to punish anyone since the crime wasn't commited, and besides it was conditioned! Not my fault!" Yeh Right. I denounce the above heresy and so did the Buddha. Do you see how this can lead a foolish person strait to Hell? .................................................... TG: A foolish person is not equipped to deal with the higher level teachings of the Buddha concerning anatta and such. Here's an area where "sensibility" plays an important role. Yes, in the wrong hands, that information could have very bad consequences. But there are only conditions at play. There is no person or self in control. It is merely a vast array of conditional forces that are forging the events taking place. And though there is no self, there is a group of conditions that interact with a "sense-of-self" that reap the consequences of actions based on such a view. We throw some "5 aggregate groups" in jail for committing a crime because they are a hazard to the rest of the community. We still make an effort because we are "educated" to know that an effort to do something can succeed given the coming together of the right conditions. We study, contemplate, and practice to try to develop such conditions. "Our" efforts are not in vain, but they are conditioned. Buddhist teachings, Buddhist practice, and this DSG group too, are all conditions that keep "our" minds focused on the things we need to establish for escaping the sufferings caused by attachment and delusion. Studying Buddhism at this level is a rare opportunity because the conditions have come together for us to do so. Who's to say when this will happen again? So keep making an effort, it will succeed eventually. TG #85723 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 10:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > .................................................... > > TG: A foolish person is not equipped to deal with the higher level teachings of the Buddha concerning anatta and such. Here's an area where "sensibility" plays an important role. Yes, in the wrong hands, that information could have very bad consequences. > As long as there is enough Dosa, etc - If a person doesn't exert enough teeth-grinding counter effect - Bad akusala action may arise. Buddha has nowhere stated "You (Conventionally) don't exist", possible to avoid the above implications. Buddha has used word atta 2K+ times. Also, Attadiipa Attadanto Attagutto attagutti attahetu attahita Also he has stressed 4 bases of power, 4 right efforts, etc. > > But there are only conditions at play. There is no person or self in control. >>> Maybe not in FULL control. What about MN19-20 ? > And though there is no self, there is a group of conditions Interestingly though, Buddha has NEVER said that conventional self doesn't exist. > > > We still make an effort because we are "educated" to know that an effort to do something can succeed given the coming together of the right conditions. We study, contemplate, and practice to try to develop such conditions. "Our" efforts are not in vain, but they are conditioned. Buddhist teachings, Buddhist practice, >>> Some deny practice, effort etc... Best wishes, Alex #85724 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex In a message dated 5/15/2008 11:01:21 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi TG, --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , TGrand458@.., TG > ............ .... .... .... .... > > TG: A foolish person is not equipped to deal with the higher level teachings of the Buddha concerning anatta and such. Here's an area where "sensibility" plays an important role. Yes, in the wrong hands, that information could have very bad consequences. > As long as there is enough Dosa, etc - If a person doesn't exert enough teeth-grinding counter effect - Bad akusala action may arise. ............................................... TG: And the reason you know this is due to conditions. :-) Such an effort by another will require "those conditions" ("their" conditions) to know the same. Or the 'conditions' won't make that effort. ....................................................... Buddha has nowhere stated "You (Conventionally) don't exist", possible to avoid the above implications. Buddha has used word atta 2K+ times. Also, Attadiipa Attadanto Attagutto attagutti attahetu attahita Also he has stressed 4 bases of power, 4 right efforts, etc. > > But there are only conditions at play. There is no person or self in control. >>> Maybe not in FULL control. ............................................................. TG: This world, samsara, consists of only conditions. (Nibbana being the absence of conditions.) Words such as "self" are used by the Buddha merely so others can know what he is referring to. The Buddha called it "conventional language." It is the 'comprehensive vision of conditionality' that needs to be inculcated so that the misapprehended "appearance of phenomena" does not lead to delusion. ............................................................. What about MN19-20 ? > And though there is no self, there is a group of conditions Interestingly though, Buddha has NEVER said that conventional self doesn't exist. .......................................................... TG: I'm not aware of the Buddha discussing a "conventional self." The Buddha has clearly stated... "All things are not self." And also... “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self – there is no such possibility.â€? (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 928, The Many Kinds of Elements, Bahudhatuka Sutta #115) .............................................................................. > > > We still make an effort because we are "educated" to know that an effort to do something can succeed given the coming together of the right conditions. We study, contemplate, and practice to try to develop such conditions. "Our" efforts are not in vain, but they are conditioned. Buddhist teachings, Buddhist practice, >>> Some deny practice, effort etc... ........................................................ TG: Not these conditions ("little old me.") LOL TG OUT ......................................................... #85725 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 11:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hi TG and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi Alex > > TG: I'm not aware of the Buddha discussing a "conventional self." The Buddha has clearly stated... "All things are not self." And also... > “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view > could treat anything as self â€" there is no such possibility.â€? > (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 928, The Many Kinds of Elements, Bahudhatuka > Sutta #115) > .................................................................... .......... > Buddha has denied Atta to be in any Khandas. He didn't deny the conventional existence of Sariputta, Devadatta , etc. Alex, Scott, James and so on - conventionally exist. Each of us are different, and with different Kamma. Of course no Dhamma in samsara is the Self. But lets not forget the famous "neti-neti" style of Indian Teaching that Buddha was probably well aware of (He may even have started it). Best wishes, Alex #85726 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 11:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-mei-2008, om 21:53 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I see that you believe in the efficacy of mantas (Skt 'mantra'), Nina. ------- Ha, ha. I like to read your posts which have a touch of humour and are well written. Never mind that we do not agree. Let me see what I can say against your opinions :-)) -------- > Howard: > The kamma (i.e., intention/intentional activity) of the killer is not > the kamma of the victim, but without that intention and action of > the killer, > there would not have been the killing. That makes the killer's > intentions > conditions for the shortened life of the victim. If not, then > 'condition for' > has no meaning, and meaningless terms aren't worth the time or > effort to listen > to or to read. > ---------------------------------------------- > N: *The real cause* is his own kamma. You stress too much other > proximate causes, I think. I was wondering whther you got this from > Nagarjuna and checked, p. 234. No, he speaks about seed, sprout and > fruit. If there is no killer around there will be another proximate > cause such as a calamity of nature, the force of kamma is so powerful. > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > All well and good, but kamma comes to fruition only when requisite > supportive conditions have also occurred. (BTW, whoever wrote the > Expositor must have > had contact with whoever wrote the story of Jonah! ;-) > ----------------------------------------------- > > N: Right understanding of cause and effect is important for siila: one > will not accuse others who do wrong to oneself. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Wrong actions are wrong actions, and courts should not be abolished. > ------------------------------------------ > N: I did not say that, but what about the citta: kusala or akusala? > What is better? ------- > > N: They are not the > real, the fundamental cause of what one has to suffer. > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > They are not the sole condition, but they ARE conditions, and > important > ones at that. > ------------------------------------------- > > Take the > parable of the saw: > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If we have made it to such a point, we will be without hate. That is > fine. > -------------------------------------------- > > Whatever has to happen, > let it happen. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That is NOT fine! First of all. we do not know what "has" to > happen. If > someone were about to attack someone (my wife, for example) and I > could > prevent it but did nothing to prevent it then I should go straight > to hell! If > someone were about to push Lodewijk to the ground - and I pray that > nothing such > should *ever* happen, would you permit it to occur, thinking > "Whatever has > to happen let it happen"? SHOULD that be your response, Nina? Would > that be > "good"? I think your position is absurdly off the mark! > --------------------------------------------- > N: Not off the mark. I speak about things that cannot be prevented, > like sickness and death. Should we not cope with these with kusala > citta, not with dosa? We have different outlooks on life. You will emphasize situations and persons whereas I see the benefit of learning (I say: learning) to understand life as dhammas, conditioned dhammas. I find it complicated to think this way: suppose so and so is doing this to him. You yourself also know that there is not this or that person, only citta, cetasika and rupa. > As Sarah wrote to Han: because we're used to think > about 'events' and 'situations' rather than about momentary good > and bad > intentions which lead to actions and bring results in the way of > momentary > sense experiences.> I feel this is the way to understand kamma and vipaaka. Seeing sees pleasant or unpleasant visible objects. What is the cause? Seeing is vipakacitta, produced by kusala kamma or akusala kamma of the past. Someone else cannot produce 'my' seeing. No need to think of person A or person B. It arises in a sequence of cittas that have a fixed order (citta niyata). There is first the eye-door adverting citta which is not vipaaka, but kiriyacitta. Nobody can change the order of cittas. It is then followed by seeing which is vipaka. ------- Nina. #85727 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 11:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. truth_aerator Hi Nina and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Howard: > > That is NOT fine! First of all. we do not know what "has" to > > happen. If someone were about to attack someone (my wife, for example) and I could prevent it but did nothing to prevent it then I should go straight to hell! If someone were about to push Lodewijk to the ground - and I pray that nothing such should *ever* happen, would you permit it to occur, thinking "Whatever has > > to happen let it happen"? SHOULD that be your response, Nina? Would that be > > "good"? I think your position is absurdly off the mark! > > --------------------------------------------- N: Not off the mark. I speak about things that cannot be prevented, like sickness and death. Should we not cope with these with kusala citta, not with dosa? > What about things that can be prevented? >> I see the benefit of learning (I say: learning) to understand life as dhammas, conditioned dhammas. >>>> Can one understand the tast of food by reading the menu? Is learning vipaka? Is it passive or active? Isn't "learning", opening the book, going to this website, asking questions - ACTIVE ACTIONS BEING DONE? Best wishes, Alex #85728 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:03 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] was: Are the 32 body parts - Rain Gods nilovg Dear Scott, Op 15-mei-2008, om 2:28 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Jaanaati: "...Intrs. to know, to have or gain knowledge, to be > experienced, to be aware, to find out..." > > ~Neyya: "Grd. ~neyya as nt.=knowledge (cp. ~naa.na)..." ------ N: I do not see it as compound, but simply the subjonctive: jaaneyyaatha: you would know, or may know. Same for vihareyyaatha. Yaatha would be at the beginning of a sentence, not as a compound. Upasampajjaa, a gerund. Taking upon oneself. I like this: Scott:< I don't think the Buddha meant to suggest that the Dhamma he taught was to be 'questioned', but that it is to be known, not by conventional means ('by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher'), but through the workings of pa~n~naa.> Good you found the post back. Nina. #85729 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' nilovg Hi Howard (Larry), Op 15-mei-2008, om 13:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There are actually no such things as > aspirin, right? Not "realities," right? Just imagined? Hmm, wonder > whether Nina ever > takes aspirin. I guess not. ;-) > Just having fun, Nina, but with what I think are valid points. ------- N: LOL. Hardly ever. .Valid points, yes, you always come up with these things. You seem to think it weltfremd to see life as nama and rupa. We can come back to this, but I am so busy revising my conditions for print later on. Nina. #85730 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' nilovg Hi Howard (Larry, and Connie), Something to add. Op 15-mei-2008, om 13:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There are actually no such things as > aspirin, right? Not "realities," right? Just imagined? Hmm, wonder > whether Nina ever > takes aspirin. I guess not. ;-) > Just having fun, Nina, but with what I think are valid points. ------- N: LOL. Hardly ever. .Valid points, yes, you always come up with these things. You seem to think it weltfremd to see life as nama and rupa. We can come back to this. As Connie just posted, this shows that understanding nama and rupa goes together with all the good things one can help others with: Nina. #85731 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Alex, it is late for me now. Scott answered very well about study and learning and pa~n~naa, keep on considering it, turn it over in your mind. Nina. Op 15-mei-2008, om 20:49 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Isn't "learning", opening the book, going to this website, asking > questions - ACTIVE ACTIONS BEING DONE? #85732 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/15/2008 2:40:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 14-mei-2008, om 21:53 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I see that you believe in the efficacy of mantas (Skt 'mantra'), Nina. ------- Ha, ha. I like to read your posts which have a touch of humour and are well written. Never mind that we do not agree. Let me see what I can say against your opinions :-)) ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! And I very much appreciate your friendship, whether we agree on things or not! :-) ------------------------------------------------- -------- > Howard: > The kamma (i.e., intention/intentional activity) of the killer is not > the kamma of the victim, but without that intention and action of > the killer, > there would not have been the killing. That makes the killer's > intentions > conditions for the shortened life of the victim. If not, then > 'condition for' > has no meaning, and meaningless terms aren't worth the time or > effort to listen > to or to read. > ---------------------------------------------- > N: *The real cause* is his own kamma. You stress too much other > proximate causes, I think. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I try only to give them adequate weight. Mainly, I oppose giving them a weight of zero. ----------------------------------------------- I was wondering whther you got this from > Nagarjuna and checked, p. 234. No, he speaks about seed, sprout and > fruit. If there is no killer around there will be another proximate > cause such as a calamity of nature, the force of kamma is so powerful. > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > All well and good, but kamma comes to fruition only when requisite > supportive conditions have also occurred. (BTW, whoever wrote the > Expositor must have > had contact with whoever wrote the story of Jonah! ;-) > ----------------------------------------------- > > N: Right understanding of cause and effect is important for siila: one > will not accuse others who do wrong to oneself. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Wrong actions are wrong actions, and courts should not be abolished. > ------------------------------------------ > N: I did not say that, but what about the citta: kusala or akusala? > What is better? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I hardly think we disagree on which is better! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ ------- > > N: They are not the > real, the fundamental cause of what one has to suffer. > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > They are not the sole condition, but they ARE conditions, and > important > ones at that. > ------------------------------------------- > > Take the > parable of the saw: > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If we have made it to such a point, we will be without hate. That is > fine. > -------------------------------------------- > > Whatever has to happen, > let it happen. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That is NOT fine! First of all. we do not know what "has" to > happen. If > someone were about to attack someone (my wife, for example) and I > could > prevent it but did nothing to prevent it then I should go straight > to hell! If > someone were about to push Lodewijk to the ground - and I pray that > nothing such > should *ever* happen, would you permit it to occur, thinking > "Whatever has > to happen let it happen"? SHOULD that be your response, Nina? Would > that be > "good"? I think your position is absurdly off the mark! > --------------------------------------------- > N: Not off the mark. I speak about things that cannot be prevented, > like sickness and death. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Death by aggression can be prevented oftentimes, and attempts to do so should be made. Likewise death from illness. Nina, do you and Lodewijk take no medication??? If you do, what is the point, assuming that sickness and death cannot be prevented? Certainly we cannot make ourselves immune to either illness or death, but we can and do improve our circumstances. And, Nina, you KNOW that! -------------------------------------------------- Should we not cope with these with kusala > citta, not with dosa? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Who suggests dosa? Not I. ------------------------------------------------ We have different outlooks on life. You will emphasize situations and persons whereas I see the benefit of learning (I say: learning) to understand life as dhammas, conditioned dhammas. I find it complicated to think this way: suppose so and so is doing this to him. You yourself also know that there is not this or that person, only citta, cetasika and rupa. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: When the Buddha encountered a wild bull elephant on the path, The Buddha did more than just make the observation "Only khandhas"!! ------------------------------------------------ > As Sarah wrote to Han: > because we're used to think > about 'events' and 'situations' rather than about momentary good > and bad > intentions which lead to actions and bring results in the way of > momentary > sense experiences.> I feel this is the way to understand kamma and vipaaka. Seeing sees pleasant or unpleasant visible objects. What is the cause? Seeing is vipakacitta, produced by kusala kamma or akusala kamma of the past. Someone else cannot produce 'my' seeing. No need to think of person A or person B. It arises in a sequence of cittas that have a fixed order (citta niyata). There is first the eye-door adverting citta which is not vipaaka, but kiriyacitta. Nobody can change the order of cittas. It is then followed by seeing which is vipaka. ------- Nina. ================================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85733 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/15/2008 3:15:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard (Larry), Op 15-mei-2008, om 13:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There are actually no such things as > aspirin, right? Not "realities," right? Just imagined? Hmm, wonder > whether Nina ever > takes aspirin. I guess not. ;-) > Just having fun, Nina, but with what I think are valid points. ------- N: LOL. Hardly ever. .Valid points, yes, you always come up with these things. You seem to think it weltfremd to see life as nama and rupa. ------------------------------------------- Howard: No, I do not. But I do think that proper understanding of namas and rupas should harmonize with the everyday world and enable smooth sailing through it, and not contradict what is surely true. I do not think that understanding of the mentality-materiality nature of reality should be estranged from ordinary, day-to-day life. ----------------------------------------- We can come back to this, but I am so busy revising my conditions for print later on. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Wonderful, Nina. I marvel at your fortitude and productiveness. :-) --------------------------------------- Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85734 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 3:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi Alex, --------------- A: >If there is only the present moment, then where are all the past causes located at? -------------- Everything that exists must exist in the present, mustn't it? If there is the potential for for evil (for example) then that potential must lie in the present citta - even if the present citta is not evil. That is the meaning of latency (the state of being hidden: present or existing, but in an underdeveloped or unexpressed form (Encarta)). ----------------------------------- A: > If only the present moment exists, and only 1 citta at a time counts as being truly in "present moment", then what is it examining during satipatthana?!!!! How can you see lobha for example if it is non existent! ----------------------------------- That's a good question and one that must be answered. You have raised it several times at DSG and I think you have had all the right answers. Obviously, however, you are still not satisfied. But I strongly suggest you persevere. In order to understand conditioned reality it is essential to know that recently fallen-away dhammas can be, and often are, *directly* experienced. ----------------- A: > I mean the panna citta (knowing) cannot arise simulteneously with lobha (known) citta. Either one or the other arises. Nothing can be known without the knowing, but the knowing citta cannot arise together with the known. You'll probably say that current citta takes lobha (or dosa, or moha) citta of the past. But you've just said that past NO LONGER EXISTS thus contradicting either: a) The law that only one citta arises at a given time OR b) existence of past dhammas in the past. ----------------- I must admit it is a tough question - although, personally, I don't find it hard to believe that citta can directly know a dhamma that has fallen away. It is sometimes remarked here at DSG that the entire Dhamma is wonderful and amazing. It is amazing to know that visible object, for example, can arise at the same time as eye-base rupa and as contact-cetasika and all the other conditions necessary for seeing. And yet it is happening right now! How? Why? It's all quite wonderful and amazing. :-) But that doesn't answer your question, and all can I do now is to urge you to keep asking - and to carefully consider the answers. Ken H #85735 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... HI Alex I guess we're going to have to debate this a bit. ;-) In a message dated 5/15/2008 12:06:09 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Buddha has denied Atta to be in any Khandas. He didn't deny the conventional existence of Sariputta, Devadatta , etc. ................................................. NEW TG: The Buddha's denial of self is far more comprehensive than just "a denial regarding the khandhas." All things are not self...period. I'm sorry, I don't know what a "conventional existence" is. The Buddha did say -- that in truth there was no Tathagata. There is no "provisional self." There is no self of any kind. There was an interaction of conditions that was referred to as Sariputta, Devadatta, etc. But "it," was just an interaction of conditions. The same goes for us. ............................................................ Alex, Scott, James and so on - conventionally exist. Each of us are different, and with different Kamma. ............................................................. NEW TG: The conditions of the "folks" you named are all different, so the interactions regarding them all are taking place in different ways. But the "principles" of those conditions are the same...and that is -- conditioned, impermanent, afflicted, nonself. There is different kamma due to different conditional interactions. ....................................................................... Of course no Dhamma in samsara is the Self. ............................................................... NEW TG: Whatever this means, I think I agree with it. LOL .................................................................... But lets not forget the famous "neti-neti" style of Indian Teaching that Buddha was probably well aware of (He may even have started it). ...................................................................... NEW TG: Forget it? ... I don't even know what it is. LOL TG OUT Best wishes, Alex #85736 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' truth_aerator Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: Hi Alex, Everything that exists must exist in the present, mustn't it? >>> > If there is the potential for for evil (for example) then that potential must lie in the present citta - even if the present citta is not evil. >>> How can not evil citta have a potential for evil? >> That is the meaning of latency (the state of being hidden: present or existing, but in an underdeveloped or unexpressed form > So every citta that only exists NOW, has latencies from infinite past? Including latency for delusion? In order to understand conditioned reality it is essential to know that recently fallen-away dhammas can be, and often are, *directly* experienced. > Furthermore you've said: "Everything that exists must exist in the present, mustn't it?" . But the recently fallen-away dhamma isn't in the present, thus non existence. How can something NON existent be *directly* percieved? > ----------------- > A: > I mean the panna citta (knowing) cannot arise simulteneously with > lobha (known) citta. Either one or the other arises. Nothing can be > known without the knowing, but the knowing citta cannot arise > together with the known. > > You'll probably say that current citta takes lobha (or dosa, or moha) > citta of the past. But you've just said that past NO LONGER EXISTS > thus contradicting either: > a) The law that only one citta arises at a given time > OR > b) existence of past dhammas in the past. > ----------------- > > I must admit it is a tough question - although, personally, I don't > find it hard to believe that citta can directly know a dhamma that > has fallen away. >>>> I do find it hard to believe how can something non existent be the object of present citta. >> It is sometimes remarked here at DSG that the entire Dhamma is wonderful and amazing. >>> Yeh, it is beyond logic, subtle, hard to see, to be understood and seen only by those whose IQ > 200. Best wishes, Alex #85737 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/15/2008 7:16:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: I'm sorry, I don't know what a "conventional existence" is. The Buddha did say -- that in truth there was no Tathagata. There is no "provisional self." There is no self of any kind. There was an interaction of conditions that was referred to as Sariputta, Devadatta, etc. But "it," was just an interaction of conditions. The same goes for us. ============================== TG, I very much like the phrase 'just an interaction of conditions'! It actually points to the same thing that I point to when I use the term 'aggregation', but it is much less prone to reification. Very good! :-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85738 From: "Alex" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 4:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > HI Alex > In a message dated 5/15/2008 12:06:09 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Buddha has denied Atta to be in any Khandas. He didn't deny the > conventional existence of Sariputta, Devadatta , etc. > ................................................. > > > NEW TG: The Buddha's denial of self is far more comprehensive than just "a denial regarding the khandhas." All things are not self...period. > True, all dhammas are anatta. > > I'm sorry, I don't know what a "conventional existence" is. The Buddha did > say -- that in truth there was no Tathagata. There is no "provisional self." There is no self of any kind. There was an interaction of conditions that was referred to as Sariputta, Devadatta, etc. But "it," was just an > interaction of conditions. The same goes for us. > But the different set of conditions are separate from each other owing to their difference. "Your" kamma is Your kamma. "Mine" is "mine". > ............................................................ Alex, Scott, James and so on - conventionally exist. Each of us are different, and with different Kamma. > ............................................................. > > > NEW TG: The conditions of the "folks" you named are all different, so the interactions regarding them all are taking place in different ways. >>> So different identities... >>> But the "principles" of those conditions are the same...and that is -- conditioned, impermanent, afflicted, nonself. > ................................................................... ... True, all dhammas are anatta. > > > But lets not forget the famous "neti-neti" style of Indian Teaching that Buddha was probably well aware of (He may even have started it). > > .................................................................... .. > > > NEW TG: Forget it? ... I don't even know what it is. LOL > > > TG OUT > It is something like "not this, not that". Sometimes when positive descriptions fail, one uses negative ones. Best wishes, Alex #85739 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings egberdina Hi colette, 2008/5/13 colette : > Good Day Herman, > > > With that said my consciousness, at this point, has been somewhat > conditioned, primed, and I come to you laughing all the way. Why I > laugh is that you spoke of "...it is living stuff"! (outrageously > loud laughter, a deep throaty chuckle. Those are stage directions, I > don't know how they do it in the theater so I just put it in). Does > this mean, when you say that it is "real" it is "living stuff" does > this mean that I am allowed to use the terminology: MASTER OF > REALITY? Black Sabbath would be interested knowing that I have > achieved such an honor, no? > You are allowed to call yourself anything you want :-) But I was just pointing to the difference between those who know lots of stuff as facts, trivia wizards if you like, and those whose lives are a living reflection of what they know. > Yea, it blows me away too, sometimes, when things simply fall into > place. My breadth of knowledge and experience is highly limited and > scewed since I cannot get a job, people refuse to offer gainful > employment to me since I have not accepted THE PATH OF THE MASSES, > the easiest path to money and the addiction of/to money. It's a real bummer. The reality is that if you want something that you can only get from others eg money, you have to either take it by force or deception, or reach agreement as to how you may share in the wealth of others. Last year, I had to apply for a job because there was not enough money coming in from my own business any more. I wasn't prepared to become a beggar, I wanted to maintain the life style I had, so I knew of no other option but to go work for a boss. It took quite a bit of adjustment, to no longer be at my own beck and call. I don't doubt that it will be possible for you to get work somewhere, but it will be nigh on impossible if you will only work with others on your own terms. You're going to have to ditch that MASTER OF REALITY tag, I'm afraid :-) By simply > giving it conscious recognition of the actuality of what is you offer > such a lovely gift to me and something that will resonate for quite > some time now that I have the approval of at least one person in our > community. I am really very pleased to hear this, There aren't too many people who do not want to be loved or approved by their peers. You're part of the gang, colette. > > Yes, thank you for offering what you can to me for aid in alleviating > some of the suffering and torment I experience every day. I would > like to have a deeper relationship on the net than simply forums > where I speak, almost as if downward toward lower people as if I were > some kind of authority on any subject let alone the complexity of > myself. > I'd be very interested to be part of that. You have mentioned April 1978 as a pivotal time on a number of occasions. If it is something you want to share, what happened? > May you have a wonderful day! > You too, colette Cheers Herman #85740 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The problem of "Bare mindfulness" or "Just observe" . egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/15 : > > For whatever value you may accord it, my take on the term 'ultimate > realities' is that this term names those phenomena that, among all "realities" > (i.e., experienced, not just imagined. phenomena), are the ones that do not > have other phenomena as components. (Herman, I believe, and perhaps you as well, > disbelieve in such not-further-decomposable phenomena.) A slight correction. What I believe is that it is in principle unknowable that something is not further decomposable. Otherwise, I think the discussion is great :-) Cheers Herman #85741 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 7:23 pm Subject: Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "Please explain. If conditionality is 100% sufficient (as opposed to nessesery), then there is NO difference between predetermination and conditionality. Scott: Please consider the set of 24 conditions to be a set of sufficient conditions. Consider the actual combination of conditions that are in place as cause for a certain effect to be the necessary [set of sufficient] conditions for that 'event'. Sincerely, Scott. #85742 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 8:08 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,261-263 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 261. 