#85800 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > > ------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------- I don't understand why you read into the Sutta what you do. I do not read the Sutta I quoted to say "there is going to be a process where there will be reflection on possible actions and possible outcomes of those possible actions, and based on that process there will be a selection of an appropriate action, based on a value system based in craving". The Sutta says what it says. Let me reiterate, I do not argue for free will or unconditioned willing. I just quoted a Sutta that suggests that before a person acts, they should become neurotic :-) Cheers Herman #85801 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: H: "I think the synopsis you gave was very good and to the point." Scott: Thanks. Sincerely, Scott. #85802 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > > > =============================== > 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. > If I came to believe again, even for a moment, that I was the cause of my own actions, that would put my therapy back 10 years :-) I don't doubt for a minute that beings are distinguishable and distinct. But if anatta contradicts kamma, then I won't be arguing for the correctness of kamma. Cheers Herman #85803 From: Charles Thompson Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:11 am Subject: RE: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced dhammasaro Good valued friends, May we limit our discussions to Theravada Buddhism? I have enough trouble with keeping up with your Pali and English discussions. I am afraid Sanskrit and Tibetan is way, way too, too much for me!!! Or, am I asking too much? Please kindly advise... yours in the dhamma-vihara, Chuck (AKA Supachallo, Dhammasaro) To: dhammastudygroup@...: upasaka@...: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:10:31 -0400Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced 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 asingular entity." That was my point when I said that the error withregard to aggregations is not in saying that there *are* aggregationsbut in conceiving (labeling) them as individuals and not merecollections."Larry: I think abhidhamma would call an unexamined aggregation a"compact whole" or possibly simply a perception. As I understand itperception can single out one element of an aggregation, take thatelement as a sign of that aggregation and link that sign with otherassociations. The main fault with all that, apart from all the wrongidentifications, 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.-------------------------------------------- #85804 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/17/2008 9:33:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Let me reiterate, I do not argue for free will or unconditioned willing. I just quoted a Sutta that suggests that before a person acts, they should become neurotic :-) ============================= Always a good idea!! ;-) Hey, are you sure you're not Jewish, Herman? LOLOL! With metta, Howard - a.k.a. (the neurotic) Chaim Zelig ben Yitzchak /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) #85805 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/17/2008 9:43:19 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/17 : > > > =============================== > 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. > If I came to believe again, even for a moment, that I was the cause of my own actions, that would put my therapy back 10 years :-) --------------------------------------- Howard: ;-) I think that looked at rightly, though, it would advance it. :-) -------------------------------------- I don't doubt for a minute that beings are distinguishable and distinct. But if anatta contradicts kamma, then I won't be arguing for the correctness of kamma. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Nor would I, but I see no contradiction. ------------------------------------------ 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) #85806 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Herman, Regarding: H: "Mind streams are not separate. They interact. They are interdependent." Scott: I'd suggest, in disagreeing, and with all due respect, that 'mind streams' are figments of the imagination. Hence, I think the 'interaction of mind streams' is not possible - except in the imagination, of course. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #85807 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced upasaka_howard Hi, Chuck - In a message dated 5/17/2008 10:15:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dhammasaro@... writes: Good valued friends, May we limit our discussions to Theravada Buddhism? I have enough trouble with keeping up with your Pali and English discussions. I am afraid Sanskrit and Tibetan is way, way too, too much for me!!! Or, am I asking too much? Please kindly advise... yours in the dhamma-vihara, Chuck (AKA Supachallo, Dhammasaro) ============================ I won't promise to *never* stray, but I think a single post shouldn't get anyone in a tizzy. ;-) I rarely write about aspects of Buddhism beyond the Dhamma as put forward by the Buddha in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, and should I ever significantly overstep, I count on the moderators to point that out. 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) #85808 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 5/17/2008 10:25:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard and Herman, Regarding: H: "Mind streams are not separate. They interact. They are interdependent." Scott: I'd suggest, in disagreeing, and with all due respect, that 'mind streams' are figments of the imagination. Hence, I think the 'interaction of mind streams' is not possible - except in the imagination, of course. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. ============================ Then I take it you also view streams of cittas with the same object as also figments of the imagination? What of the commentarial psychology? You dismiss that as dealing with fictions? 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) #85809 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/18 : > Hi, Herman - > > > I don't doubt for a minute that beings are distinguishable and > distinct. But if anatta contradicts kamma, then I won't be arguing for > the correctness of kamma. > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Nor would I, but I see no contradiction. > ------------------------------------------ If anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then what is different about a landslide killing 100 people, and Angulimala doing the same? What is explained by kamma that anatta doesn't? On the other hand, kamma implies there are special consequences that will follow actions a la Angulimala, but not actions a la landslides. Why not? Cheers Herman #85810 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hello Howard, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Of course there isn't a 100% free choice. But let us not think in black or white categories (100% no choice or 100% free choice). Of course there are many things that cannot be changed due to past conditions. But I believe that there are "glitches" in conditionality that CAN be exploited. But will they be or not, depends on various subjective factors. And even IF everything is 100% predetermined "what happens today is 100% dependent on causes in the past, and what will happen tomorrow was set in stone yesterday" I still think it is much more skillful to talk about "bringing up effort, mindfulness, panna and so on and work as hard as possible, do good avoid evil, purify the mind, etc" and setting up good conditions. "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." — SN 45.8 "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — AN 2.19 "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right resolve: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into right speech: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into right livelihood: This is one's right effort." — MN 117 There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part2.html #part2-d Etc etc. Best Wishes, Alex #85811 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > 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'. > So is that how you understand Buddha's liberative teaching? Predestination is Ajivika concept... > 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. > Still, the above does not contradict the possibility of volition to change the course and attenuate at least some past causes. If there are ALWAYS only one result possible from a set of conditions, then our future was set since Big Bang or from beginingless past. Not only would this be a sort of Nihilistic Ajivika teaching, it would be morally reprehensible and something that Buddha didn't teach. > "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): > Purpose can only be if there is a possibility of choice. If there isn't any possibility of choice or attenuating at least SOME past causes - then talk about "Volition", "Choosing", "Responcibility", "Effort", "Kamma" is empty talk. >> > 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. > That sounds like predistenation. What is your obsession with "Self", "Actor" and so on? Of course it is only will (or Citta) that wills. The discussion was about possibility of impersonally making alternative choices. Best wishes, Alex #85812 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Chaim, 2008/5/18 : > > > Hi, Herman - > > With metta, > Howard - a.k.a. (the neurotic) Chaim Zelig ben Yitzchak > Love it :-) Cheers Meshuga #85813 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 3:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/17/2008 10:31:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/18 : > Hi, Herman - > > > I don't doubt for a minute that beings are distinguishable and > distinct. But if anatta contradicts kamma, then I won't be arguing for > the correctness of kamma. > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Nor would I, but I see no contradiction. > ------------------------------------------ If anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then what is different about a landslide killing 100 people, and Angulimala doing the same? What is explained by kamma that anatta doesn't? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't follow you. Kamma is intention, period. Anatta refers to the lack of own-being/self-existence/identity in phenomena. But there is no "thing" that is anatta. Intention, on the other hand, is a mental activity that does occur. ------------------------------------------------- On the other hand, kamma implies there are special consequences that will follow actions a la Angulimala, but not actions a la landslides. Why not? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry, Herman, but I'm just not following you on this. --------------------------------------------- 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) #85814 From: "connie" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:42 am Subject: Perfections Corner (155) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: Some people wonder how, in the development of satipa.t.thaana, one can at the moment of seeing understand the characteristics of the realities that are appearing. There is only one way: when someone has listened to the Dhamma he can be mindful so that he will understand the characteristic of seeing that sees at this very moment, or the characteristics of the other dhammas that are appearing at this moment. At the moment of understanding realities, satipa.t.thaana is being developed. Sati is mindful of the characteristic of the reality which experiences or knows, such as seeing, and pa~n~naa is able to understand that characteristic, it realizes that it is only a reality which is not self, not a being, not a person. At whatever moment seeing, hearing, the other sense-cognitions or other types of citta present themselves, the aayatanas can be understood: the eye and visible object, the ear and sound, the other sense-bases and sense objects, citta and dhammas. At those moments pa~n~naa begins to develop by knowing the characteristics of realities which are appearing. We can use the word satipa.t.thaana for this process, but what matters above all is knowing how pa~n~naa is to be developed: when seeing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of seeing, when hearing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of hearing, and so on for the other sense-cognitions and for other types of citta. The perfection of energy, viriya, should arise together with pa~n~naa, otherwise one will make an effort for something else, different from the right effort to understand the characteristics of realities, just as they naturally arise in daily life. ..to be continued, connie #85815 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:44 am Subject: produced and unproduced rupa. nilovg Dear Alex, Sarah explained this subject to you and I can add a little from the Visuddhimagga and Tiika, Ch XIV, 71: Tiika: 77. Nipphannaruupa.m panettha ruuparuupa.m naamaati “Here, however, 'produced matter' is called 'concrete matter' ” N: The Tiika explains that concrete matter is included among the twentyeight kinds of materiality and that it is associated with matter as characteristics. N: All materiality has the characteristics of origination, continuity, decay and breaking up. Tiika: Ruppana.m ruupa.m, ta.m etassa atthiiti .. Materiality that is molested, this is the meaning of it... N: Ruppana is a word association with ruupa, and ruppana means being molested. The Dispeller I, (Ch 1, p. 3) explains: it is being molested (disturbed or battered) by cold, heat, hunger, etc. We read: “it is well-beaten; it is oppressed, it is broken...” Concrete matter is the translation of ruupa-ruupa. The Tiika explains that the reduplication in ruupa-ruupa is used in a way similar to dukkha-dukkha. Dukkha can mean: dukkha-dukkha, suffering that is obvious such as bodily and mental suffering, dukkha because of change and dukkha as characteristic inherent in all conditioned dhammas. Tiika text: ruppanasabhaava.m ruupanti attho... Evenso the word ruupa-ruupa means that it has a nature of being molested... Yadi eva.m, aakaasadhaatu-aadiina.m katha.m ruupabhaavoti? How has the element of space and so on (that is not produced) the nature of materiality? Nipphannaruupassa paricchedavikaaralakkha.nabhaavato taggatikamevaati “ruupan”tveva vuccati. He called them just materiality because they have the nature of being the separation, changeability and being characteristics of produced materiality, and just referred to that. N: remarks: Also the unproduced materiality is called rupa, because they are attributes of the rupas that are produced, thus, of concrete matter (ruupa-ruupa). They delimit the groups of rupa, they are changeability of rupa (the intimations that are a certain unique change of the elements, lightness etc.) and the four characteristics inherent in all rupas. Thus, as the Vis. text states, rupas can, in this way, be classified as fourfold. Concrete matter is one class, and the unproduced materiality is classified as threefold. _____ Threefold: three aspects: They delimit the groups of rupa, they are changeability of rupa (the intimations that are a certain unique change of the elements, lightness etc.) and the four characteristics inherent in all rupas. But, as Sarah also said, the unproduced rupas are paramattha dhammas, they belong to the classification of twentyeight rupas. ****** Nina. #85816 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "Then I take it you also view streams of cittas with the same object as also figments of the imagination? What of the commentarial psychology? You dismiss that as dealing with fictions? Scott: I take issue with the notion of 'streams'. I'm saying that the construct 'stream of cittas' is a fiction. Sincerely, Scott. #85817 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:08 am Subject: Re:German site, to Dieter moellerdieter Dear Nina, I suppose the site Palikanon.com has been changed to http://www.palikanon.de/ where Khuddaka can be found too.. (assuming N.' s translation) with Metta Dieter #85818 From: Charles Thompson Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:08 am Subject: RE: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced dhammasaro Good friend Howard, et al Very warm thanks for your very quick reply... Just a concern... one step leads to another step to another until we are no longer Theravadin... I saw this as a temporary monk in Thailand and USA... well, a limited view... only a monk for one year... However, I observed much not what is taught in the Ti-Pitaka... IMHO, both the influence of Hinduism and Mahayana, etc. are in Theravadin monastaries in Thailand and USA. Hopefully, my observations are totally incorrect!!!! yours in the Dhamma-Vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@...: upasaka@...: Sat, 17 May 2008 10:27:07 -0400Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced Hi, Chuck -In a message dated 5/17/2008 10:15:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dhammasaro@... writes:Good valued friends,May we limit our discussions to Theravada Buddhism? I have enough trouble with keeping up with your Pali and English discussions. I am afraid Sanskrit and Tibetan is way, way too, too much for me!!!Or, am I asking too much?Please kindly advise...yours in the dhamma-vihara,Chuck (AKA Supachallo, Dhammasaro)============================ I won't promise to *never* stray, but I think a single post shouldn't get anyone in a tizzy. ;-) I rarely write about aspects of Buddhism beyond the Dhamma as put forward by the Buddha in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, and should I ever significantly overstep, I count on the moderators to point that out.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) #85821 From: Charles Thompson Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:09 am Subject: RE: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced dhammasaro I had thre redials with no indication of message sent!!! Sorry. #85822 From: Charles Thompson Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:14 am Subject: Currently in Bangkok dhammasaro Good friends, please forgive my errors... I have a rapidly drop-out dial-up internet connection here in Bangkok. #85823 From: Charles Thompson Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:46 am Subject: RE: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced dhammasaro Good friends, I understand, perhaps incorrectly, there are at least two versions of the Abhidhamma (Skt: Abhidharma?)... which version are we discussing? Warm thanks. yours in the Dhamma-Vihara, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@...: upasaka@...: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:10:31 -0400Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced 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 asingular entity." That was my point when I said that the error withregard to aggregations is not in saying that there *are* aggregationsbut in conceiving (labeling) them as individuals and not merecollections."Larry: I think abhidhamma would call an unexamined aggregation a"compact whole" or possibly simply a perception. As I understand itperception can single out one element of an aggregation, take thatelement as a sign of that aggregation and link that sign with otherassociations. The main fault with all that, apart from all the wrongidentifications, 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.-------------------------------------------- #85824 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply. I'd still appreciate your remarks with regards to the difference between the Dependent Origination versus the Conditional Relations methods. Its difficult to proceed when such clarifications are not made - its like running off in all directions. Me: "The volition ('action and intention') that there is simply is not the volition of an agent." A: "Still, the above does not contradict the possibility of volition to change the course and attenuate at least some past causes." Scott: Of course not. A: " Purpose can only be if there is a possibility of choice. If there isn't any possibility of choice or attenuating at least SOME past causes - then talk about "Volition", "Choosing", "Responcibility", "Effort", "Kamma" is empty talk." Scott: Of course. There is kusala and there is akusala. A: "Of course it is only will (or Citta) that wills. The discussion was about possibility of impersonally making alternative choices." Scott: Cetanaa wills. Cetanaa arises conascently with citta and is cetasika. Cetanaa wills impersonally. In agreeing, you help rest the case that there is no one who pulls or does not pull the trigger, while it seems that many triggers continue to be pulled or not pulled. Sincerely, Scott. #85825 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced upasaka_howard Hi, Chuck - In a message dated 5/17/2008 11:10:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dhammasaro@... writes: I had thre redials with no indication of message sent!!! Sorry. ======================== They say that three's a charm! ;-) 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) #85826 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex, Howard, All Alex, your "after title" -- Cold blooded conditionality" is perfect! Conditionality doesn't give a damn...it just does. And it generates us, and it murders us. This "fine line" your talking about in order to try to have some measure of "free choice" just doesn't fly. I think we'd all like to think so, in a way, but bottom lines is -- pure, selfless, interaction of forces. Yes! Effort can be applied. But it is not "me" applying it, it is the conditions...conditions of education, conditions of experience, conditions of memories, physical forces, mental forces, etc., all interacting in the big stew of conditionality. It is this vision, fully developed, that is the escape from suffering. TG In a message dated 5/17/2008 8:32:20 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Of course there isn't a 100% free choice. But let us not think in black or white categories (100% no choice or 100% free choice). Of course there are many things that cannot be changed due to past conditions. But I believe that there are "glitches" in conditionality that CAN be exploited. But will they be or not, depends on various subjective factors. And even IF everything is 100% predetermined "what happens today is 100% dependent on causes in the past, and what will happen tomorrow was set in stone yesterday" I still think it is much more skillful to talk about "bringing up effort, mindfulness, panna and so on and work as hard as possible, do good avoid evil, purify the mind, etc" and setting up good conditions. "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." — SN 45.8 "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — AN 2.19 "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right resolve: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into right speech: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into right livelihood: This is one's right effort." — MN 117 There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence.persistence... concentration founded on intent... c founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. _http://www.accesstohttp://www.ahttp://www.ahttp://www.http://www.ahttp_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part2.html) #part2-d Etc etc. Best Wishes, Alex #85827 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Herman, Howard, Alex I look at it this way Herman, the quote you posted below, or any quote from the Suttas being used to support some idea of free will,....is an "instruction." I.E., it is a condition for the mind. It is like a computer program. The mind now has this in-form-ation as part of its operating process. Therefore, conditions can now be "directed" by this information and corresponding actions are able to result. As to exactly how the mind will respond, depends on the overall accumulation of information, the environment (friends) around them, and such a multitude of other factors ... that our ability to follow the ebbs and flows of conditionality, with precision, is difficult to "see." Therefore, it often seems to us...there must be some sort of choice involved. But not really. Its just conditions following the path of least resistance. There aint nothing easy about practicing dhamma true ... that's why we need to be so focused on issues like death and suffering that can propel such effort....effort due to conditions. TG In a message dated 5/17/2008 6:32:36 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > 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 #85828 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:German site, to Dieter nilovg Dear Dieter, thank you very much, das ist wunderbar. The site looks very good. Nina. Op 17-mei-2008, om 17:08 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > I suppose the site Palikanon.com has been changed to http:// > www.palikanon.de/ > where Khuddaka can be found too.. (assuming N.' s translation) #85829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Tibetan-Buddhist Article Larry Referenced nilovg Dear Chuck, good to see you. Here we discuss the Theravada one. Nina. Op 17-mei-2008, om 17:46 heeft Charles Thompson het volgende geschreven: > I understand, perhaps incorrectly, there are at least two versions > of the Abhidhamma (Skt: Abhidharma?)... which version are we > discussing? #85830 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (155) nilovg Dear Connie, Op 17-mei-2008, om 16:42 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > when seeing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of > seeing, when hearing appears, one begins to understand the > characteristic of hearing, and so on for the other sense-cognitions > and for other types of citta. The perfection of energy, viriya, > should arise together with pa~n~naa, otherwise one will make an > effort for something else, different from the right effort to > understand the characteristics of realities, just as they naturally > arise in daily life. ------- N: the part on effort is very important. People are always wondering: we should make an effort, but when, and what for? It can arise naturally, we do not have to think of effort. Here is right effort: when seeing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of seeing. I like the: Nina. #85831 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard This caught my eye... LOL In a message dated 5/17/2008 5:54:20 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: 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. .............................................................. TG: You surprise me now and then. This is now. LOL I'm just not aware of any such phenomena than can fit this description. As far as I understand... no phenomena stands on "its own" so none is not composed by "other phenomena." Except Nibbana which may simply be "no phenomena." Hence, I cringe whenever I see you use Paramattha Dhamma. LOL When other people use it, I just laugh. LOL ................................................................. That sense of 'ultimate' (or 'basic') doesn't bother me in the slightest. .............................................. TG: <------ Ultimately cringing. LOL .................................................. I also have no problem with the word 'reality' as referring to something actually observed as opposed to merely imagined. ...................................................... TG: Now I understand the Buddha's analogy when he says would yet another spear cause more affliction after being stabbed 100 times prior. LOL .......................................................... 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.) ................................................................. TG: I understand you here. But here's what I think, and I think you know what I think, but I'll say it anyway to "condition" you to death. ;-) The "delusion" of self does arise. It is phenomena. It is mentality. There is no actual "self" that arises, so there is no need to give it any consideration as a "phenomena" in anyway whatsoever...in terms of considering a level of "reality" for it. This applies to all concepts and imaginations too. To me, there are no different levels of "reality," there is just what arises and what doesn't. Delusion arises yes, but that doesn't mean there is somehow some "projected" sub-phenomena that corresponds to that delusion. The delusion is just mentality and doesn't ever stray from that. So there is a difference between delusion and non-delusion. But there is no difference in the level of "reality" (phenomena) of what arises. Phenomena are just phenomena, if it arises it arise, but there's nothing that arises that doesn't arise. LOL To me, the very discussion of different levels of reality, as is generally done in DSG, brings with it the idea of self and is done, unwittingly, to hold on to self-view as represented by the "ultimate realities" in contrast to "concept." It is in this way that an imagined compliance with the Suttas is developed. But "no-self" is far more comprehensive and obliterating than that. Sweeeet .............................................................. Simply using the term 'phenomena' as translation of 'dhammas' is fine, in which case 'paramattha dhamma' is translated as 'ultimate/basic phenomenon'. .................................................. TG: I can happily live with "phenomena." Throw me a bone.... LOL The idea of various classes of phenomenal reality...ouch. ;-) TG OUT .................................................... #85832 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard and Herman, Op 17-mei-2008, om 13:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > 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. ------ N: I do not deny this. The Buddha speaks about the importance of association with the right friends. That is helpful for the development of understanding. So, I would say: this helps 'our' kusala cittas. --------- > H: 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. ------ N: And here I do not agree, when speaking of kamma of someone else producing vipaka for the listener. Association with the good friend, hearing the Good Dhamma from him or her helps the kusala citta of the listener, but vipaka? No. We have to keep to this: vipaka is rebirth- consciousness, the sense cognitions and some other types within a process. If we do not keep strictly to cittas we are lost. If you wish to understand vipaka, let us look at Connie's posting on the Perfections: Seeing at this very moment is vipaka. We have to consider this over and over again. Hearing is vipaka, bodyconsciousness is vipaka, painful bodily feeling is vipaka. Just consider one citta at a time, at this moment. This is the only way. Nina. #85833 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Alex, Op 16-mei-2008, om 23:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > 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. ------ N: Of course we should be prudent. Negligence is akusala. ------- > > A:Do you take Medication? > Are you generally careful when crossing the street, etc etc? ------- N: No doctor, no need at the moment, but it can change, we never know. Of course I am careful. An acident can suddenly happen: due to kamma. -------- > > A: "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. ------ N: Agreed. Not everything. Nina. #85834 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 17, 2008 12:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' nilovg Hi Alex, Op 17-mei-2008, om 0:03 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > 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. > > ------ N: Sarah answered. As she said it is not just sa~n~naa, and, she kept on saying, and rightly so, the *characteristic* can still appear. No representational image of characteristics of Lobha simulteneously present WITH Sati. It is not sa~n~naa. Just try this: can you notice seeing now? Seeing citta has just gone when you notice it, seeing and noticing cannot arise at the same time. but it is very much present, is it not? -------- A: Or maybe the present Citta itself carries ALL the information from the past. ------- N:And this is another subject, different from our discussion above about sati. Each citta contains all accumulated kusala and akusala of the past. Possible, because citta is mental. It is not a room that is limited in what it can contain. Think of the latent tendencies, from aeons ago, so stubborn, hard to eradicate, only by lokuttara magga-cittas. Nina. #85835 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/17/2008 2:41:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard This caught my eye... LOL In a message dated 5/17/2008 5:54:20 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: 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. .............................................................. TG: You surprise me now and then. This is now. LOL I'm just not aware of any such phenomena than can fit this description. As far as I understand... no phenomena stands on "its own" so none is not composed by "other phenomena." Except Nibbana which may simply be "no phenomena." -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not speaking of phenomena standing on their own. All I'm talking about are phenomena that do not *consist* of other phenomena, having them as components or parts or elements. An example of such for me would be any instance of hardness or of warmth. A tree is quite different, and is actually a (fuzzy) system of interacting phenomena. ---------------------------------------------------- Hence, I cringe whenever I see you use Paramattha Dhamma. LOL When other people use it, I just laugh. LOL ................................................................. That sense of 'ultimate' (or 'basic') doesn't bother me in the slightest. .............................................. TG: <------ Ultimately cringing. LOL .................................................. I also have no problem with the word 'reality' as referring to something actually observed as opposed to merely imagined. ...................................................... TG: Now I understand the Buddha's analogy when he says would yet another spear cause more affliction after being stabbed 100 times prior. LOL .......................................................... 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.) ................................................................. TG: I understand you here. But here's what I think, and I think you know what I think, but I'll say it anyway to "condition" you to death. ;-) The "delusion" of self does arise. It is phenomena. It is mentality. There is no actual "self" that arises, so there is no need to give it any consideration as a "phenomena" in anyway whatsoever...in terms of considering a level of "reality" for it. This applies to all concepts and imaginations too. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Quite so. -------------------------------------------------- To me, there are no different levels of "reality," there is just what arises and what doesn't. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree! ------------------------------------------------- Delusion arises yes, but that doesn't mean there is somehow some "projected" sub-phenomena that corresponds to that delusion. The delusion is just mentality and doesn't ever stray from that. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, delusion is a mental phenomenon. It actually occurs. It is not imagined. It is real. ------------------------------------------------ So there is a difference between delusion and non-delusion. But there is no difference in the level of "reality" (phenomena) of what arises. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that entirely, and I haven't said otherwise. In fact, I explicitly rejected degrees of reality. Whatever is actually experienced and not just imagined is real. It may be misperceived and misconceived d to delusion, but that is another matter. -------------------------------------------- Phenomena are just phenomena, if it arises it arise, but there's nothing that arises that doesn't arise. LOL To me, the very discussion of different levels of reality, as is generally done in DSG, brings with it the idea of self and is done, unwittingly, to hold on to self-view as represented by the "ultimate realities" in contrast to "concept." It is in this way that an imagined compliance with the Suttas is developed. But "no-self" is far more comprehensive and obliterating than that. Sweeeet .............................................................. Simply using the term 'phenomena' as translation of 'dhammas' is fine, in which case 'paramattha dhamma' is translated as 'ultimate/basic phenomenon'. .................................................. TG: I can happily live with "phenomena." Throw me a bone.... LOL The idea of various classes of phenomenal reality...ouch. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are differences among phenomena. Some are composed of parts, our bodies for example, and others are not. Some are mental, others are physical. All sorts of distinctions. Not all phenomena are the same. They are perfectly alike only in sharing the tilakkhana. -------------------------------------------------------- TG OUT .................................................... 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) #85836 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/17/2008 2:55:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard and Herman, Op 17-mei-2008, om 13:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > 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. ------ N: I do not deny this. The Buddha speaks about the importance of association with the right friends. That is helpful for the development of understanding. So, I would say: this helps 'our' kusala cittas. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Good! ---------------------------------------- --------- > H: 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. ------ N: And here I do not agree, when speaking of kamma of someone else producing vipaka for the listener. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't say that, Nina. I spoke of my intention leading to actions that prompt intentional actions in others. If A hits B, B may be angered and return the blow. A's action prompts the quick intention in B to respond in kind. ---------------------------------------------- Association with the good friend, hearing the Good Dhamma from him or her helps the kusala citta of the listener, but vipaka? ------------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, you misread me, and you are attacking a straw man. -------------------------------------------- No. We have to keep to this: vipaka is rebirth- consciousness, the sense cognitions and some other types within a process. If we do not keep strictly to cittas we are lost. If you wish to understand vipaka, let us look at Connie's posting on the Perfections: Seeing at this very moment is vipaka. We have to consider this over and over again. Hearing is vipaka, bodyconsciousness is vipaka, painful bodily feeling is vipaka. Just consider one citta at a time, at this moment. This is the only way. Nina. ============================= Nina, you didn't understand my post. :-) Please reread 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) #85837 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 9:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 5/17/2008 1:32:20 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: I'm not speaking of phenomena standing on their own. All I'm talking about are phenomena that do not *consist* of other phenomena, having them as components or parts or elements. An example of such for me would be any instance of hardness or of warmth. A tree is quite different, and is actually a (fuzzy) system of interacting phenomena. ............................................... TG: I think I'm aware of what you mean. I'm still not aware of any phenomena that "do not consist of other phenomena." (In your words.) Hardness and warmth are both experiences. I can't even imaging the billions of conditions necessary to support such phenomena. A "tree" is actually a simpler phenomena because it at least does not have the mental component to consider. Even the Four Great Element cannot stand without a conditioned relationship to the other 3 elements. TG OUT .......................................................... #85838 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 9:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard (#2) In a message dated 5/17/2008 1:32:20 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: So there is a difference between delusion and non-delusion. But there is no difference in the level of "reality" (phenomena) of what arises. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that entirely, and I haven't said otherwise. In fact, I explicitly rejected degrees of reality. Whatever is actually experienced and not just imagined is real. It may be misperceived and misconceived d to delusion, but that is another matter. -------------------------------------------- ......................................................................... TG: This argument puts us back at the beginning...with an "imagined class of phenomena." In other words, what arises arise, what doesn't doesn't. So what are we comparing a "reality" to? The "imagined" are perceptions. They arise. What is it that we are "imagining" that doesn't arise? ................................................................. Phenomena are just phenomena, if it arises it arise, but there's nothing that arises that doesn't arise. LOL To me, the very discussion of different levels of reality, as is generally done in DSG, brings with it the idea of self and is done, unwittingly, to hold on to self-view as represented by the "ultimate realities" in contrast to "concept." It is in this way that an imagined compliance with the Suttas is developed. But "no-self" is far more comprehensive and obliterating than that. Sweeeet .............................................................. Simply using the term 'phenomena' as translation of 'dhammas' is fine, in which case 'paramattha dhamma' is translated as 'ultimate/basic phenomenon'. ......................................................... TG: Why translate it at all? Its not in the Suttas as far as I understand. Why translate a term that is based on a mis-understanding of the Suttas? I wouldn't deal with it...other than reject it. ..................................................... .................................................. TG: I can happily live with "phenomena." Throw me a bone.... LOL The idea of various classes of phenomenal reality...ouch. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are differences among phenomena. Some are composed of parts, our bodies for example, and others are not. Some are mental, others are physical. All sorts of distinctions. Not all phenomena are the same. They are perfectly alike only in sharing the tilakkhana. .............................................................. TG: Agreed. Great comment of the tilakkhana. So when describing phenomena and wanting to be specific, we can say -- "mental phenomena," "physical phenomena," visual-phenomena, etc. Keeping in mind, these distinctions are from "our perspective" and not the phenomena's. The phenomena don't give a damn. TG OUT ...................................................... #85839 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:33 pm Subject: Perhaps not Cold blooded fatalistic conditionality truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Scott: Cetanaa wills. Cetanaa arises conascently with citta and is > cetasika. Cetanaa wills impersonally. In agreeing, you help rest the > case that there is no one who pulls or does not pull the trigger, > while it seems that many triggers continue to be pulled or not pulled. > Of course there is no one pulling the trigger. However what is important to understand that there are multiple possible future outcomes possible. Hopefully the actual outcome will be kusala leading to Nibbana. Best Wishes, Alex #85840 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:43 pm Subject: Re: Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hi TG and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi Alex, Howard, All > This "fine line" your talking about in order to try to have some measure of "free choice" just doesn't fly. I think we'd all like to think so, in a way, but bottom lines is -- pure, selfless, interaction of forces. > Even if the above is true, it is still good to put in conditions of "believing in effort to bring up Kusala and remove akusala". Because otherwise some nama-rupas when little akusala arises, decide that "nothing can be done so no need trying to remove it" . However that view sounds a bit too extreme. Reading the suttas give the impression that the future (AD 2008+) outcome wasn't determined during Big Bang or so. > > Yes! Effort can be applied. But it is not "me" applying it, it is the conditions...conditions of education, conditions of experience, conditions of memories, physical forces, mental forces, etc., all interacting in the big stew of conditionality. It is this vision, fully developed,that is the escape from suffering. > TG > But I wasn't arguing for self behind the forces. I was trying to talk about that the force itself has MULTIPLE possible outcomes and sometimes it may develop in one or the other way. Best Wishes, Alex #85841 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:49 pm Subject: Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Hello TG and all, Interesting idea, however, one problem: According to the suttas Buddha not only taught USEFUL information (which is what you are trying to say with your He is programing us) but TRUE as well. Sorry I don't have a sutta ref at the moment. I think it was in that sutta where he was arguing with a prince holding a baby on his lap (a cheap debaters trick). Of course in Mahayana there developed a skillful means doctrine, etc etc... But from the Pali Suttas it is clear: Buddha would NOT lie, even if it were useful and beneficial. Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > > Hi Herman, Howard, Alex > > > I look at it this way Herman, the quote you posted below, or any quote from > the Suttas being used to support some idea of free will,....is an > "instruction." I.E., it is a condition for the mind. It is like a computer program. The mind now has this in-form-ation as part of its operating process. Therefore, conditions can now be "directed" by this information and corresponding actions are able to result. > > > As to exactly how the mind will respond, depends on the overall accumulation > of information, the environment (friends) around them, and such a multitude > of other factors ... that our ability to follow the ebbs and flows of > conditionality, with precision, is difficult to "see." Therefore, it often seems to > us...there must be some sort of choice involved. But not really. Its just > conditions following the path of least resistance. > > > There aint nothing easy about practicing dhamma true ... that's why we need > to be so focused on issues like death and suffering that can propel such > effort....effort due to conditions. > > > TG #85842 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 5:56 pm Subject: Re: Pali, to Scott. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks: N: "Warder Ch 14, p. 86: bhaveyya: optative: should, would, may." Scott: I'm on it. Sincerely, Scott. #85843 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings egberdina Hi colette, 2008/5/16 colette : > Hi Herman, > > 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 might help to realise that the conspirators are also "planned out", and that there is no-one who is acting freely in a quest of their own choosing. But we are not defenseless against those that would harm us in their ignorance, a quick burst of loving-kindness, compassion, appreciative joy or equanimity in all directions, never goes astray. > > 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. The middle-class is a hazy concept that you can fruitfully think about in terms of economic behaviour of groups in general, but what you actually encounter in your daily life are individuals, none of whom carry a membership card to any class, but who each have their own individual history, just like you. Having said that, I don't doubt that there are those who treat you badly, and I'm sorry it happens. >> > 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. <....> Your powers of analysis are A1. But I do not get the feeling that you actually want to be like the masses, or is that just a defence mechanism? > 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. > Man-O-Man (my inclination was to write a series of expletives, but this is a family site :-)), that is quite a history. Four years of recoop suggests very serious injuries indeed. Do you remember any of the crash? Cheers Herman #85844 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 8:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/17 sarah abbott : > Hi Alex, > .... > S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are characteristics of red. How is the absence of a characteristic related to what characteristic it is an absence of? > 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. As B. Bodhi has pointed out in his introduction to CMA, the cittavitthi theory is entirely commentarial in origin, as are the paramattha and sabhava views of elements. I think it is unwise that even when we know these views and theories to be entirely commentarial to continue to present them as originating with the Buddha. Cheers Herman #85845 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 4:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/17/2008 4:04:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard In a message dated 5/17/2008 1:32:20 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: I'm not speaking of phenomena standing on their own. All I'm talking about are phenomena that do not *consist* of other phenomena, having them as components or parts or elements. An example of such for me would be any instance of hardness or of warmth. A tree is quite different, and is actually a (fuzzy) system of interacting phenomena. ............................................... TG: I think I'm aware of what you mean. I'm still not aware of any phenomena that "do not consist of other phenomena." (In your words.) Hardness and warmth are both experiences. I can't even imaging the billions of conditions necessary to support such phenomena. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Nor can I. But they aren't components of the hardness or warmth - they are supporting conditions. ----------------------------------------------- A "tree" is actually a simpler phenomena because it at least does not have the mental component to consider. --------------------------------------------- Howard: From my phenomenalist perspective, that's not quite so, but that is too complex of a matter to get into - too messy of a can of worms! -------------------------------------------- Even the Four Great Element cannot stand without a conditioned relationship to the other 3 elements. -------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not disputing the existence of conditions for any dhammas other than nibbana. ------------------------------------------- TG OUT ======================== 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) #85846 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 4:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/17/2008 4:23:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard (#2) In a message dated 5/17/2008 1:32:20 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: So there is a difference between delusion and non-delusion. But there is no difference in the level of "reality" (phenomena) of what arises. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that entirely, and I haven't said otherwise. In fact, I explicitly rejected degrees of reality. Whatever is actually experienced and not just imagined is real. It may be misperceived and misconceived d to delusion, but that is another matter. -------------------------------------------- ......................................................................... TG: This argument puts us back at the beginning...with an "imagined class of phenomena." ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Huh? We imagine that there are selves, but there are not. When we say "Selves are merely imagined," that sentence does NOT imply that there is a class of selves. The form of the sentence is unavoidable - language is as it is. ------------------------------------------------ In other words, what arises arise, what doesn't doesn't. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! when you say "What doesn't arise," what can you be talking about!? You see, such language use is unavoidable! --------------------------------------------------- So what are we comparing a "reality" to? The "imagined" are perceptions. They arise. What is it that we are "imagining" that doesn't arise? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are lots of thought-about-things that are only thought about and do not exist. In many cases we need to *discover* that they do not exist. One's alleged "self" is the most pertinent Buddhist example. -------------------------------------------------- ................................................................. Phenomena are just phenomena, if it arises it arise, but there's nothing that arises that doesn't arise. LOL To me, the very discussion of different levels of reality, as is generally done in DSG, brings with it the idea of self and is done, unwittingly, to hold on to self-view as represented by the "ultimate realities" in contrast to "concept." It is in this way that an imagined compliance with the Suttas is developed. But "no-self" is far more comprehensive and obliterating than that. Sweeeet .............................................................. Simply using the term 'phenomena' as translation of 'dhammas' is fine, in which case 'paramattha dhamma' is translated as 'ultimate/basic phenomenon'. ......................................................... TG: Why translate it at all? Its not in the Suttas as far as I understand. Why translate a term that is based on a mis-understanding of the Suttas? I wouldn't deal with it...other than reject it. ..................................................... .................................................. TG: I can happily live with "phenomena." Throw me a bone.... LOL The idea of various classes of phenomenal reality...ouch. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are differences among phenomena. Some are composed of parts, our bodies for example, and others are not. Some are mental, others are physical. All sorts of distinctions. Not all phenomena are the same. They are perfectly alike only in sharing the tilakkhana. .............................................................. TG: Agreed. Great comment of the tilakkhana. So when describing phenomena and wanting to be specific, we can say -- "mental phenomena," "physical phenomena," visual-phenomena, etc. Keeping in mind, these distinctions are from "our perspective" and not the phenomena's. The phenomena don't give a damn. TG OUT ======================== 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) #85847 From: "colette" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 7:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings ksheri3 Hi Herman, Another good post/reply, AND IT JUST SO HAPPENS that I'm working on the strategy, if the Dharmas can or could have a strategy, of the PAST DHARMA, the PRESENT DHARMA, and the FUTURE DHARMA. Naturally, I guess I'll have to make the last the first, no? > > Man-O-Man (my inclination was to write a series of expletives, but > this is a family site :-)), that is quite a history. Four years of > recoop suggests very serious injuries indeed. Do you remember any of > the crash? > colette: I clearly remember entering the garage the night before the accident. I have no memory of entering the house, going to bed, getting up the next day, going to school and the usual routine, etc. The first thoughts I had when I woke up in the hospital were the ability to do "one-hitters" using the Graphics Bong (a unique water filled smoking utensil that gave monster hits, I was known for my lung capacity and ability to smoke an entire bowl in one hit during those yrs.) I can't explain how difficult the trauma was! Plus the fact that my dad had condemned me, had me completely isolated from any human companionship, and was a ruthless dictator that left me no other choice but to join the Navy and get the hell out of DuPage county <....>. Sorry Herman, I've gotta get off the computer so that I can enjoy some peace and quiet here at home. In a short while the roomates will come home with approx. 6 kids and they will be stomping on the ceiling, I live in an unfinished basement, and they will create an endless racket clumping up & down the stairs. Thanx for the warm thoughts. toodles, colette <....> #85848 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex In a message dated 5/17/2008 6:44:15 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Even if the above is true, it is still good to put in conditions of "believing in effort to bring up Kusala and remove akusala". .................................... TG: Agreed. ........................................ Because otherwise some nama-rupas when little akusala arises, decide that "nothing can be done so no need trying to remove it" . However that view sounds a bit too extreme. Reading the suttas give the impression that the future (AD 2008+) outcome wasn't determined during Big Bang or so. .................................................................. TG: The variables are so complex there would be no way to predict it. Maybe a computer the size of the universe could. ;-) ................................................................. > > Yes! Effort can be applied. But it is not "me" applying it, it is the conditions..is the conditions...conditions of educa experience, conditions of memories, physical forces, mental forces, etc., all interacting in the big stew of conditionality. It is this vision, fully developed,that is the escape from suffering. > TG > But I wasn't arguing for self behind the forces. I was trying to talk about that the force itself has MULTIPLE possible outcomes and sometimes it may develop in one or the other way. .................................................... TG: I can't argue with that. Sounds good. TG OUT Best Wishes, #85849 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 17, 2008 6:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Alex Never claimed the Buddha lied...wouldn't do so. Not sure how you mean it. However, he certainly would teach at different levels. If one were to try to find inconsistencies, they certainly could. But it would be because they did not have the sensibility to figure out why the Buddha said what and when. TG OUT In a message dated 5/17/2008 6:49:51 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello TG and all, Interesting idea, however, one problem: According to the suttas Buddha not only taught USEFUL information (which is what you are trying to say with your He is programing us) but TRUE as well. Sorry I don't have a sutta ref at the moment. I think it was in that sutta where he was arguing with a prince holding a baby on his lap (a cheap debaters trick). Of course in Mahayana there developed a skillful means doctrine, etc etc... But from the Pali Suttas it is clear: Buddha would NOT lie, even if it were useful and beneficial. Best wishes, Alex --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , TGrand458@.., TG > > > Hi Herman, Howard, Alex > > > I look at it this way Herman, the quote you posted below, or any quote from > the Suttas being used to support some idea of free will,....is an > "instruction. "instruction." I.E., it is a condition for th a computer program. The mind now has this in-form-ation as part of its operating process. Therefore, conditions can now be "directed" by this information and corresponding actions are able to result. > > > As to exactly how the mind will respond, depends on the overall accumulation > of information, the environment (friends) around them, and such a multitude > of other factors ... that our ability to follow the ebbs and flows of > conditionality, with precision, is difficult to "see." Therefore, it often seems to > us...there must be some sort of choice involved. But not really. Its just > conditions following the path of least resistance. > > > There aint nothing easy about practicing dhamma true ... that's why we need > to be so focused on issues like death and suffering that can propel such > effort....effort due to conditions. > > > TG #85850 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 10:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/18 : > Hi, Herman - > > > If anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then what is > different about a landslide killing 100 people, and Angulimala doing > the same? What is explained by kamma that anatta doesn't? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't follow you. Kamma is intention, period. If only it were that easy, Howard. The entry on kamma in the PTS dictionary is 4 pages long. The gist of that definition, and Nyantiloka's, which is only a one-liner, is that kamma is action. II accept that the usage of kamma as intention is valid, but only in a meditative scenario. >Anatta refers to the > lack of own-being/self-existence/identity in phenomena. But there is no "thing" > that is anatta. Intention, on the other hand, is a mental activity that does > occur. I'm not arguing with you, honest :-), but I would see the above as a negative definition. It defines anatta as an absence, a lack. Nothing wrong with that of course, but for completeness sake I will just throw in that the positive definition of anatta is that all phenomena are conditioned (by conditions other than themselves, I might add, nothing is it's own condirtion). I agree that intention is mental activity, but it is mental activity only, and that is why it is the kamma of meditation. But intention has no consequences other than "in" the mind. Kamma as action, on the other hand is action in the world, and it has consequences in the world, including for others. > > On the other hand, kamma implies there are special consequences that > will follow actions a la Angulimala, but not actions a la landslides. > Why not? > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm sorry, Herman, but I'm just not following you on this. > --------------------------------------------- The point I was trying to get across is that a landslide is a conditioned phenomenon, just like Angulimala wiping out towns and villages. And they both have consequences in the world. Yet nobody talks about the kamma or vipaka of landslides, only the kamma and vipaka of beings. But if anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then a being, like a landslide, is merely something that happens, not something that acts, or intends even. Hope that is clearer Cheers Herman #85851 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/5/18 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Howard and Herman, > > >> H: 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. > ------ > N: And here I do not agree, when speaking of kamma of someone else > producing vipaka for the listener. Association with the good friend, > hearing the Good Dhamma from him or her helps the kusala citta of the > listener, but vipaka? No. We have to keep to this: vipaka is rebirth- > consciousness, the sense cognitions and some other types within a > process. If we do not keep strictly to cittas we are lost. > The following may be relevant (I could be wrong though, I was wrong once before, in 1989 it was :-)) AN 2: 125-126 "Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of wrong view. Which two? The voice of another and inappropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of wrong view." "Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which two? The voice of another and appropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of right view." Cheers Herman #85852 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi TG, 2008/5/18 : > > Hi Herman, Howard, Alex > > I look at it this way Herman, the quote you posted below, or any quote from > the Suttas being used to support some idea of free will,....is an > "instruction." I.E., it is a condition for the mind. It is like a computer program. > The mind now has this in-form-ation as part of its operating process. > Therefore, conditions can now be "directed" by this information and corresponding > actions are able to result. > > > As to exactly how the mind will respond, depends on the overall accumulation > of information, the environment (friends) around them, and such a multitude > of other factors ... that our ability to follow the ebbs and flows of > conditionality, with precision, is difficult to "see." Therefore, it often seems to > us...there must be some sort of choice involved. But not really. Its just > conditions following the path of least resistance. > > > There aint nothing easy about practicing dhamma true ... that's why we need > to be so focused on issues like death and suffering that can propel such > effort....effort due to conditions. > Ah, finally I get to disagree with you. It has been monotonous, I must say TG, to be in agreement with everything you've said since I rejoined :-) But even this disagreement may only be slight. There ain't nothing easy about practicing the dhamma, that much is true. But there is nothing hard about it either. The Buddha's invitation to his own flesh and blood Rahula, to become a neurotic basketcase before any action is undertaken is brilliant pedagogy. That is because any honest and thorough attempt to answer the question "What should I do next" will result in total insanity. Why is that so? The question is the epitome of wrong view. There isn't anyone that chooses the next course of action, at best there may be reflection on "What has just happened?" Cheers Herman #85853 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Disturbing News.... egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/17 sarah abbott : > 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. > I thought your answer was excellent. Thank you very much indeed. If I harp on about karma-vipaka in other threads, it is not because your answer was lacking, but only because I think the theory of spilt milk is :-) Cheers Herman #85854 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 12:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi TG, 2008/5/18 : > Hi Howard (#2) > > > TG: This argument puts us back at the beginning...with an "imagined class > of phenomena." > > > In other words, what arises arise, what doesn't doesn't. So what are we > comparing a "reality" to? The "imagined" are perceptions. They arise. What is > it that we are "imagining" that doesn't arise? > The difference between an imagined phenomenon and a real one cannot be arrived at from phenomena in isolation. Just like the tilakkhana cannot be attributed to sinbgle dhammas alone. It is not phenomena that are real or imagined, it is the conditionality that is attributed to sequences of phenomena that is real or imagined. I might attribute to the shimmering light in the distance the being of a lake full of water. That is commonly called a mirage, but we cannot know whether it was a mirage or not until we proceed to look for, and find or not find all the qualities that would suffice to indeed make it a lake. An other example would be the performance of rites and rituals. These performances are not imaginary, but the belief in the reality of their efficacy is. And they can become known to have been rites and rituals only, when the intended outcome does not eventuate. Phenomena in isolation are truly meaningless (and they do not occur) Cheers Herman #85855 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat May 17, 2008 11:41 pm Subject: Great Compassion! bhikkhu0 Friends: One should feel Great Compassion with those many beings heading Downwards: It is a great pity with all those thinking: Pleasure is the only good; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Terror is the only goal; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Sensuality is innocent; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Violence is allowable; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Money makes happy; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Power is progress; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Falsehood is OK; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Stealing makes rich; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Conceit covers up; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Science knows all; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Killing can be good; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Hunting is only fun; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Adultery is matured; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Paedophilia is harmless; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Drugs is fantastic; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Booze is medicine; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Giving does not help; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: After death is nothing!; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: The Hells do not exist; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Action has no effect; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: I am the better than...; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those thinking: Making-merit cannot elevate; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is veiled by wrong view; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is fooled by own opinion; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is gripped by greed & lust; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is stirred by hate & anger; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is clinging to all worldly; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who is confused by not knowing; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who prostitutes themselves; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who cheat & deceives; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who pretends what is not; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who hides what is real & true; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who destroys beings &/or things; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who pollute milieu & society; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who deliberately do bad knowing it; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who fails their duties & obligations; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those, who misses the opportunities; By that they fall! It is a great pity with all those blinded by ignorance, dragged by craving, while pushed by aversion: By that they surely fall into states of pain, agony, & despair! As if gripped by the arms by two huge & strong men & hurled into a great fire... <...> Have a nice day in Deep Pity! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #85856 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 18, 2008 1:16 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, In connection with amity there is another term, namely “courtesy” (patisanthåro). One should not merely have speech which is blameless, pleasant to the ears, affectionate, which goes to the heart and which is urbane. It is important to have also courtesy through loving-kindness. When one really develops mettå one is not without courtesy. We read in the Dhammasangani: §1344: What is courtesy (patisanthåro)? The two forms of courtesy: hospitality towards bodily needs and considerateness in matters of the Dhamma. When anyone shows courtesy it is in one or other of these two forms. There cannot be real courtesy if there is no mettå. When there is sincere courtesy in daily life it is evident that there is mettå-citta. If we do not have courtesy in our daily life we should develop mettå so that we can help other people with courtesy in our deeds and speech. The Atthasåliní (397) explains the term courtesy: In the exposition of courtesy, “carnal courtesy” (åmisa patisanthåro) is the closing, covering up, by means of bodily needs, the gap which might exist between oneself and others owing to those needs not getting satisfied. Thus, this refers to helping others by giving them things they need, by looking after them. There is a gap or separation between people all the time, between those who posses things and those who are needy. However, there is a means to close such a gap and that is by material courtesy, by giving assistance with material things, helping those in need. Then there is no longer a separation or distance between people. As to “Dhamma courtesy” (dhamma patisanthåro), this is the closing of the gap which might exist between oneself and others who did not learn the Dhamma. When we see the benefit of the Dhamma and we think it appropriate to help others by explaining the Dhamma there is courtesy of Dhamma. Then the Dhamma covers completely the gap or separation between people. ******* Nina. #85857 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 4:24 am Subject: Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...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." Scott: I've waited on a response here, Howard. You addressed me parenthetically for some reason, which seemed to require some sort of response. It is a sensitive sort of thing to respond to. It almost hangs in the ether, defying response, like some sort of Delicate Thing that no one ought, in a polite world, to respond to. That notwithstanding, my take on it will not likely please you, but you did post the description, and you did address me, and hence it is, as they say, fair game. I don't see what this has to do with anything, really, from a Dhamma perspective. You must understand where I'm coming from, though. I work everyday with people who are exploring their own psyches as deeply as they can, all open to every sort of mental experience, every sort of emotional experience, every sort of fantasy, every sort of thought, every sort of construction, every sort of dream - what have you, Howard - I've heard a lot. I've had a personal psychoanalysis as well, and have had some pretty Heavy Experiences myself. These sorts of things, in my experience, are entirely common to the human experience. If you are unfamiliar with common introspection, and especially, if you have no context (i.e. an ongoing psychotherapy context) in which to place these sorts of experiences, then you are vulnerable. For what its worth, I'd not make too much of it, if I were you. Some people are simply anxious about certain deeper *psychological and totally human things* and it really isn't that big a deal, and I wouldn't start thinking it had much to do with Dhamma, except to condition some thoughts about it, which thoughts, in the end, may not be all that Important. If you meant to suggest more by posting this, I'd be interested. For instance, you use this experience to back up a belief in a 'seamless reality' and of 'seamlessness'. I'm not familiar with 'seamlessness' as an aspect of the Dhamma. Can you suggest where such a thing is mentioned in the texts so that I might have a look at it? How would you label this experience? Was it part of the preliminary experience of jhaana, for example? And what do you think it was that you found yourself 'unprepared' for? What might have happened, do you think, had you been 'prepared'? Are you suggesting that this was some sort of burgeoning path experience in the offing? Why the fear? Don't you think that, were this to have been such an arising, that the development of the faculties would have been such that fear wouldn't have been a question? In other words, wouldn't such a thing happen naturally as conditioned by the appropriate level of development, and not be an abortive arising, spoiled by the fear of Someone who was believing in His Own Fear at the time? This alone suggests that this was only some sort of emotional experience with thinking on the side. Please take only as much offense as you do by this, though, Howard. I'm not trying to be a jerk. (And I waited a whole night before posting this, just so you know - I think a discussion about what constitutes useful 'experience' is potentially useful). No need to respond at all if this is too annoying to you. Sincerely, A Big Wet Blanket, ;-) Scott. #85858 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/18/2008 1:34:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/18 : > Hi, Herman - > > > If anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then what is > different about a landslide killing 100 people, and Angulimala doing > the same? What is explained by kamma that anatta doesn't? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't follow you. Kamma is intention, period. If only it were that easy, Howard. The entry on kamma in the PTS dictionary is 4 pages long. The gist of that definition, and Nyantiloka's, which is only a one-liner, is that kamma is action. II accept that the usage of kamma as intention is valid, but only in a meditative scenario. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, you're right - kamma is any act of intention but also any intentional act. In any case, the element of intention is central to kamma in the Dhamma. (Originally, prior to the Buddha, 'kamma' meant only "action.") ---------------------------------------------- >Anatta refers to the > lack of own-being/self-existence/identity in phenomena. But there is no "thing" > that is anatta. Intention, on the other hand, is a mental activity that does > occur. I'm not arguing with you, honest :-), but I would see the above as a negative definition. It defines anatta as an absence, a lack. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. ----------------------------------------------- Nothing wrong with that of course, but for completeness sake I will just throw in that the positive definition of anatta is that all phenomena are conditioned (by conditions other than themselves, I might add, nothing is it's own condirtion). ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Correct, with one exception: nibbana is anatta but also asankhata. --------------------------------------------- I agree that intention is mental activity, but it is mental activity only, and that is why it is the kamma of meditation. But intention has no consequences other than "in" the mind. Kamma as action, on the other hand is action in the world, and it has consequences in the world, including for others. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: My recent point has been that intention has consequences "all over the place," with only the most immediate consequences (plus vipaka, which may be long delayed) occurring within "the same" mind. -------------------------------------------- > > On the other hand, kamma implies there are special consequences that > will follow actions a la Angulimala, but not actions a la landslides. > Why not? > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm sorry, Herman, but I'm just not following you on this. > --------------------------------------------- The point I was trying to get across is that a landslide is a conditioned phenomenon, just like Angulimala wiping out towns and villages. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: From my phenomenalist perspective, the landslide is a shared experience consisting of a host of conditions. But, yes, there are apparently lots of non-kammic conditions leading to the landslide. Another matter, however, is what people are directly affected by it and in what ways. Their kamma likely played some role in that. --------------------------------------------------- And they both have consequences in the world. Yet nobody talks about the kamma or vipaka of landslides, only the kamma and vipaka of beings. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. Kamma vipaka is a very particular effect, the fruition of intention and intentional action within the same mind stream. It is that conditionality that is of greatest "personal" interest, for it is that kamma over which "we" have the greatest direct influence, and it is that effect that has the greatest long-term influence over our experience. -------------------------------------------------- But if anatta is a correct statement of the way things are, then a being, like a landslide, is merely something that happens, not something that acts, or intends even. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: There literally is no being - just a system of interacting phenomena, but within that system there is willing and acting, albeit impersonal conditions. The kamma is impersonal, and not something directed by any agent or controller. So kamma itself is anatta. ----------------------------------------------- Hope that is clearer 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) #85859 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:48 am Subject: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Hi TG & Abhidhammikas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > > Hi Alex > > > Never claimed the Buddha lied...wouldn't do so. Not sure how you mean it. > However, he certainly would teach at different levels. If one were to try to > find inconsistencies, they certainly could. But it would be because they > did not have the sensibility to figure out why the Buddha said what and when. > > > TG OUT > What I wanted to say was that as I understand Buddha's teaching is that he would NOT mislead people, even if it was for higher purpose. Skillful Means as I understand it is found ONLY in marayana. In the suttas it DOES appear that volition can be trained to respond in kusala as opposed to akusala way. It is hard, but IS possible. A question to you and Abhidhammikas. Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already "pre- determined" or "set in stone" from distant past? Best Wishes, Alex #85860 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? truth_aerator Hello Herman, Sarah and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > 2008/5/17 sarah abbott : > > Hi Alex, > > .... > > S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. > If impermanence is a characteristic of "paramattha" dhamma, then it is no longer "Ultimate" because it depends on the causes more powerful than itself. For example in DO you will NOT find "ultimate realities", just conditions and conditioning forces. I think that it is better to call Impermanence as an Ultimate Samsaric Reality. >>>>>>>> You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are characteristics of red. How is the absence of a characteristic related to what characteristic it is an absence of? >>> I agree Herman. It is illogical to say that A = A and not A, at least from a conventional logic. >>>> As B. Bodhi has pointed out in his introduction to CMA, the cittavitthi theory is entirely commentarial in origin, as are the paramattha and sabhava views of elements. I think it is unwise that even when we know these views and theories to be entirely commentarial to continue to present them as originating with the Buddha. > Cheers > Herman > Elsewhere he has said much more about authorship Abh itself. :) Best wishes, Alex #85861 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Howard (and Herman) I have some answers to posts from a couple of weeks ago that I'm hoping to get around to doing shortly, but in the meantime ... upasaka@... wrote: > 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! > It is true that, conventionally speaking, one person's actions can be a contributing factor in another's early death (e.g., A kills B), or in another's unwholesome actions (e.g., B is provoked by A's actions into doing something that B would not otherwise have done). But in the world of dhammas, this particular relationship is apparently of no real significance, at least from the "victim's" (B's) perspective. The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere impersonal circumstances. But I don't think any of the above involves pretending to disbelieve that people interact in important ways ;-)). Jon PS Herman, good to see you back! #85862 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 3:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Herman) - In a message dated 5/18/2008 9:57:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: It is true that, conventionally speaking, one person's actions can be a contributing factor in another's early death (e.g., A kills B), or in another's unwholesome actions (e.g., B is provoked by A's actions into doing something that B would not otherwise have done). But in the world of dhammas, this particular relationship is apparently of no real significance, at least from the "victim's" (B's) perspective. The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere impersonal circumstances. But I don't think any of the above involves pretending to disbelieve that people interact in important ways ;-)). =============================== A scenario, Jon: An extremely powerful explosive is cleverly placed by a terrorist aboard an airline, undetected. All the passengers on board (amazingly) had kamma coming to fruition that "called for" their death. (Hmm, how did their vipaka get to influence the terrorist!?) Then one more late-arriving passenger gets his ticket and boards the plane. HIS time is NOT up. HIS death-affecting kamma has not come to fruition. So, Jon, does that prevent the explosion from occurring? Your statement "in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed" seems to suggest that magically it will! Jon, do you really buy this? Not everything that comes to one is due to the fruition of one's kamma, and it's not just weather etc that need to be added on - those were just examples that the Buddha came up with at the moment. There ARE innocent victims, whose death is the result of the intentional action of others (and other conditions) but not their own kamma, at least in any manner of ethical/moral significance. Their kamma (intentional actions) certainly conditioned their being on that plane, but their kamma didn't "know" about the explosives. Our intentions condition our reactive tendencies, a.k.a. our accumulations. That is the relation between intention and result. Those tendencies are critical at critical moments, for example, at birth and at death, and at moments of decision, but kamma and vipaka are not magical. 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) #85863 From: "connie" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 8:28 am Subject: Perfections Corner (156) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: The Buddha's different methods of teaching Dhamma are in conformity with each other, there is no contradiction between them. For example, the Buddha taught mindfulness of death, mara.na sati. Moreover, he also taught that there are three kinds of death: momentary death (kha.nika mara.na), conventional death (sammutti mara.na) and final death (samuccheda mara.na) *1. Momentary death is death at each moment, and this means that our life occurs during only one moment of citta. One may say that life lasts long, that a person is very old, but in reality, life is a series of cittas that arise and fall away in succession. If we reduce the duration of life that seems to be very long into just one extremely short moment of citta, we can understand that life occurs during only one moment of seeing. At this moment of seeing, there is just one moment of life that arises and sees; if there would not be seeing there would be no life. Seeing has arisen and sees, and then it dies, it lasts for an extremely short moment. At the moment we are hearing, life occurs only during one short moment of hearing and then there is death. *1 Final death, samuccheda mara.na, is the final passing away of the arahat who will not be reborn. When someone who develops the perfection of pa~n~naa is mindful of death, he should not merely think of death in conventional sense, sammutti mara.na. It is not enough to think, even with some degree of detachment, that there is nobody who can own anything, and that one day we shall be separated from all things, that all we used to take for self or mine will disappear. Merely intellectual understanding cannot lead to the eradication of defilements. The true understanding of momentary death, death occurring at each moment of citta, is different from understanding of death in the conventional sense. We should understand momentary death: each moment we are seeing, seeing arises and then dies. It is the same in the case of hearing, the other sense-cognitions and thinking. If we have right understanding of momentary death, we will be able to investigate and know as they are the characteristics of the realities that are appearing. This is mindfulness of death. There are different levels of mindfulness of death, in accordance with a person's understanding. There is mindfulness of death of the level of someone who develops calm and this is different from the level of someone who develops understanding by considering and investigating the characteristic of death which occurs each moment. If we are mindful of momentary death we come to see the disadvantage of clinging to what falls away immediately. ..to be continued, connie #85864 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 4:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Alex This is a first...me being grouped in with the Abhidhammikas! What have I done to deserve this fate? LOL In a message dated 5/18/2008 6:49:18 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi TG & Abhidhammikas, --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , TGrand458@.., TG > > > Hi Alex > > > Never claimed the Buddha lied...wouldn' Never claimed the Buddha lied mean it. > However, he certainly would teach at different levels. If one were to try to > find inconsistencies, they certainly could. But it would be because they > did not have the sensibility to figure out why the Buddha said what and when. > > > TG OUT > What I wanted to say was that as I understand Buddha's teaching is that he would NOT mislead people, even if it was for higher purpose. Skillful Means as I understand it is found ONLY in marayana. ....................................................... TG: There is a Sutta where, I think the lay disciple Anathapindika, is taught a higher teaching usually presented to monks. He cries (with appreciation) and says that such teachings should be given to lay people more often too. The teachings on elements, etc. were not often presented to lay people. Does this mean the Buddha was lying to them because he wasn't teaching at a more accurate and higher level to them? I think not. But technically, someone could make that case, but it would be a foolish case IMO. If the Buddha had taught to them at a higher level, for the most part, they would have gotten nothing out of it. The Buddha did once slightly rebuke Sariputta for teaching a "lower teaching" to someone who had the ability to understand at a higher level. ........................................................ In the suttas it DOES appear that volition can be trained to respond in kusala as opposed to akusala way. It is hard, but IS possible. .......................................................... TG: I gotta do a "Howard" here... HUH? I thought I recently wrote to you extensively saying the same thing. Yes, it is volition and conditions being trained, not a "person" in the sense of "its own thing." Now you mention it, I have been sounding slightly "Abhidhammika" lately. LOL But I assure you, its just a "surface" anomaly. ;-) ............................................................. A question to you and Abhidhammikas. ................................................ TG: LOL Oh man!!!!!! Sarah and Nina must be loving this! .............................................. Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already "pre- determined" or "set in stone" from distant past? .............................................................. TG: I don't know, but I will claim, based on my understanding, that it all unfolded due to conditions, in accordance with conditional forces. Hey, maybe it was "predetermined" that you would garner the conditions necessary to become enlightened in the near future. (Probably due partially to your meeting with me.) LOL Due to the fact that we're looking at a near infinite amount of conditioning possibilities in the universe, and that the forces between moving in one direction or another can be extremely subtle, there is surely no way to predict outcomes very far in advance. Just like predicting weather, when we know what the conditions are today, mixed with understanding of principles related to weather, we can reasonably well predict a few days in advance what will occur. After that, the variables are too scattered (from today's point of view) and the predictions start to fall apart. I think the idea of "predetermination" bothers you (and me) because it makes you feel that you have no control. Well, you really don't have control. The conditions are moving you like a puppet on strings!!! This makes it even more imperative that you make an effort toward enlightenment while we have these conditions that are favorable to us at this time. And, BTW, this "puppet on strings" analogy should help! ;-) TG OUT #85865 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Herman In a message dated 5/18/2008 1:18:59 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: It is not phenomena that are real or imagined, it is the conditionality that is attributed to sequences of phenomena that is real or imagined. ........................................................... TG: The dichotomy between the "real" and "imagined" doesn't work for me. Because the imagined is just mental phenomena...every bit as real as any other phenomena. ........................................................ I might attribute to the shimmering light in the distance the being of a lake full of water. That is commonly called a mirage, but we cannot know whether it was a mirage or not until we proceed to look for, and find or not find all the qualities that would suffice to indeed make it a lake. An other example would be the performance of rites and rituals. These performances are not imaginary, but the belief in the reality of their efficacy is. ................................................................... TG: The "mirage," or rites and rituals "belief" in the rite and rituals efficacy, is purely mental phenomena. In the "mirages" case, there is no "unreal mirage" out there. Its all in the mind. In the "beliefs" case, its just "belief," "views," i.e., mentality. The supposed " projection" of that belief doesn't exist, so there is no "unreal belief thing" out there that appears. ............................................................. And they can become known to have been rites and rituals only, when the intended outcome does not eventuate. Phenomena in isolation are truly meaningless (and they do not occur) ........................................................... TG: Agreed with that last. There is no such thing. Whatever appears is a mere by-product of "other things" and cannot be accurately considered in isolation of such. TG OUT #85866 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Herman) - In a message dated 5/18/2008 12:04:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Herman In a message dated 5/18/2008 1:18:59 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: It is not phenomena that are real or imagined, it is the conditionality that is attributed to sequences of phenomena that is real or imagined. ........................................................... TG: The dichotomy between the "real" and "imagined" doesn't work for me. Because the imagined is just mental phenomena...every bit as real as any other phenomena. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Sense of self is real and not imagined. Self, however, is just imagined. Don't you agree? Is there no difference between the notions of sense of self and the notion of self? The first refers to a reality, but the second does not. We express that latter fact by saying "Self is only imagined." -------------------------------------------- >Snip> TG OUT ============================ With metta, Howard #85867 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard I've considered our other post on "un-arisen imagination referents" and conclude we are on or nearly on the same page so I ended up dropping it. Whew. LOL In a message dated 5/17/2008 9:17:00 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hardness and warmth are both experiences. I can't even imaging the billions of conditions necessary to support such phenomena. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Nor can I. But they aren't components of the hardness or warmth - they are supporting conditions. ----------------------------------------------- ..................................................... TG: I wrote this sentence in a Herman post but thought it worked well here... Whatever appears is a mere by-product of "other things" and cannot be accurately considered in isolation of such. Phenomena are empty or coreless because they have nothing of their own. All they are is a by-product of the supporting conditions. When we experience hardness or warmth, I think that experience is the grand total of the conditions supporting it...not "it" itself. Although "that" hardness or warmth is the "focus" of what the conditions are doing at that time...at that spot. I suspect you have some interesting reasons for stating it the way you do. None of the above is meant to contradict you...just venting. ............................................................. ........................................................... A "tree" is actually a simpler phenomena because it at least does not have the mental component to consider. --------------------------------------------- Howard: From my phenomenalist perspective, that's not quite so, but that is too complex of a matter to get into - too messy of a can of worms! ................................................. TG: I hear you. Your phenomenalist perspective seems to be where you and I have a problem coming together. I also view the Buddha's teaching from a phenomenological perspective, but also psychological, and physical and slightly religious perspective; but not as much as I should in the latter case. But in all cases, conditionality is the head of the deal. Probably in yours too. As far as zoning in on hardness or warmth and the such, its no more my thing than anything else I do. I don't hold it in any particular high regard or low regard. (I don't use those terms to deal with that phenomena either. Probably due to our different approach.) For me, whatever arises is just another condition to sort out as impermanent, afflicting, and nonself...and conditioned, empty, coreless, alien, a part of the falling apart process, etc. I don't care whether its internal, or external. I work on both...in fact, can't really understand one without the other. So basically, I want to look at it and say...yikes! And then hopefully relinquish it. But have to keep practicing. TG OUT ....................................................... #85868 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:35:07 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: Sense of self is real and not imagined. Self, however, is just imagined. Don't you agree? ........................................................... TG: I agree totally. And would say "there is no self to use as a basis to compare something else's reality against." So again, what arises arises, what doesn't doesn't. Clean and simple. Virtually no reason to talk about "realities." Its sort of like overlaying a "blanket of substantiation" on top of "the stuff." ......................................................... Is there no difference between the notions of sense of self and the notion of self? The first refers to a reality, but the second does not. We express that latter fact by saying "Self is only imagined." ................................................................ TG: Yep. Well said! TG OUT #85869 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 9:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi Alex > > --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ > (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , TGrand458@, TG > > > > > > Hi Alex > > > TG: There is a Sutta where, I think the lay disciple Anathapindika, is taught a higher teaching usually presented to monks. He cries (with appreciation) and says that such teachings should be given to lay people more often too. > The teachings on elements, etc. were not often presented to lay people. Does this mean the Buddha was lying to them because he wasn't teaching at a more accurate and higher level to them? I think not. But technically, someone could make that case, but it would be a foolish case IMO. If the Buddha had taught to them at a higher level, for the most part, they would have gotten nothing out of it. > The analogue is incorrect. The Buddha selectively taught one ASPECT of the teaching to Anathapindika and other NON-CONTRADICTORY aspects to monks. He didn't say to Person A: X never exist and to Person B: X always exists. > The Buddha did once slightly rebuke Sariputta for teaching a "lower teaching" to someone who had the ability to understand at a higher level. > Sariputta didn't teach ENOUGH. It is not that Sariputta was mistaken in that particular person (Are we talking about Sariputta helping someone to get a good rebirth?). > .............................................. > Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already "pre- > determined" or "set in stone" from distant past? > .............................................................. > > > TG: I don't know, but I will claim, based on my understanding, that it all > unfolded due to conditions, in accordance with conditional forces. Hey, > maybe it was "predetermined" that you would garner the conditions necessary to > become enlightened in the near future. (Probably due partially to your meeting > with me.) LOL > And how was this conditionality different from points of view of Other ascetics? Infact how is it different from modern day materialistic/atomistic determinism? > > Due to the fact that we're looking at a near infinite amount of conditioning possibilities in the universe, and that the forces between moving in one direction or another can be extremely subtle, there is surely no way to predict outcomes very far in advance. > But if there was a supercomputer that could, would the prediction (at least in theory) possible? > > > I think the idea of "predetermination" bothers you (and me) because it makes you feel that you have no control. Well, you really don't have control. The conditions are moving you like a puppet on strings!!! This makes it even more imperative that you make an effort toward enlightenment while we have these conditions that are favorable to us at this time. And, BTW, this "puppet > on strings" analogy should help! ;-) > > > TG OUT > It is bothersome from a "moral/ethical" standpoint. Basically what you are saying implies that Hitler had no choice, that holocaust couldn't have been avoided, that "whatever happens happens", that there isn't responcibility for actions since they couldn't have happened any other way, 1st or 3rd degree murders were equal choices in terms of "personal" responcibility, etc etc . Best Wishes, Alex P.S. I Sorry for unintended offense I've done to you, unintentionally and against ANY free will, by calling you an Abhidhammika. I had no choice! What happened happened... #85870 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:46:23 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: The analogue is incorrect. The Buddha selectively taught one ASPECT of the teaching to Anathapindika and other NON-CONTRADICTORY aspects to monks. He didn't say to Person A: X never exist and to Person B: X always exists. .................................................... TG: I'm going to have to call you on this Alex. The Buddha did teach "self" to one person > The Buddha did once slightly rebuke Sariputta for teaching a "lower teaching" to someone who had the ability to understand at a higher level. > Sariputta didn't teach ENOUGH. It is not that Sariputta was mistaken in that particular person (Are we talking about Sariputta helping someone to get a good rebirth?). > ............ .... .... .... .. > Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already "pre- > determined" or "set in stone" from distant past? > ............ .... .... .... .... .... > > > TG: I don't know, but I will claim, based on my understanding, that it all > unfolded due to conditions, in accordance with conditional forces. Hey, > maybe it was "predetermined" that you would garner the conditions necessary to > become enlightened in the near future. (Probably due partially to your meeting > with me.) LOL > And how was this conditionality different from points of view of Other ascetics? Infact how is it different from modern day materialistic/Infact how is determinism? > > Due to the fact that we're looking at a near infinite amount of conditioning possibilities in the universe, and that the forces between moving in one direction or another can be extremely subtle, there is surely no way to predict outcomes very far in advance. > But if there was a supercomputer that could, would the prediction (at least in theory) possible? > > > I think the idea of "predetermination" bothers you (and me) because it makes you feel that you have no control. Well, you really don't have control. The conditions are moving you like a puppet on strings!!! This makes it even more imperative that you make an effort toward enlightenment while we have these conditions that are favorable to us at this time. And, BTW, this "puppet > on strings" analogy should help! ;-) > > > TG OUT > It is bothersome from a "moral/ethical" standpoint. Basically what you are saying implies that Hitler had no choice, that holocaust couldn't have been avoided, that "whatever happens happens", that there isn't responcibility for actions since they couldn't have happened any other way, 1st or 3rd degree murders were equal choices in terms of "personal" responcibility, etc etc . Best Wishes, Alex #85871 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 9:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already 'pre- determined' or 'set in stone" from distant past'? Scott: Is this a serious question? Sincerely, Scott. #85872 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Alex previous email send accidentally and not complete nor not what I intended. Please ignore. I'll send another. #85873 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/18/2008 12:37:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard I've considered our other post on "un-arisen imagination referents" and conclude we are on or nearly on the same page so I ended up dropping it. Whew. LOL -------------------------------------------- Howard: I suspect we have no disagreement, but are differing only in how we are expressing matters. -------------------------------------------- In a message dated 5/17/2008 9:17:00 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hardness and warmth are both experiences. I can't even imaging the billions of conditions necessary to support such phenomena. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Nor can I. But they aren't components of the hardness or warmth - they are supporting conditions. ----------------------------------------------- ..................................................... TG: I wrote