6. 'Which for which becomes condition' means that here the exposition should be known according to what kind of clinging is a condition for what [kind of becoming]. But what is condition for what here? Any kind is a condition for any kind. For the ordinary man is like a madman, and without considering 'Is this right or not?', and aspiring by means of any of the kinds of clinging to any of the kinds of becoming, he performs any of the kinds of kamma. Therefore when some say that the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming do not come about through rite-and-ritual clinging, that should not be accepted: what should be accepted is that all kinds come about through all kinds. 262. For example, someone thinks in accordance with hearsay or [false] view that sense desires come to be fulfilled in the human world among the great warrior (khattiya) families, etc., and in the six divine worlds of the sense sphere. Misled by listening to wrong doctrine, etc., and imagining that 'by this kamma sense desires will come to be fulfilled', he performs for the purpose of attaining them acts of bodily misconduct, etc., through sense-desire clinging. By fulfilling such misconduct he is reborn in the states of loss. Or he performs acts of bodily misconduct, etc., aspiring to sense desires visible here and now and protecting those he has already acquired. By fulfilling such misconduct he is reborn in the states of loss. The kamma that is the cause of rebirth there is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But percipient becoming and five-constituent becoming are included in that, too. 263. Another, however, whose knowledge has been intensified by listening to good Dhamma and so on, imagines that 'by this kind of kamma sense desires will come to be fulfilled'. He performs acts of bodily good conduct, etc., through sense-desire clinging. By fulfilling such bodily good conduct he is reborn among deities or human beings. The kamma that is the cause of his rebirth there is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But percipient becoming and five-constituent becoming are included in that, too. So sense-desire clinging is a condition for sense-desire becoming with its analysis and its synthesis. ------------------------- 261. ya.m yassa paccayo cevaati ya~ncettha upaadaana.m yassa paccayo hoti, tatopi vi~n~naatabbo vinicchayoti attho. ki.m panettha kassa paccayo hoti? ya.mki~nci yassa kassaci paccayo hotiyeva. ummattako viya hi puthujjano. so ida.m yutta.m ida.m ayuttanti avicaaretvaa yassa kassaci upaadaanassa vasena ya.mki~nci bhava.m patthetvaa ya.mki~nci kamma.m karotiyeva. tasmaa yadekacce siilabbatupaadaanena ruupaaruupabhavaa na hontiiti vadanti, ta.m na gahetabba.m. sabbena pana sabbo hotiiti gahetabba.m. 262. seyyathida.m -- idhekacco anussavavasena vaa di.t.thaanusaarena vaa ``kaamaa naamete manussaloke ceva khattiyamahaasaalakulaadiisu, cha kaamaavacaradevaloke ca samiddhaa''ti cintetvaa tesa.m adhigamattha.m asaddhammassavanaadiihi va~ncito ``iminaa kammena kaamaa sampajjantii´´ti ma~n~namaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayaduccaritaadiinipi karoti, so duccaritapaaripuuriyaa apaaye upapajjati. sandi.t.thike vaa pana kaame patthayamaano pa.tiladdhe ca gopayamaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayaduccaritaadiini karoti, so duccaritapaaripuuriyaa apaaye upapajjati. tatraassa upapattihetubhuuta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. kammaabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. sa~n~naabhavapa~ncavokaarabhavaa pana tadantogadhaa eva. 263. aparo pana saddhammassavanaadiihi upabruuhita~naa.no ``iminaa kammena kaamaa sampajjantii''ti ma~n~namaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayasucaritaadiini karoti. so sucaritapaaripuuriyaa devesu vaa manussesu vaa upapajjati. tatraassa upapattihetubhuuta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. kammaabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. sa~n~naabhavapa~ncavokaarabhavaa pana tadantogadhaa eva. iti kaamupaadaana.m sappabhedassa saantogadhassa kaamabhavassa paccayo hoti. #85743 From: "colette" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings ksheri3 Hi Herman, A Beautiful reply! Does > > this mean, when you say that it is "real" it is "living stuff" does > > this mean that I am allowed to use the terminology: MASTER OF > > REALITY? Black Sabbath would be interested knowing that I have > > achieved such an honor, no? > > > colette: c'mon, I gave up that Black Sabbath, ala Ozzy Osborne,shit that came from my 1970s, a long time ago. I was considering my options for applying a more current Black Sabbath song, a song from 1980 when I was in San Diego just starting my investigations in magik: "Holy and bright. Blessed by the night" but it will raise the potential of a negative or "Satanic" consciousness within the community at large. <...> ------------------------------------- > You are allowed to call yourself anything you want :-) But I was just > pointing to the difference between those who know lots of stuff as > facts, trivia wizards if you like, and those whose lives are a living > reflection of what they know. > colette: WHAT A BEAUTIFUL THING TO SAY! THANK YOU! CAN YOU GET AN IDEA OF WHAT I'M DOING, NOW, IN LEARNING DGOZCHEN AND MAHAMUDRA, et al? Sometimes, however, I can't help but get this strange feeling that "it's all been planned out" but that leads to the paranoia of the conspiracy theory, et al. Not the thing to do when performing Yogacara, etc. ------------------------------------------------ > It's a real bummer. The reality is that if you want something that you > can only get from others eg money, you have to either take it by force > or deception, or reach agreement as to how you may share in the wealth > of others. Last year, I had to apply for a job because there was not > enough money coming in from my own business any more. I wasn't > prepared to become a beggar, colette: I have never been prepared nor able to beg for money. I simply cannot do it. All the bumbs that I rationalized to while standing in line at the soup kitchens or when I stand in line at the food pantries, they cannot understand how I can NOT BEG, NOT DEVOTE MY TIME TO CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, ETC. They simply call me a mental midgit and mock me further than the mocking I receive from the middle- class for not subscribing to their hallucinations. ------------------------------------ I wanted to maintain the life style I > had, so I knew of no other option but to go work for a boss. colette: I've worked for bosses before, office manager do everything at a computer software developer, very small developer, then UPS which was far too strenuous to begin doing again at my age and health, but in that position, the Union Rep. gave me such support over the way the UPS management team was abusing me and my willingness to get things done. It took > quite a bit of adjustment, to no longer be at my own beck and call. I > don't doubt that it will be possible for you to get work somewhere, > but it will be nigh on impossible if you will only work with others on > your own terms. colette: good heavens no. I have no terms. Just play fair. Don't take advantage of me and don't try to make any more of a mockery of me, however, the drug of EGO is far too strong and most middle-class schmucks fall victim to the gratification they receive by humilliating and dehumanizing another human being. -------------------- > By simply > > giving it conscious recognition of the actuality of what is you offer > > such a lovely gift to me and something that will resonate for quite > > some time now that I have the approval of at least one person in our > > community. > > I am really very pleased to hear this, There aren't too many people > who do not want to be loved or approved by their peers. You're part of > the gang, colette. > colette: thanks for the approval. I always knew that I was part of the gang I am simply NOT UNDER THE STANDARD NORMAL CURVE. I've used/applied that visualization since the late 1980s: the Standard Normal Curve depicts groups of people, statistics, and I am an OUTLIER. <....> ---------------------------------- > > > > Yes, thank you for offering what you can to me for aid in alleviating > > some of the suffering and torment I experience every day. I would > > like to have a deeper relationship on the net than simply forums > > where I speak, almost as if downward toward lower people as if I were > > some kind of authority on any subject let alone the complexity of > > myself. > > > > I'd be very interested to be part of that. You have mentioned April > 1978 as a pivotal time on a number of occasions. If it is something > you want to share, what happened? colette: I rolled Daddy's Caddy end over end three times, was thrown some 370 feet from the vehicle, landed on my head, died on the spot, the EMTs brought me back, coma for a week, recooperation for about three to four years after. It was tough. And I was a Communications & Intelligence Specialist in 1980-mid81 in the USN. Honorably discharged of course. Thanks for the beautiful and kind reply! toodles, colette #85744 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu May 15, 2008 8:07 pm Subject: Silenced! bhikkhu0 Daily Words of the Buddha for 16 May 2008 The Blessed Buddha once said: KÄ?yamunim vÄ?cÄ?munim, manomunimanÄ?savam, munim moneyyasampannam. Ä€hu ninhÄ?tapÄ?pakam. Silenced in body, silenced in speech, silenced in mind, without defilement, blessed with silence is the sage. He is truly washed of all evil. Itivuttaka 3.67 The Daily Words of the Buddha is a service of Pariyatti. http://www.pariyatti.org More on Mental Tranquillity: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Tranquillity_Passaddhi.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Tranquillity.htm Have a nice calm day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) <....> #85745 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu May 15, 2008 5:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex Just a few observations... In a message dated 5/15/2008 5:26:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Sariputta, Devadatta, etc. But "it," was just an > interaction of conditions. The same goes for us. > But the different set of conditions are separate from each other owing to their difference. "Your" kamma is Your kamma. "Mine" is "mine". ........................................................ NEWER TG: The kamma doesn't belong to me, it belongs to conditions falsely thought to be me. The delusion of "me" keeps the kamma flowing. Therefore, I (I = conventional language here) try to retrain thoughts to see just conditions. Conditions appears as features (some of which some in this group like to call "realities.") But I consider them "empty relativities" ... and these 'mere fleeting features,' are all caused by something else. None of them "stands on their own" a wit. "Ultimate" they may be ... ultimate fakers, that is. .............................................................................. ..... > ............ .... .... .... .... .... Alex, Scott, James and so on - conventionally exist. Each of us are different, and with different Kamma. > ............ .... .... .... .... .... > > > NEW TG: The conditions of the "folks" you named are all different, so the interactions regarding them all are taking place in different ways. >>> So different identities..S ............................................................ NEWER TG: The root of the word "identity" is "entity." So normally, when we "identify" we are (deludedly) identifying "entities." Which means the mind is seeing them as "self same things." Which is self-view of course. This applies not only to the compositions we might identify as "you or "me," but also to elements or aggregates. This is why I am against the idea that the mere breakdown into elements or aggregates does a darn thing to get rid of self-view... not without understanding conditionality principles and the implications thereof. ................................................................. >>> But the "principles" of those conditions are the same...and that is -- conditioned, impermanent, afflicted, nonself. > ............ .... .... .... .... .... .... ... True, all dhammas are anatta. > > > But lets not forget the famous "neti-neti" style of Indian Teaching that Buddha was probably well aware of (He may even have started it). > > ............ .... .... .... .... .... .... .. > > > NEW TG: Forget it? ... I don't even know what it is. LOL > > > TG OUT > It is something like "not this, not that". Sometimes when positive descriptions fail, one uses negative ones. ............................................. NEWER TG: Ahhhh. Interesting. Thanks. TG OUT #85746 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 10:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han (& sutta experts!), --- On Thu, 15/5/08, han tun wrote: >What I wanted to know is how to explain a person doing unwholesome deeds in this life getting good results in this life, while another person who is doing wholesome deeds in this life getting bad results in this life. ... S: I think there are many examples.....kusala vipaka, akusala vipaka, kusala, akusala all the time. Think of Devadatta or Anathapindika. For example, in Anathapindika's case, the Buddha encouraged him when he had lost all his wealth and felt disappointed that he couldn't provide more than broken rice to the bhikkhus anymore in the Velaama Sutta: http://www.vimokkha.com/velama.htm As you know, it ends with the reminder about the greatest value being that of understanding impermanence (and thereby the other characteristics of all dhammas too). This is so much more precious than all other offerings. Through the development of right understanding of impermanent dhammas, kusala and akusala vipaka are understood all the more for what they are - impermanent results of past kamma. Sutta experts may be able to provide further examples. Metta, Sarah ======== #85747 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 11:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How can panna investigate non-existent past cittas? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Alex wrote: > > A) It is possible to see one's citta. > .... > S: There is never "one's citta". Cittas don't belong to anyone. Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta if there are the> right conditions for this! > .... A: By one's citta I meant that YOUR stream of cittas is different from mine. Just like oneself is the owner of Kamma, same is here. .... S: In this discussion about the understanding of cittas, it's important to appreciate that at the moment of such understanding, there's no idea of 'mine' or 'yours' with regard to seeing, hearing or whatever citta is known. ..... > > B) The seen state of citta cannot simulteneously arise with seeing > citta as 2 cittas cannot arise together. > ... > S: Correct. > ... A: Which leads to strange conclussion -> .... S: It depends how it's read -> ... > > c) However what is (lobha or dosa for example) cognized by the > > Citta, MUST exist. But since the seen citta (akusala or kusala) citta > > isn't found in the present - then it exists and is real in another > > non-present moment of time. In this case in the past. > .... > S: The lobha or dosa (in your example) are understood by panna immediately > after they have arisen. The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is > presently apparent. It is thus said to be the *present* object. > .... A:But how can something which is in the past (and thus doesn't exist, since only present exists) be "presently apparent" ? ... S: Read what I wrote again. I wrote: "The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is presently apparent". In other words, the lobha or dosa itself has fallen away, but in the next (rapidly following) process, its characteristic appears as a present object. When there's the understanding and awareness of a characteristic of a dhamma, there's no doubt or wanting to know whether in fact the citta which appears now has just fallen away. Such wondering can be a hindrance to understanding, I think. The most important thing is to understand that characteristic which appears as a reality, as not self. Also, it's very important to appreciate that it is experienced by a citta and cetasikas, not you or me and that any moment of thinking or doubt at this moment is anatta too. ... A: The only way out is a) Admit two simulteneous citta - one citta sees the 2nd citta which may be either kusala or akusala IMMEADEATELY cooccuring at EXACT moment of time. b) Admit the existence of citta in the past which is the object of present citta. ... S: Sounds like the debates in the Kathavatthu. Your reasoning is faulty!See above on this subtle point. Also, see past saved posts on: "Navattabba (Not so Classifiable) objects" in U.P. in the files. ... A: You can't see a characteristic of something presently non existent! ... S: Can you view a perfect photocopy of a page of text? ... > > D) We can see the truths about the arisen state of citta > > example: > > i) Anger or greed are unskillful (akusala) > > ii) Akusala leads to suffering > > iii) Akusala should be removed > > iv) Akusala leads to future suffering > > > > The above i-iv involve seeing the future in some way or another. > ... > S: No. At the moment of directly understanding anger, it's unskilful > nature is apparent. It is an aspect of the characteristic of anger. It all depends on the depth of understanding of a dhamma what is known about its *present* characteristic. > ... A: But during Satipatthana, or panna investigating the citta - the investigated citta cannot occur at EXACTLY THE PRESENT MOMENT with the investigating citta. One is supposed to be mindful of presently arisen phenomenon. But the law states that two cittas (investigating & investigated) cannot occur at once. One of them, investigated citta, has to preceed the investigating. But when investigating citta arises, investigated doesn't exist. So what is there to be aware off? ... S: Its characteristic. Think of the reviewing consciousness which follows magga and phala cittas (during enlightenment). The reviewing cittas precisely know the characteristics of the cittas just arisen and the object (nibbana), for example. ... A: Mere memory? But even then, the mere memory is a citta that is investigated which cannot occur with investigating citta. ... S: Not mere memory, not a concept as object. ... > > Or to simplify the above: All seeing of presently arisen dhammas > > require to see the past state of mind (citta). > ... > S: No, I wouldn't say this. ... A: Then how can presently arisen panna examine itself for akusala that cannot arise simulteneously? How can citta be aware of unwholesome states that are past and gone? ... S: Don't underestimate what panna can know! I look forward to hearing from you when you've considered and checked those messages. I hope the table in CMA is clear now too? Metta, Sarah ========= #85748 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 15, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Hi TG, --- On Fri, 9/5/08, TGrand458@... wrote: TG: Thanks for taking my comments with good nature. :-) ... S: :-) ... TG: >When > asked directly, the Buddha said that feeling, perception, mental > formations, and > consciousness were not "separate things, but were merely separated for > purposes of analysis. ... S: >They cannot be separated in the sense that they cannot arise without the support of the other nama khandhas. ... >NEW TG: That WAS NOT the question or the concern in the Sutta. Your comment makes no sense in context to my point or the Suttas point. Sorry I don't have a reference handy, but I think maybe you would already be familiar with it, as it so intimately pertains to your viewpoint... .in opposition perhaps. .... NEW S: MN 43, Mahaavedalla Sutta (Nanamoli/Bodhi transl): "Feeling, perception, and consciousness, friend - are these states conjoined or disjoined?....." "Feeling, perception, and consciousness, friend - these states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is impossible to separate each of these states from the others in order to describe the difference between them. For what one feels, that one perceives, and what one perceives, that one cognizes......." note: "MA: Wisdom has been excluded from this exchange because the intention is to show only the states that are conjoined on every occasion of consciousness." ... NEW S: Feeling, perception and so on are separate realities with particular characteristics. However, it is impossible to separate them in the sense that they always arise together with every moment of consciousness. However, only one reality is ever the *object* of consciousness. This is why the Buddha taught about knowing feeling, perception and so on. ... TG:>Clarifying.. .the Sutta referred solely to feeling, perception, mental-formations, and consciousness. ..and whether they were actually separate from each other or ONLY separated for purposes of analysis. ... NEW S: See above. ... >S: The thinking itself (cittas and cetasikas) are conditioned, impermanent etc. The idea/construct of 'person' or the idea/construct of 'elements' is not - by the definition you give, it is just a construct. ... ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... . >NEW TG: 1) A mental "construct-tion" IS the mentality which you label as cittas and cetasikas... just different labels. 2) The "idea" of person is also conditioned, impermanent, afflicted, and nonself. Concepts are also conditions.. .conditionally arisen, etc. Better check out this Sutta where conceptual Views are analyzed as conditioned, impermanent, suffering... .. >AN 10.93 Ditthi Sutta Views Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu <....> >"As for the venerable one who says, 'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless. This is the sort of view I have,' his view arises from his own inappropriate attention or in dependence on the words of another. Now this view has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated. Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. ..... .... NEW S: The view (wrong thinking with di.t.thi) is conditioned, impermanent and so on, arising on account of unwise attention. The idea itself "the cosmos is eternal" is however just an idea, a mentally constructed fantasy. "The cosmos...." is not real, it's not conditioned and it's not impermanent. Only the thinking about it is. This is why thinking can be the object of right understanding, ditthi can be the object of right understanding, but "the cosmos...." can never be. I hope this clarifies my point. Metta, Sarah p.s Yahoo has changed a setting, so now when I (and others, I imagine) use yahoo accounts to reply, we have just the same problem you do:-( Apologies to all for any lack of clarity with regard to old and new comments in this regard. ========= #85749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 12:28 am Subject: Pali, to Scott. nilovg Dear Scott, Warder Ch 14, p. 86: bhaveyya: optative: should, would, may. Nina. #85750 From: han tun Date: Fri May 16, 2008 12:31 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for giving the examples of Anaathapindika and Velaama. Anaathapindika was noted for his generosity. He spent eighteen crores on the purchase of Jetavana and a like sum on the construction of the vihaara; another eighteen crores were spent in the festival of dedication. He fed one hundred monks in his house daily in addition to meals provided for guests, people of the village, invalids, etc. Five hundred seats were always ready in his house for any guests who might come. Anaathapindika went regularly to see the Buddha twice or three times a day, and always taking with him alms for the young novices. And yet, as you said, he had lost all his wealth and felt disappointed that he couldn't provide more than broken rice to the bhikkhus. But why did he become poor? It was said that it was because of his selfless generosity that he was gradually reduced to poverty. But he continued his gifts even when he had only bird-seed and sour gruel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anathapindika So despite his wholesome deeds in his life, he had bad results in his life by becoming poor, and the reason for his becoming poor was due to his own selfless generosity. Fine! But how would you explain that in terms of the workings of kamma? And what bad results did Velaama get in his life? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #85751 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/16/2008 12:41:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: NEWER TG: The root of the word "identity" is "entity." ========================= Mmm, maybe not. I think it comes from the Latin 'idem', meaning "same". The dictionary says it may be a contraction of 'idem et idem' ("same and same." indicating unchanging nature). The word 'entity' comes from the Latin 'ens' (meaning "being," and related to 'esse', the verb meaning "to be"). With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85752 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 16, 2008 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Fri, 16/5/08, han tun wrote: H:>Anaathapindika was noted for his generosity. <....> >And yet, as you said, he had lost all his wealth and felt disappointed that he couldn't provide more than broken rice to the bhikkhus. But why did he become poor? >It was said that it was because of his selfless generosity that he was gradually reduced to poverty. But he continued his gifts even when he had only bird-seed and sour gruel http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Anathapindika >So despite his wholesome deeds in his life, he had bad results in his life by becoming poor, and the reason for his becoming poor was due to his own selfless generosity. Fine! .... S: That is the conventional explanation. In absolute terms, the vipaka in this case would be the moments of experiencing undesirable objects through the senses, such as painful bodily feeling. The cause of such akusala vipaka is kamma (and accumulations). Sometimes a rich person may experience more akusala vipaka than a poor person of course. We always think about the situations, the stories and conventionally say this or that one is a result of kamma, but as you know, we need to be very precise. A rich man may eat too much and have many health problems and die young, for example. H:>But how would you explain that in terms of the workings of kamma? ... S: I'd just say that Anathapindika had accumulations for great generosity and wisdom and those accumulations and the great kamma would being their results in due course. (He was reborn in Tusita heaven for a start). He also had the great opportunities to listen to the Buddha and disciples such as Sariputta. Of course there will always be gain and loss in this life and no one can prevent past kamma bringing its results. Even the Buddha had to endure the results of past akusala kamma. .... H> And what bad results did Velaama get in his life? ... S: I don't know, but we can be sure that any bad results, i.e akusala vipaka, were the result of past kamma. It's the same for us all. Again we are reminded in the Velaama sutta of the greatest value in just a finger-snap of insight. Now is the time to develop right understanding. Please spell out your concerns if I've still not addressed them. I always find it helpful to discuss the Dhamma with you (like Phil and all the others!) Metta, Sarah =========== #85753 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:36 am Subject: Metta, Ch 4, no 9. nilovg Dear friends, The Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics, the first book of the Abhidhamma, §1340) refers to wholesome qualities such as plasticity, gentleness, smoothness, pliancy, and humbleness of heart. The commentary to this passage (Atthasåliní II, Book III, 395) describes humbleness of heart as follows: “by the absence of conceit this person’s heart is humble; the state of such a person is humbleness of heart.” Softness, gentleness, pliancy and humbleness of heart, these qualities are characteristics of mettå. Såriputta was an example of humility. He compared himself with a dust rag, an old rag without any value. He had no arrogance, he was not conceited about it that he was one of the foremost disciples. Even when others behaved badly towards him through body or speech he was unaffected by it since he was an arahat. He had eradicated conceit and all the other defilements and thus he was of perfect gentleness and humility. Can we have true humility? When there is unwholesomeness in our actions and speech we should be mindful of the characteristic of citta at such moments. We can find out that we are full of defilements and that these condition our behaviour and speech. When there is sincere humility there cannot be unwholesome speech. Our behaviour and our speech reflect our citta: kusala citta or akusala citta. Is there mettå or is there conceit? If we want to strive earnestly for the eradication of defilements we should be mindful of the different cittas. Then we will notice what our normal behaviour and speech is in our daily life. We will know when they are motivated by akusala citta and when by kusala citta. ****** Nina. #85754 From: han tun Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:46 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, I accept your explanations with gratitude. # The present bad results are the results of past kamma. Even the Buddha had to endure the results of past akusala kamma. # Anaathapindika had accumulations for great generosity and wisdom and those accumulations and the great kamma would bring their results in due course. (He was reborn in Tusita heaven for a start) -------------------- Now, I will be grateful if you would kindly take up my first question on how to explain, in terms of the workings of kamma, a person doing unwholesome deeds in this life but getting good results in this life. You asked me to spell out my concerns if you have still not addressed them. Sarah, I do not have any concerns on any issue. You have kindly started this discussion on-line for the benefit of many of us, and I just follow your discussions. I am glad that you always find it helpful to discuss the Dhamma with me and Phil and all the others. I also find it enjoyable and profitable to have discussions with you and Jon. It is solely for this reason that I participated in some of the discussions at the Foundation. Respectfully, Han #85755 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thank you for your kind feedback. --- On Fri, 16/5/08, han tun wrote: H: >Now, I will be grateful if you would kindly take up my first question on how to explain, in terms of the workings of kamma, a person doing unwholesome deeds in this life but getting good results in this life. ... S: I referred to Devadatta as an example in passing. In spite of his atrocious deeds, he had a large following, was praised by many, encountered the Buddha and other disciples and so on. As we know, his deeds brought their results however at the time of being swallowed up by the earth and reborn in the Avici hell. I also recall, however, that the Buddha had ordained him so that it would be a condition at the last moments of life for him to take refuge in the Buddha. We know that eventually he became a pacceka Buddha. Who but a Buddha would understand all the intricacies of kamma? In one of the Milinda panha dilemmas, it was asked why Devadatta who was also wicked in many past lives (given in the Jataka stories) have had such great power so often, sometimes more than that of the bodhisatta. Nagasena's reply was along the lines that he had also performed many good actions, taking care of the poor and so on. Again, I'd like to stress that there are results of kusala and akusala kamma all day long. What's important is the understanding which develops regardless. Can we even know at this moment whether the seeing or the hearing is the result of kusala or akusala kamma? I don't think so. Please fire back if I still haven't answered your question:-). Also, I'm sure you have more good examples yourself which you might care to share:-)). Metta, Sarah ========= #85756 From: "connie" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:36 am Subject: Perfections Corner (154) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: We read in the Khuddhaka Nikaaya, Cuulaniddesa, "Ajita's Questions": " 'Kusalo sabbadhammaana.m', means: he is skilful in all dhammas. He knows that conditioned dhammas are impermanent, that conditioned dhammas are dukkha and that all dhammas are anattaa." In order to directly understand and penetrate the truth we should study the Dhamma in all details, so that we come to know the precise meaning of the term "all conditioned realities", sa'nkhaara dhammas. This includes everything that appears right now, and this is impermanent, it arises and falls away. The dhammas which arise and fall away are dukkha and all dhammas are anattaa, non-self. We read further on about different ways in which realities are taught: "Again, he is skilful in the khandhas (aggregates), the dhaatus (elements), the aayatanas (bases), the pa.ticcasamuppaada (dependent origination), satipa.t.thaana, the sammaa-padhaanas (four right efforts), the indriyas (faculties), the balas (powers), the factors of enlightenment, the path, the fruit, nibbaana. This means, he is in this way skilful in all dhammas *1 ." *1 The aayatanas, bases are: the five sense bases, mind-base, including all cittas, the five sense objects, and dhammaayatana including the realities of cetasikas, subtle ruupas and nibbaana. The four right efforts, sammaa-padhaanas, are: the effort of avoiding akusala, of overcoming akusala, of developing kusala and of maintaining kusala. The five faculties, indriyas are: confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. The five powers, balas, are the same realities as the five spiritual faculties, indriyas, but when the indriyas have been developed so that they are unshakable by their opposites, they have become powers. The seven factors of enlightenment are: sati, investigation of the Dhamma (dhamma-vicaya), energy (viriya), rapture (piiti), tranquillity (passaddhi), concentration (samaadhi) and equanimity (upekkhaa). The Dependent Origination teaches the conditionality of naama and ruupa in the cycle of birth and death. The five khandhas of ruupas, feelings, remembrance, formations and consciousness are present at this very moment. The elements, the aayatanas (bases), the dependent origination, refer to dhammas which are very intricate and arise in interdependence on one another. The four right efforts, the faculties and the powers are related to pa~n~naa. There must be right effort with pa~n~naa so that the characteristics which are appearing can be understood. The person who is skilful in all dhammas is, as we read, skilful in the factors of enlightenment which pertain to the realization of the four noble Truths, the magga-citta, path-consciousness, which attains enlightenment and the phala-citta, fruition-consciousness, which is the result of the magga-citta, and nibbaana. We are not skilful in all dhammas if we merely listen for a short time. We read further on: "And again, the aayatanas (bases) are: the eye and visible object, the ear and sound, the nose and odour, the tongue and flavour, the bodysense and tangible object, the mind (manaayatana) and dhammas (dhammaayatana), and these are called: all dhammas." The person who has developed pa~n~naa can, when he listens to the Dhamma and also understands the characteristics of the dhammas that are appearing, realize at that moment the arising and falling away of realities. He is skilful in the aayatanas, such as seeing and what appears through the eyesense at this very moment. .. to be continued, connie #85757 From: han tun Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:45 am Subject: Re: More Disturbing News.... hantun1 Dear Sarah, Once again, I gratefully accept your explanations. Sarah: Can we even know at this moment whether the seeing or the hearing is the result of kusala or akusala kamma? I don't think so. Sarah: Who but a Buddha would understand all the intricacies of kamma? -------------------- Han: Right. That’s why I had said earlier that I have accepted the complexities of kamma which is difficult to understand for those who lack supernormal cognitive faculties. ========== Sarah: Please fire back if I still haven't answered your question:-). Han: No more questions. My ammunitions are all spent. ========== Sarah: Also, I'm sure you have more good examples yourself which you might care to share:-)). Han: I do not have to share. You know that there are people like Devadattas. In fact, Devadatta will be angry to compare them with him. Because, Devadatta will some day become a Pacceka Buddha! Respectfully, Han #85758 From: "connie" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:44 am Subject: Vism.XVII,261-263 nichiconn 650. Ya.m yassa paccayo cevaati ya~ncettha upaadaana.m yassa paccayo hoti, tatopi vi~n~naatabbo vinicchayoti attho. Ki.m panettha kassa paccayo hoti? Ya.mki~nci yassa kassaci paccayo hotiyeva. Ummattako viya hi puthujjano. So ida.m yutta.m ida.m ayuttanti avicaaretvaa yassa kassaci upaadaanassa vasena ya.mki~nci bhava.m patthetvaa ya.mki~nci kamma.m karotiyeva. Tasmaa yadekacce siilabbatupaadaanena ruupaaruupabhavaa na hontiiti vadanti, ta.m na gahetabba.m. Sabbena pana sabbo hotiiti gahetabba.m. PPn xvii, 261. 6. Which for which becomes condition means that here the exposition should be known according to what kind of clinging is a condition for what [kind of becoming]. But what is condition for what here? Any kind is a condition for any kind. For the ordinary man is like a madman, and without any considering 'Is this right or not?', and aspiring by means of any of the kinds of clinging to any of the kinds of becoming he performs any of the kinds of kamma. Therefore when some say that the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming do not come about through rite-and-ritual clinging, that should not be accepted: what should be accepted is that all kinds come about through all kinds. PoP p.689-90: "Whate'er is cause of what": - the meaning is that decision should be known according to what grasping is cause of what. And here, which is the "cause of what"? Any (grasping) whatsoever is cause of any (becoming) whatsoever. For the average man is like a madman. Without considering what is proper, or what is improper, he aspires to any becoming whatsoever, by means of any grasping whatsoever, and does any act whatsoever. Therefore what some say, namely, that becomings of matter and non-matter are not due to the grasping of rite and ritual should not be accepted. We should accept that all (becomings) are due to all (graspings). Seyyathida.m- idhekacco anussavavasena vaa di.t.thaanusaarena vaa "kaamaa naamete manussaloke ceva khattiyamahaasaalakulaadiisu, cha kaamaavacaradevaloke ca samiddhaa"ti cintetvaa tesa.m adhigamattha.m asaddhammassavanaadiihi va~ncito "iminaa kammena kaamaa sampajjantii"ti ma~n~namaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayaduccaritaadiinipi karoti, so duccaritapaaripuuriyaa apaaye upapajjati. Sandi.t.thike vaa pana kaame patthayamaano pa.tiladdhe ca gopayamaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayaduccaritaadiini karoti, so duccaritapaaripuuriyaa apaaye upapajjati. Tatraassa upapattihetubhuuta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. Kammaabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. Sa~n~naabhavapa~ncavokaarabhavaa pana tadantogadhaa eva. PPn xvii, 262. For example someone thinks in accordance with hearsay or [false] view that sense desires come to be fulfilled in the human world among the great warrior (khattiya) families, etc., and in the six divine worlds of the sense sphere. [574] Misled by listening to wrong doctrine, etc., and imagining that 'by this kamma sense desires will come to be fulfilled', he performs for the purpose of attaining them acts of bodily misconduct, etc., through sense-desire clinging. By fulfilling such misconduct he is reborn in the states of loss. Or he performs acts of bodily misconduct, etc., aspiring to sense desires visible here and now and protecting those he has already acquired. By fulfilling such misconduct he is reborn in the states of loss. The kamma that is the cause of rebirth there is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But percipient becoming and five-constituent becoming are included in that, too. PoP p.690: For instance some one here, through hearsay, or as a result of his opinion, thinks thus: "These things which are known as sense-desires are fulfilled both among the families {read khattiya-mahaasaalakulaadisu} of wealthy princes in the world of men, and also in the world of devas of the world of sense," and he, being deceived [574] into hoping to get them by listening to the bad doctrine and so on, does misdeeds of the body and so on by means of the grasping of sense-desires, thinking to fulfil sense-desires by deeds. Through the fulness of his misdeeds he goes to a state of woe. Or longing for sense-desires of the present life and keeping watch over the things he has acquired, he does misdeeds of the body and so on, by means of the graspings of sense-desires. Through the fulness of his misdeeds he goes to a state of woe. The karma which is the condition of his rebirth there is the becoming of karma. The aggregates which produce the karma are the becoming of rebirth. And the becomings of perception and of the five constituents are included in that becoming of sense-desires. {The .Tiikaa adds, that they are only partially included in that becoming of sense-desires.} Aparo pana saddhammassavanaadiihi upabruuhita~naa.no "iminaa kammena kaamaa sampajjantii"ti ma~n~namaano kaamupaadaanavasena kaayasucaritaadiini karoti. So sucaritapaaripuuriyaa devesu vaa manussesu vaa upapajjati. Tatraassa upapattihetubhuuta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. Kammaabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. Sa~n~naabhavapa~ncavokaarabhavaa pana tadantogadhaa eva. Iti kaamupaadaana.m sappabhedassa saantogadhassa kaamabhavassa paccayo hoti. PPn. xvii, 263. Another, however, whose knowledge has been intensified by listening to good Dhamma and so on, imagines that 'By this kind of kamma sense desires will come to be fulfilled'. He performs acts of bodily good conduct, etc., through sense-desire clinging. By fulfilling such bodily good conduct he is reborn among deities or human beings. The kamma that is the cause of his rebirth there is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But percipient becoming and five-constituent becoming are included in that, too. So sense-desire clinging is a condition for sense-desire becoming with its analysis and its synthesis. PoP p.690: Another man, who finds his knowledge growing by listening to the good doctrine and so on, does good deeds of the body and so on by means of the grasping of sense-desires, thinking to fulfil his sense-desires by such deeds. Through the fulness of his good deeds, he is reborn among devas or men. The karma which is the condition of his rebirth there is the becoming of karma; the aggregates which produce the karma are the becoming of rebirth. And the becomings of perception and of the five constituents are included in that becoming of sense-desires. Thus is the grasping of sense-desires the cause of the becoming of sense-desires together with its different kinds and the included states. #85759 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/15 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: We are in agreement about much. > > Scott: Are you saying that the 'workings' of conditionality cannot be > known? Conditionality can be known, but not in real time, and certainly not all at once. Knowing is serial, sequential, one at a time: but being, and the "mechanics" of being, is everything, all at the same time, massively parallel. > > H: "I think that the notion of becoming is irreconcilable with the > notion of a moment in isolation." > > Scott: I'm not sure I quite follow, but why would these be > irreconcilable? I'm probably not understanding 'becoming' in the > sense you mean to use it. At any rate, 'moment in isolation' is not > how it is, as I understand it. Becoming implies a transition from what is, to what is not [yet]. If this becoming was held to occur in the space of single moments, a moment would be where something both is what it is, and what it isn't. That is why I agree with you about "moment in isolation" not being how it is. > > I'd say that conditionality, that is the ways in which states relate > to each other as cause and effect, demonstrates that any given moment > can never be 'taken in isolation' since each moment is 'multiply > conditioned' and 'multiply conditioning', if you know what I mean. I'm sure I do know what you mean. And I agree with you entirely. I > still consider that one moment follows the last(and is so, in fact, > due to conditions - namely anantara and samanantara paccaya), but this > is complicated. It is not a big deal, but I do not actually think there are moments as demarcatable things. There are, to me, no boundaries in reality, only in thought. Cheers Herman #85760 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... egberdina Hi Sarah and Han 2008/5/16 han tun : > Dear Sarah, > > > Sarah: Please fire back if I still haven't answered your question:-). > > Han: No more questions. My ammunitions are all spent. > If your discussion is finished, then perhaps this is a good time to ask what gain there is in holding views on kamma and vipaka, given that the murderer Angulimala could become a saint in the very lifetime in which he laid waste to villages and towns, and the lives of hundreds of people? Cheers Herman #85761 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 7:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/5/16 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Howard (Larry), > ------- > N: LOL. Hardly ever. .Valid points, yes, you always come up with > these things. You seem to think it weltfremd to see life as nama and > rupa. > We can come back to this, but I am so busy revising my conditions for > print later on. One of your endearing features, Nina, is that you never miss an opportunity to tell all and sundry that their stories are only namas and rupas, but you are actually very busy publishing yours :-) Cheers Herman #85762 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 3:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Scott) - In a message dated 5/16/2008 9:48:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: I > still consider that one moment follows the last(and is so, in fact, > due to conditions - namely anantara and samanantara paccaya), but this > is complicated. It is not a big deal, but I do not actually think there are moments as demarcatable things. There are, to me, no boundaries in reality, only in thought. =============================== I agree with you, Herman. This is an aspect of what I mean when I say that reality is seamless. At the same time, however, what is present now (at any "now") is distinguishable from what was, and phenomena are distinguishable from each other. Inseparability doesn't imply identity. There was a brief period for me, just once, when sense of personal self and also the sense of separateness of "things" both disappeared, though sights, sounds, emotions etc, each as "the experienced quality of the moment," i.e., as so-called object of consciousness, were (namelessly) distinguishable. This was an experience of seamlessness, yet everything was still there as an aspect of reality and not coalescing into an amorphous unity. The state was so shockingly different, so "other," so strange, with no anchor - nothing at all to hold onto, that a terrible fear arose that overcame the state and finally ended it. Too bad that I was unprepared. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85763 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/16/2008 5:00:32 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Mmm, maybe not. I think it comes from the Latin 'idem', meaning "same". The dictionary says it may be a contraction of 'idem et idem' ("same and same." indicating unchanging nature). The word 'entity' comes from the Latin 'ens' (meaning "being," and related to 'esse', the verb meaning "to be"). With metta, Howard ................................... TG: Thanks for the correction and scholarship Howard. But...of course, all you say still really supports my case about "identifying" being about identifying "entities," in a deep psychological sense, ... and the conjoining false-perspectives of permanence-view, pleasurableness-view, and self-view thereof. But, I do appreciate the information! TG #85764 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/16/2008 12:03:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: In a message dated 5/16/2008 5:00:32 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Mmm, maybe not. I think it comes from the Latin 'idem', meaning "same". The dictionary says it may be a contraction of 'idem et idem' ("same and same." indicating unchanging nature). The word 'entity' comes from the Latin 'ens' (meaning "being," and related to 'esse', the verb meaning "to be"). With metta, Howard ................................... TG: Thanks for the correction and scholarship Howard. But...of course, all you say still really supports my case about "identifying" being about identifying "entities," in a deep psychological sense, ... and the conjoining false-perspectives of permanence-view, pleasurableness-view, and self-view thereof. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure! The connection is clear. :-) -------------------------------------------- But, I do appreciate the information! TG ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85765 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard Just to follow up. What you wrote about Identity/identify (same and same) is exactly the problem with a practice of "identifying" -- "ultimate realities with their own characteristics." Just the process of identifying specific things is tending toward "falsely seeing." Then, when you add a huge "badge of substantiation" of calling things "ultimate realities" ... wow, really plays into self-view IMO. Of course, the whole idea of "with their own characteristics" is just flat out wrong IMO. I think that the knowledge of conditionality drives the mind to the point of being able to view phenomenal formations in such a manner that the "identities" of the formations "dissolve" into the greater vision of conditionality, impermanence, afflicted (with impermanence) and nonself. OK, I feel better now. LOL TG In a message dated 5/16/2008 10:59:39 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/16/2008 12:03:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) writes: In a message dated 5/16/2008 5:00:32 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, _upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) writes: Mmm, maybe not. I think it comes from the Latin 'idem', meaning "same". The dictionary says it may be a contraction of 'idem et idem' ("same and same." indicating unchanging nature). The word 'entity' comes from the Latin 'ens' (meaning "being," and related to 'esse', the verb meaning "to be"). With metta, Howard ................................... TG: Thanks for the correction and scholarship Howard. But...of course, all you say still really supports my case about "identifying" being about identifying "entities," in a deep psychological sense, ... and the conjoining false-perspectives of permanence-view, pleasurableness-false-perspectives of pe thereof. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure! The connection is clear. :-) -------------------------------------------- But, I do appreciate the information! TG ========================= With metta, Howard #85766 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 11:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Terminology of 'Ultimate Realities' nilovg Hi Herman, Op 16-mei-2008, om 16:21 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > One of your endearing features, Nina, is that you never miss an > opportunity to tell all and sundry that their stories are only namas > and rupas, but you are actually very busy publishing yours :-) ------ N: You are very kind. Yes, the story about nama and rupa, and may it help others to see that stories are different from the actual realities appearing now, such as seeing that is the result of vipaka. (Yes, I seize this opportunity again:-)) Nina. #85767 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard (et all), Op 15-mei-2008, om 21:42 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Certainly we cannot make ourselves immune to either > illness or death, but we can and do improve our circumstances. And, > Nina, you > KNOW that! ------ N: We can do many things preventing this or that but the outcome: that depends on kamma. I understand that you also put weight on circumstances, persons, conventional realities, but I prefer to understand dhamma now, so that I may see more clearly what kamma is, what vipaka is. At this moment, always at this moment. To me that is far more helpful than thinking about the cittas of killers or of preventing people from doing such or such or acting to prevent sickness and death. Up to a certain point, yes, but showing the way to develop understanding of nama and rupa is the most precious gift from the Buddha. Perhaps some people may be interested to read the following quote from Kh Sujin's Survey of Paramattha dhammas (p. 146, 148): Nina. #85768 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 11:36 am Subject: German site, to Dieter nilovg Dear Dieter, Where is the on-line version of the Ven. Nyanaponikas German translation of the Suttanipata? It was at http://www.palikanon.com/khuddaka/sn This site has disappeared, do you know of another German Tipitaka site? Someone on the Pali list wanted to know. Nina. #85769 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 7:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/16/2008 1:44:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard Just to follow up. What you wrote about Identity/identify (same and same) is exactly the problem with a practice of "identifying" -- "ultimate realities with their own characteristics." Just the process of identifying specific things is tending toward "falsely seeing." Then, when you add a huge "badge of substantiation" of calling things "ultimate realities" ... wow, really plays into self-view IMO. Of course, the whole idea of "with their own characteristics" is just flat out wrong IMO. I think that the knowledge of conditionality drives the mind to the point of being able to view phenomenal formations in such a manner that the "identities" of the formations "dissolve" into the greater vision of conditionality, impermanence, afflicted (with impermanence) and nonself. OK, I feel better now. LOL ----------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) -------------------------------------- TG =============================== Though I think that taking the phrase 'an ultimate reality' to refer to any of those unimagined phenomena that are not composites of other phenomena (i.e., not complexes) is an "okay" usage, I do agree that it is a dangerous term, easily misunderstood. A better terminology might simply be 'an elementary (or simple or basic) phenomenon'. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85770 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 16, 2008 11:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' nilovg Dear Alex and Ken H, may I butt in? Op 16-mei-2008, om 1:19 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > I must admit it is a tough question - although, personally, I don't > > find it hard to believe that citta can directly know a dhamma that > > has fallen away. > >>>> > > I do find it hard to believe how can something non existent be the > object of present citta. ------- N: Cittas arise and fall away so extremely fast. Lobha arises, say, you enjoy good food. Then this charactreistic may appear to sati in a following process, but all so fast, lobha has just fallen away, then lobha arises again, and sati again. Numerous processes follow upon one another. You do not have to think long stories about lobha. Nina. #85771 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/16/2008 12:44:45 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Though I think that taking the phrase 'an ultimate reality' to refer to any of those unimagined phenomena that are not composites of other phenomena (i.e., not complexes) is an "okay" usage, I do agree that it is a dangerous term, easily misunderstood. A better terminology might simply be 'an elementary (or simple or basic) phenomenon'. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard .................................. Yea, I would call them "elements" and leave it at that ... you know ... kind of like the Buddha did. But I do like and do use "phenomena" for the entire conditional venue. That works for either the elemental viewpoint, or the compound viewpoint. TG #85772 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How can panna investigate non-existent past cittas? truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Alex wrote: > > > A) It is possible to see one's citta. > > .... > > S: There is never "one's citta". Cittas don't belong to anyone. > Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta if > there are the> right conditions for this! > > .... > > A: By one's citta I meant that YOUR stream of cittas is different from > mine. Just like oneself is the owner of Kamma, same is here. > .... > S: In this discussion about the understanding of cittas, it's important to appreciate that at the moment of such understanding, there's no idea of 'mine' or 'yours' with regard to seeing, hearing or whatever citta is known. > ..... While of course 5 Aggregates are Anatta. Conventional beings and things do exist conventionally. > > > > c) However what is (lobha or dosa for example) cognized by the > > > Citta, MUST exist. But since the seen citta (akusala or kusala) > citta > > > isn't found in the present - then it exists and is real in > another > > > non-present moment of time. In this case in the past. > > .... > > S: The lobha or dosa (in your example) are understood by panna > immediately after they have arisen. The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is presently apparent. It is thus said to be the *present* object. > > .... > S:"The characteristic of that lobha or dosa is presently apparent". > > In other words, the lobha or dosa itself has fallen away, but in the next (rapidly following) process, its characteristic appears as a present object. So one see the representation of the non-existent past citta, rather than citta itself. Right? > ... > A: The only way out is > a) Admit two simulteneous citta - one citta sees the 2nd citta which > may be either kusala or akusala IMMEADEATELY cooccuring at EXACT > moment of time. > > b) Admit the existence of citta in the past which is the object of > present citta. > ... > S: Sounds like the debates in the Kathavatthu. Your reasoning is faulty!See above on this subtle point. Also, see past saved posts on: > "Navattabba (Not so Classifiable) objects" in U.P. in the files. > ... Well, there is perhaps a 3rd alternative: c) Can the presently arisen citta contain ALL information of the past, in a latent form? So a, b or c? > A: You can't see a characteristic of something presently non existent! > ... > S: Can you view a perfect photocopy of a page of text? > ... Yes, but the photocopy (rupa) isn't non existent. Mind states aren't like material things. Right? Thank you for your answers, Best wishes, Alex #85773 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 2:58 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard (et all), > > > Certainly we cannot make ourselves immune to either > > illness or death, but we can and do improve our circumstances. And, Nina, you > > KNOW that! > ------ > N: We can do many things preventing this or that but the outcome: > that depends on kamma. Ultimately, yes - the outcome may depend on Kamma - but there is a lot that "one" can do in the PRESENT. One person takes pills and still gets sick (or doesn't recover), another person in identical situation can take the same pills and become healthy again. But prudent action in the present MAY be very helpful. Do you take Medication? Are you generally careful when crossing the street, etc etc? Thank you for the rest of the post about how to relate to bad events. However, personally IMHO "one should try one's best and let Kamma take care of the rest." To chalk EVERYTHING to past kamma (the semi? infinite amount of it) isn't the most effective approach. Best wishes, Alex #85774 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 3:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex and Ken H, > may I butt in? > Op 16-mei-2008, om 1:19 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > I must admit it is a tough question - although, personally, I don't > > > find it hard to believe that citta can directly know a dhamma that > > > has fallen away. > > >>>> > > > > I do find it hard to believe how can something non existent be the > > object of present citta. > ------- > N: Cittas arise and fall away so extremely fast. Lobha arises, say, you enjoy good food. Then this charactreistic may appear to sati in a following process, but all so fast, lobha has just fallen away, then > lobha arises again, and sati again. Numerous processes follow upon > one another. You do not have to think long stories about lobha. > Nina. > But the Sati can't be simulteneously present with the Lobha citta, Sati follows afterwards. So Sati probably arises with some sort of representational image of characteristics of Lobha simulteneously present WITH Sati. Or maybe the present Citta itself carries ALL the information from the past. Can a citta contain almost infinite amount of past causes/data? Sorry for being so hair splitting in this single issue. Thanks. Best wishes, Alex #85775 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 3:12 pm Subject: Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Thanks for the reply: > > A: "Please explain. If conditionality is 100% sufficient (as opposed to nessesery), then there is NO difference between predetermination and conditionality. > > Scott: Please consider the set of 24 conditions to be a set of > sufficient conditions. Consider the actual combination of conditions > that are in place as cause for a certain effect to be the necessary > [set of sufficient] conditions for that 'event'. > Are you implying that any of the 24 conditions is sufficient? Lets take a case of ordinary worldling & dependent origination. When he feels any feeling, does he have any (however small) possibility to avoid craving? What about person who has studied Buddhism & has decent mindfulness at the moment feeling appears. Can the volition be made NOT to react with craving? Or by your mention of sufficient conditions, any and every feeling will cause craving to arise? Irrespective of wholesome chanda etc etc. Best wishes, Alex #85776 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/5/15 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Howard, > When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' > kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is > not external. > > A woman had tied a pot of sand to her dog's neck and thrown it into > the water. Later on she was on a ship that got aground. To make it > move again someone had to be thrown out and the lot fell on her, the > captain's wife. The captain tied a pot of sand to her neck and threw > her into the water. One can never escape from kamma wherever one may > be, even in mid ocean or the sky (Expositor II, p. 361). AN 3.99 "Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life, there is no opportunity for the right ending of stress." HH > The message is clear, folkloristic views of tit-for-tat kamma and result are out. "There is the case where a trifling evil deed done by a certain individual takes him to hell. There is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by another individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment." HH > Why the difference? "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual takes him to hell. "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in [contemplating] the body, developed in virtue, developed in mind, developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment." HH > What can be clearer? Cheers Herman #85777 From: Sukinder Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality sukinderpal Hi TG (and Howard), I’m somewhat behind in my reading and have not read the posts in the thread preceding this one, but this caught my eye while cutting and pasting on Word. ============ Howard: Though I think that taking the phrase 'an ultimate reality' to refer to any of those unimagined phenomena that are not composites of other phenomena (i.e., not complexes) is an "okay" usage, I do agree that it is a dangerous term, easily misunderstood. A better terminology might simply be 'an elementary (or simple or basic) phenomenon'. .................................. TG: Yea, I would call them "elements" and leave it at that ... you know ... kind of like the Buddha did. But I do like and do use "phenomena" for the entire conditional venue. That works for either the elemental viewpoint, or the compound viewpoint. Sukin: The Buddha talked in terms of Dhatu as well as Khandha and Ayatana. These are different aspects of the same realities. The term ‘Dhatu’ or ‘element’ seems often to bring to mind other meanings not particularly associated with the Dhamma, in fact I think it calls for a deeper understanding by way of direct experience to actually understand what the Buddha meant by ‘Dhatu’. This is one reason why I find that Paramattha Dhamma helps, namely that at the intellectual level it makes clear the distinction between concept and reality and focuses the attention on the one as being the only object of which wisdom knows and develops. Besides it points also to aspects such as characteristic, function and cause, depending on the understanding. So why not use it? ;-) Metta, Sukin #85778 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? truth_aerator Hi Sarah and all, I was looking over threads in this topic and I am still missing something. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > I think you've misunderstood the chart. > > --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Alex wrote: > > > It is a chart of factors belonging to all rupa (rupa sangaha). > > > > > > The last 4 properties are: Production, continuity, decay, > > > impermanence. > > > > > > According to the chart (drawn probably by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > > > Essential matter, internal, base, door, faculty, "Gross, etc" , > clung > > > to, taking objects, inseperable, 4 causes, 21 groupings, 2 > nutriment > > > born octad & undecad DO NOT HAVE 4 properties of Production, > > > continuity, decay, impermanence! !! $7-$22 > .... > S: > > On the left-hand side, the 28 rupas are listed, starting with earth element (pa.thaviidhaatu) and finishing with the 4 characteristics of rupas (lakkha.naruupa). > > These 4 characteristics are: > -production (upacaya) > -continuity (santati) > -decay (jarataa) > -impermanence (aniccataa) > > So taking the earth element, it has these 4 characteristics referring to its arising, occurrence, decaying and falling away. The aniccataa of a rupa is said to manifest as the destruction and falling away of that rupa. > Yes I understand that Rupa and other great elements have the above 4 characteristics. But why don't the "derived" rupas have the above 4 characteristics? Isn't EVERYTHING and I mean EVERYTHING (derived or not, sabhava or not) impermanent, arises and perishes? Even impermanence is impermanent (after PariNibbana) Best wishes, Alex #85779 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 7:45 pm Subject: Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "Are you implying that any of the 24 conditions is sufficient?" Scott: No, I'm saying that the 24 conditions are a *set* of sufficient conditions. They do not, as far as I know, occur singly. A: "Lets take a case of ordinary worldling & dependent origination. When he feels any feeling, does he have any (however small) possibility to avoid craving?" Scott: Alex, the method of Conditional Relations differs from that of Dependent Origination. You're comparing apples and oranges. Can we clarify this before we move on to the questions below? A: "What about person who has studied Buddhism & has decent mindfulness at the moment feeling appears. Can the volition be made NOT to react with craving? Or by your mention of sufficient conditions, any and every feeling will cause craving to arise? Irrespective of wholesome chanda etc etc." Sincerely, Scott. #85780 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 9:13 pm Subject: Calm Kindness... bhikkhu0 Friends: Calm Kindness Protects by Sweet Gentle Softness! The Blessed Buddha once said: With good will for the entire cosmos, cultivate an infinitely limitless heart: Above, below, across & all around, unobstructed, without any hostility or hate. Sutta Nipata I, 8 May all creatures, all breathing things, all beings one and all, without exception, experience good fortune only. May they not fall into any harm. Anguttara Nikaya II, 72 Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. Sutta Nipata I, 8 <....> Have a nice day in Calm Kindness! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) <....> #85781 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri May 16, 2008 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/16/2008 6:37:36 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: The Buddha talked in terms of Dhatu as well as Khandha and Ayatana. These are different aspects of the same realities. The term ‘Dhatu’ or ‘element’ seems often to bring to mind other meanings not particularly associated with the Dhamma, in fact I think it calls for a deeper understanding by way of direct experience to actually understand what the Buddha meant by ‘Dhatu’. This is one reason why I find that Paramattha Dhamma helps, namely that at the intellectual level it makes clear the distinction between concept and reality and focuses the attention on the one as being the only object of which wisdom knows and develops. Besides it points also to aspects such as characteristic, function and cause, depending on the understanding. So why not use it? ;-) .................................................. TG: You mean that after the hundred or so posts I've made on the subject, plus many more by others, you are going to ask that question as if it hasn't been addressed? Oh well. TG OUT #85782 From: "colette" Date: Fri May 16, 2008 10:52 pm Subject: Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality ksheri3 Dear Scott and Alex, This is a good one to interact with, THANK YOU. > A: "Are you implying that any of the 24 conditions is sufficient?" > > Scott: No, I'm saying that the 24 conditions are a *set* of sufficient > conditions. They do not, as far as I know, occur singly. > colette: this is where "book smarts" runs away with the show, on me at least, since I cannot fathom bantying about the conceptions of "24 conditions" in such technical terms. ----------------------- But now we're starting to get into my ballpark. > A: "Lets take a case of ordinary worldling & dependent origination. > When he feels any feeling, does he have any (however small) > possibility to avoid craving?" > colette: WOW, what a thought to have! I know that there are numerous times everyday when I see things that absolutely raise no emotion or thought of craving, more than likely it would be an emotion or thought of aversion or distaste, however, I see what you could be getting at. Yes, it could certainly be the tiniest of cravings that's buried deep in the subconscious or super-subconcscious or ID or UN-CONSCIOUS. Splendid view that you raise, here, concerning the never ending work that purifying the mind entails! ------------------------------------ > Scott: Alex, the method of Conditional Relations differs from that of > Dependent Origination. You're comparing apples and oranges. Can we > clarify this before we move on to the questions below? > colette: YES, Alex, could you clarify that point for Scott and I? BTW, Scott, I can see that the "craving" exists only from the contact with that which is craved, plus there are countless things DEPENDENT on the initial craving which generate greater cravings. I see what Alex may be motioning toward but if that scenerio is carried out to its fullest extent we get back into the Western Society's unmistakable trait of the Blind leading the Blind in a never ending circle of Samsara. THEREFORE, I would like to hear Alex's explanation concerning the point you've raised. ------------------------------------ > A: "What about person who has studied Buddhism & has decent > mindfulness at the moment feeling appears. Can the volition be made > NOT to react with craving? > colette: in WEstern esoteric practices it has been long recognized that the practioner should not "DESIRE RESULT(S)" which is very prominant in Chaos magic as well as the old Temple Of Psychic Youth (TOPY) BECAUSE this craving or desire will interfere with the operation as it comes together. I know how hard this practice is: to intentionally and deliberately NOT CRAVE OR DESIRE a resultant condition. VERY GOOD POINT ALEX. ---------------------------- > Or by your mention of sufficient conditions, any and every feeling > will cause craving to arise? colette: I don't think so! Craving can be considered a thirst or lust and it is not always the case to have a thirst or lust when the alaya-vijnana or any other sense consciousness is contacted. Thanks for the fun! toodles, colette #85783 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 12:58 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 5. Mettå in action and speech Mettå supports other kusala dhammas, it is also a condition for patience. We read in the Dhammasangani: §1341: What is patience (khanti)? That patience which is long-suffering, compliance, absence of rudeness and abruptness, complacency of citta. §1342: What is temperance (soracca.m)? That which is the absence of excess in deed, in word, and in deed and word together. Besides, all moral self-restraint (sa.mvara síla) is temperance. §1343: What is amity (såkhalya.m)? When all such speech as is insolent, disagreeable, scabrous, harsh to others, vituperative to others, bordering upon anger, not conducive to concentration, is put away, and when all such speech as is innocuous, pleasant to the ear, affectionate, such as goes to the heart, is urbane, sweet and acceptable to people generally; when speech of this sort is spoken, polished, friendly and gentle speech, this is what is called amity. We read in the Atthasåliní (Book II, Part II, Chapter II, 396) the following explanation of the passage on amity in the Dhammasangani: In the exposition of amity, “insolent” means, as knobs protrude in a decaying or unhealthy tree, so, owing to faultiness, knobs are produced from words of abusing and slandering, etc. “Scabrous” means putrid, like a putrid tree. As a putrid tree is scabrous and has trickling, powdery tissue, so such speech is scabrous and enters as though piercing the ear. “Harsh to others” means bitter to the ears of others, not pleasant to their hearts and productive of dosa. “Vituperative to others” means, as a branch with barbed thorns sticks by penetrating into leather, so it sticks to others and clings on, hindering those who want to go. “Bordering on anger” means near to anger. “Not conducive to concentration” means not conducive to attainment concentration (appanå- samådhi) and access-concentration. All these terms are synonyms of the words “with hate”... “Pleasant to the ear”, that is, from sweetness of diction it is pleasant to the ear; it does not produce pain to the ear, like the piercing of a needle. And from the sweetness of sense and meaning not producing ill-temper in the body, it produces affection, and so is called “affectionate”. That speech which appeals to the heart, which enters the mind easily without striking, we say “goes to the heart”. “Urbane speech” is so called because it is full of good qualities, and because it is refined like well-bred persons, and because it is of the town (urban). It means talk of citizens. For these use appropriate speech and address fatherly men as fathers, and brotherly men as brothers. “Of- much-folk-sweetness” means sweet to many people. “Of-much-folk- pleasantness” means pleasant to many people and making for the growth of mind. “The speech which there”, that is, in that person, “is gentle”, i.e. polished, “friendly”, that is soft, “smooth”, that is, not harsh. ******* Nina. #85784 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 17, 2008 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sat, 17/5/08, Alex wrote: Hi Sarah and all, I was looking over threads in this topic and I am still missing something. ... S: I appreciate that you persist until it all makes sense. .... >S:I think you've misunderstood the chart. > S: > > On the left-hand side, the 28 rupas are listed, starting with earth element (pa.thaviidhaatu) and finishing with the 4 characteristics of rupas (lakkha.naruupa) . > > These 4 characteristics are: > -production (upacaya) > -continuity (santati) > -decay (jarataa) > -impermanence (aniccataa) > > So taking the earth element, it has these 4 characteristics referring to its arising, occurrence, decaying and falling away. The aniccataa of a rupa is said to manifest as the destruction and falling away of that rupa. ... A:>Yes I understand that Rupa and other great elements have the above 4 characteristics. >But why don't the "derived" rupas have the above 4 characteristics? ... S: All the 18 concretely produced rupas(nipphanna ruupa) have these 4 characteristics, not just the 4 great elements. The other 10 non-concretely produced rupas (anipphanna ruupa) are 'attributes' of the concretely-produced (or sabhaava ruupa), inc. the 4 characteristics. ... A:>Isn't EVERYTHING and I mean EVERYTHING (derived or not, sabhava or not) impermanent, arises and perishes? Even impermanence is impermanent (after PariNibbana) .... S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. If we talk about impermanence conventionally or in general, it is not the characteristic of impermanence that the Buddha taught. If we understand this, then we can understand how the anipphanna (or asabhaava)rupas 'depend' on the nipphanna (or sabhaava) rupas which arise and fall away. These are difficult points, I know. Please persist and be patient with our responses. Metta, Sarah ============ #85785 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, I'd like to add a little more and refine (or possibly even amend part of) what I just wrote. I'll be checking in CMA and the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha now. First of all, looking at your heading, no, the Abhidhamma doesn't teach that there are any permanent rupas. All rupas (other than the 4 characteristics, lakkha.naruupa) are said to be conditioned, caused and thereby impermanent. Now with regard to the 'non-concretely produced matter' (anipphannaruupa), i.e space element, the two initimations, the 3 mutable rupas and the 4 characteristics, we can see that it's said: - the two intimations are conditioned by consciousness (citta) - the 3 mutable rupas of lightness, malleability and wieldiness are conditioned by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment - space element is conditioned by consciousness, temperature, kamma and nutriment Then you can see that it says under 'Analysis by way of Origins' that "characteristic material phenomena do not arise from any cause." []As Nina said to you, we cannot refer to the impermanence of impermanence. However, we can refer to the impermanence of all other rupas and the text is in error (as BB agreed with me before), when it says the anipphannaruupa are not paramattha dhammas.] It further says in the text: "It is explained that the characteristics (of material phenomena) are not produced by any (modes of origin) since their intrinsic nature consists solely in the qualities of being produced, etc.". [This is referring to the 4 lakkhana rupas] In the commentary to this text, it says: "It is declared that, since they merely constitute the intrinsic nature of materialities to be born, etc - [the intrinsic nature] of materialities to be born, to come to maturity, and to break up - [and being] without any [such] intrinsic nature themselves because they do not possess the characteristics of birth, etc., the characteristics are not generated by any of the causal conditions. For the characteristics of birth [of materiality], etc., apply to the eye, etc., in conjunction with its arising, etc., but they do not apply to birth, etc. If the latter also had the characteristics of birth, etc., then there would be the problem of infinite regres." When one considers it, I think it's really very logical. Now visible object arises and falls away. It's impermanent. We don't need to refer to its arising as also arising and falling away. Thanks for helping me to consider further. I'll look forward to any of your further comments/questions. Metta, Sarah ======== #85786 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... sarahprocter... Hi Herman (& Han), --- On Fri, 16/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: Herman> If your discussion is finished, then perhaps this is a good time to ask what gain there is in holding views on kamma and vipaka, given that the murderer Angulimala could become a saint in the very lifetime in which he laid waste to villages and towns, and the lives of hundreds of people? .... S: I find it helps a lot to understand what the real causes of difficulties and suffering in life are. As the Buddha taught us, these are not caused by murderers and natural disasters, but by lobha, dosa and moha arising now. The unpleasant results (akusala vipaka), had their causes in the past. There's no use crying over that spilt milk. There can be the development of right understanding which is the only way out of the mess. The more appreciation there is of 'the one way', the subtle and difficult middle path, the more we sympathise with and try to assist others as best we can in all ways as well. This will of course be according to our abilities and tendencies. Metta, Sarah =========== #85787 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Akusala, Moha, prompting in rupa/arupavacara, jhana, cittas sarahprocter... Hi Alex, I'm not sure anyone answered this one: --- On Fri, 9/5/08, Alex wrote: A:>I have few questions: a) In CMA (cittasangaha) , why in Rupa/Arupa worlds there isn't any Akusala? ... S: Are you sure you're not confusing rupa/arupa brahma cittas with rupa/arupa brahma worlds? Can you give me a ref.? ... A:>Doesn't Brahma Baka (mn49) and others have delusion? ... S: Only arahants no longer have delusion. Oh, now looking at your other questions, I remember Nina answered. Metta, Sarah ======== #85788 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/16 Alex : > Dear Scott, > > If conditionality is 100% sufficient (as opposed to nessesery), then > there is NO difference between predetermination and conditionality. > I very much appreciate all your probing questions here at dsg. I feel akin to you in that you go straight to the heart of things, and your preference for logic over authority is admirable. I understand the idea of predetermination to imply that the future is set in stone. In such a scenario, action is identical to passivity, whatever is done or not done, that is how things were always going to be. In Buddhist terms, this would mean that the Path of the 4 Noble Truths is something that happens, it is not done. If we accept anatta as a statement of the way things are, then action and intention, as the acts of an agent possessing the ability to choose freely, is a meaningless proposition. But whether anatta is a statement of fact or not, whether we believe the future is ours to make or not, we're just going to have to wait and see just how things unfold. Because neither the free-willer or the determinist knows the next moment. Cheers Herman #85789 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, Always good to see another dinosaur around:-) Love all your posts as usual. Just a comment on this one: --- On Thu, 8/5/08, Ken O wrote: Ken O: >panna could arise at javana citta by yoniso manasikaara, it does not implied it should be before javana. As maniskaara is a unversal cetasika, when arise with panna,it is call yoniso manasikaara. ... S: I understand yoniso manasikaara can refer to kusala with or without panna. As you say, manasikara is a universal cetasika, but I understand yoniso/ayoniso manasikara not to refer to a single cetasika, but to the whole series of kusala/akusala cittas (and cetasikas), following (and including) the adverting consciousness. ... Ken O:>....wise attention is known as condition for panna as it could mean for 2nd panna onwards. ... S: For any panna, I think. Previous cittas (or series) with yoniso manasikara as a condition (by pakatupanissaya) for panna and other kusala to arise. ... Ken O: > The second reason is that the arisen of the 1st javana citta with panna depends on the prior wise attention that was accumulated. ... S: Yes! ... Ken O: >Hence again, it is always used wise attention as condition to panna This is like taints accumulated that causes the arisen of akusala cittas at javana stage. This accumulation could only change through understanding, learning and reading of the dhamma. That is why it is so much fun in Buddhism. ... S: Agreed!! I like this quote from the Perfections series Connie quoted recently: "One should be unshakable in one's determination to listen, no matter in what circumstances one may be." By listening is meant, understanding and wise consideration of what we have heard or read. Look forward to more of your comments and "fun in Buddhism":-). Metta, Sarah =========== #85790 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Nina) - In a message dated 5/16/2008 8:03:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Nina, 2008/5/15 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Howard, > When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' > kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is > not external. > > A woman had tied a pot of sand to her dog's neck and thrown it into > the water. Later on she was on a ship that got aground. To make it > move again someone had to be thrown out and the lot fell on her, the > captain's wife. The captain tied a pot of sand to her neck and threw > her into the water. One can never escape from kamma wherever one may > be, even in mid ocean or the sky (Expositor II, p. 361). AN 3.99 "Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life, there is no opportunity for the right ending of stress." HH > The message is clear, folkloristic views of tit-for-tat kamma and result are out. "There is the case where a trifling evil deed done by a certain individual takes him to hell. There is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by another individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment." HH > Why the difference? "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual takes him to hell. "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in [contemplating] the body, developed in virtue, developed in mind, developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment." HH > What can be clearer? Cheers Herman =========================================== I think it is clear and well understood, and that Nina likely agrees, that the context and strength of the fruition of one's kamma have conditions within the same mind stream *other* than the kamma itself as influence. But I have been addressing another matter. What I maintain is that events occur (i.e., dhammas arise and cease) within a namarupic stream in partial consequence of conditions initiated in other namarupic streams. Nina wrote "When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' kamma. Kamma is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is not external." Now, the kamma that is being spoken of is, without a doubt, one's own acts of intention and one's own intentional acts, and the resulting vipaka is certainly within, and internal to, that same stream. I don't deny that in the slightest. I have not been addressing vipaka, but the effect that our actions have on others, and different aspect of conditionality. "People" DO interact. We are interacting, for example, right now by having this conversation. The process that I call my writing to you includes a multitude of namas and rupas, and much of it involves intention and intentional action (i.e., kamma). That kamma, besides directly leading to vipaka within my own mind stream, also results in what we call my communicating to you, and that activity of mine prompts all sorts of kamma and other effects within your mind stream. People DO interact, and the actions of one person condition events in other mind streams. This is undeniably true. I maintain that to deny that is to bury one's face in a book and never ever look at the reality of existence. I DO NOT BELIEVE that anyone here actually disbelieves that people interact in important ways, and it mystifies me that they seem to pretend to disbelieve it! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85791 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 12:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and TG) - In a message dated 5/16/2008 8:37:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: The Buddha talked in terms of Dhatu as well as Khandha and Ayatana. These are different aspects of the same realities. The term ‘Dhatu’ or ‘element’ seems often to bring to mind other meanings not particularly associated with the Dhamma, in fact I think it calls for a deeper understanding by way of direct experience to actually understand what the Buddha meant by ‘Dhatu’. This is one reason why I find that Paramattha Dhamma helps, namely that at the intellectual level it makes clear the distinction between concept and reality and focuses the attention on the one as being the only object of which wisdom knows and develops. Besides it points also to aspects such as characteristic, function and cause, depending on the understanding. So why not use it? ;-) =============================== Actually, I do use 'paramattha dhamma' a lot. I understand it to refer to those phenomena that are ultimate in the sense that they are not composed of other phenomena. That sense of 'ultimate' (or 'basic') doesn't bother me in the slightest. I also have no problem with the word 'reality' as referring to something actually observed as opposed to merely imagined. But the term 'a reality' has a danger to it. In its adjectival usage it is fine. If someone were to say that something or other were just imagined, a perfectly natural response might be "No, it's a reality." But the use of 'a reality' as a noun leads to reification. A particular problem is the English combination 'an ultimate reality', which can suggest that 1) there are degrees of reality, and that 2) paramattha dhammas (i.e., ultimate/basic phenomena) are "the most real phenomena." I do not like that combining of 'ultimate' and 'reality'. It is utterly misleading. I would drop the 'realities' part. Every actual (unimagined) phenomenon is real, and there is no need to belabor that. (So-called selves, for example, are unreal. They are merely imagined.) Simply using the term 'phenomena' as translation of 'dhammas' is fine, in which case 'paramattha dhamma' is translated as 'ultimate/basic phenomenon'. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85792 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/17/2008 6:46:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Alex, 2008/5/16 Alex : > Dear Scott, > > If conditionality is 100% sufficient (as opposed to nessesery), then > there is NO difference between predetermination and conditionality. > I very much appreciate all your probing questions here at dsg. I feel akin to you in that you go straight to the heart of things, and your preference for logic over authority is admirable. I understand the idea of predetermination to imply that the future is set in stone. In such a scenario, action is identical to passivity, whatever is done or not done, that is how things were always going to be. In Buddhist terms, this would mean that the Path of the 4 Noble Truths is something that happens, it is not done. If we accept anatta as a statement of the way things are, then action and intention, as the acts of an agent possessing the ability to choose freely, is a meaningless proposition. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Unless the phrase "choose freely" is pinned down in some explicit way, I find this unanswerable. If "choosing freely" means an unconditioned choosing, I would say that there is no choosing freely. ------------------------------------------------------ But whether anatta is a statement of fact or not, whether we believe the future is ours to make or not, we're just going to have to wait and see just how things unfold. Because neither the free-willer or the determinist knows the next moment. Cheers Herman ============================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85793 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear colette, Herman, Howard, and Alex, Regarding: H: "I understand the idea of predetermination to imply that the future is set in stone. In such a scenario, action is identical to passivity, whatever is done or not done, that is how things were always going to be." Scott: This is, more or less, how I've understood the term 'predestination'. H; "In Buddhist terms, this would mean that the Path of the 4 Noble Truths is something that happens, it is not done. If we accept anatta as a statement of the way things are, then action and intention, as the acts of an agent possessing the ability to choose freely, is a meaningless proposition." Scott: The volition ('action and intention') that there is simply is not the volition of an agent. Dhammasa"nga.ni: "What, on that occasion, is volition (cetanaa)? The volition, purpose, purposefulness, which is born of contact with the appropriate element of representative intellection - this is the volition that there then is." Atthasaalinii (pp. 147-148): "Volition is that which co-ordinates, that is, it binds closely (abhisandahati) to itself associated states as objects. This is its characteristic; its function is conation...the function of conation is only in moral and immoral states...But volition is exceedingly energetic. It makes a double effort, a double exertion...It has directing as manifestation...It is also evident that it arises by causing associated states to be energetic in such things as recollecting an urgent work, and so forth." Scott: This particular dhamma functions according to the above characteristics - is, in fact, the above characteristics - and therefore there is volition ('action and intention'). It only seems as if an actor chooses to do or not do. Atthasaalinii (pp.127-128) further clarifies: "...Contact coexistent with sight is called sight-contact and the volition is an act of thought. And that consciousness (i.e. of sight) is called the door of an act of thought. In sight proper there is no five-fold restraint...Contact co-existent with apperception is mind-contact; the volition is an act of thought and that consciousness(apperceptional) consciousness is the door of an act of thought...Volition is an act leading to a deed. But that (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually spoken of as mind-door. (That is to say) because of the arising of (bodily) movement it does not go under the name of mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of the moving body...Volition is a mental act; that consciousness is the door of mental act." Sincerely, Scott. #85794 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > Hi, Herman (and Alex) - > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Unless the phrase "choose freely" is pinned down in some explicit way, I > find this unanswerable. If "choosing freely" means an unconditioned > choosing, I would say that there is no choosing freely. > ------------------------------------------------------ I am not arguing for free will, but there seem to be arguments for it: MN61 "Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any bodily action of that sort is fit for you to do. etc Cheers Herman #85795 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear colette, Herman, Howard, and Alex, Regarding 'conation' (a mundane psychological term; from a Google search of 'define conation'): "...in psychology, the power that impels to effort of any kind; the conscious tendency to act." "One of the three aspects of the mind, in particular dealing with 'willing and desiring', the others being cognition (awareness) and affection (feeling or emotion). They may work as a whole, but any one may dominate any mental process." "Along with cognition and affect, conation is one of three aspects of mind. It refers to the ability to act on what is known. From the Latin verb 'conari' which means to attempt or to strive." Sincerely, Scott. #85796 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > > =========================================== > I think it is clear and well understood, and that Nina likely agrees, > that the context and strength of the fruition of one's kamma have conditions > within the same mind stream *other* than the kamma itself as influence. > But I have been addressing another matter. What I maintain is that > events occur (i.e., dhammas arise and cease) within a namarupic stream in partial > consequence of conditions initiated in other namarupic streams. Nina wrote > "When it is the right time, nobody can escape the result of 'his' kamma. Kamma > is 'one's own', why would the Buddha say this? Kamma is not external." Now, > the kamma that is being spoken of is, without a doubt, one's own acts of > intention and one's own intentional acts, and the resulting vipaka is certainly > within, and internal to, that same stream. I don't deny that in the slightest. > I have not been addressing vipaka, but the effect that our actions have on > others, and different aspect of conditionality. "People" DO interact. We are > interacting, for example, right now by having this conversation. The process > that I call my writing to you includes a multitude of namas and rupas, and > much of it involves intention and intentional action (i.e., kamma). That kamma, > besides directly leading to vipaka within my own mind stream, also results in > what we call my communicating to you, and that activity of mine prompts all > sorts of kamma and other effects within your mind stream. People DO interact, > and the actions of one person condition events in other mind streams. This > is undeniably true. I maintain that to deny that is to bury one's face in a > book and never ever look at the reality of existence. I DO NOT BELIEVE that > anyone here actually disbelieves that people interact in important ways, and it > mystifies me that they seem to pretend to disbelieve it! > Try as I might, I cannot avoid the conclusion that the idea of causally distinct kammic streams is anything other than self-view. It seems to me totally at odds with what is implied by anatta. We sort of agreed yesterday about a flux of time/change that is without seams or boundaries. I see no reason why that wouldn't extend to conditionality. My kamma as oppposed to your or anyone else's kamma is delusional thinking IMO. Cheers Herman #85797 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/17 Scott Duncan : > Dear colette, Herman, Howard, and Alex, > > Regarding: > > > Scott: The volition ('action and intention') that there is simply is > not the volition of an agent. > I think the synopsis you gave was very good and to the point. > Dhammasa"nga.ni: > > "What, on that occasion, is volition (cetanaa)? The volition, > purpose, purposefulness, which is born of contact with the appropriate > element of representative intellection - this is the volition that > there then is." > > Atthasaalinii (pp. 147-148): > > "Volition is that which co-ordinates, that is, it binds closely > (abhisandahati) to itself associated states as objects. This is its > characteristic; its function is conation...the function of conation is > only in moral and immoral states...But volition is exceedingly > energetic. It makes a double effort, a double exertion...It has > directing as manifestation...It is also evident that it arises by > causing associated states to be energetic in such things as > recollecting an urgent work, and so forth." > > Scott: This particular dhamma functions according to the above > characteristics - is, in fact, the above characteristics - and > therefore there is volition ('action and intention'). It only seems > as if an actor chooses to do or not do. > > Atthasaalinii (pp.127-128) further clarifies: > > "...Contact coexistent with sight is called sight-contact and the > volition is an act of thought. And that consciousness (i.e. of sight) > is called the door of an act of thought. In sight proper there is no > five-fold restraint...Contact co-existent with apperception is > mind-contact; the volition is an act of thought and that > consciousness(apperceptional) consciousness is the door of an act of > thought...Volition is an act leading to a deed. But that > (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually spoken of as mind-door. > (That is to say) because of the arising of (bodily) movement it does > not go under the name of mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of > the moving body...Volition is a mental act; that consciousness is the > door of mental act." > Cheers Herman #85798 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 2:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/17/2008 8:32:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > Hi, Herman (and Alex) - > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Unless the phrase "choose freely" is pinned down in some explicit way, I > find this unanswerable. If "choosing freely" means an unconditioned > choosing, I would say that there is no choosing freely. > ------------------------------------------------------ I am not arguing for free will, but there seem to be arguments for it: MN61 "Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any bodily action of that sort is fit for you to do. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't read any implication of lack of conditionality into this at all. Considering the propriety of an action involves conditions that affect the occurrence or non-occurrence of the considered action. Moreover, the considering - the reflecting - is itself conditioned. Nothing comes from nothing, and I think that is a fact, whether we like it or not. I continue to maintain that 'free will' either is a meaningless phrase, or, if taken to mean "unconditioned willing," has no existing referent. The Buddha taught nibbana as the only unconditioned phenomenon, and I believe that to be a correct teaching. ------------------------------------------------------- etc Cheers Herman ============================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #85799 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 2:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/17/2008 9:06:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Try as I might, I cannot avoid the conclusion that the idea of causally distinct kammic streams is anything other than self-view. It seems to me totally at odds with what is implied by anatta. We sort of agreed yesterday about a flux of time/change that is without seams or boundaries. I see no reason why that wouldn't extend to conditionality. My kamma as oppposed to your or anyone else's kamma is delusional thinking IMO. =============================== Mind steams are not separate. They interact. They are interdependent. They are aspects of the whole. But the kamma serves as a kind of glue within a mind stream, serving to maintain it as a more or less distinguishable facet of reality. In fact, Herman, I believe you know that. You don't confuse yourself with others, do you? The middle-way mode of existence, which is neither separateness nor an amorphous unity, is subtle and deep, and it is easy to gravitate towards one or the other of the two extremes. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra)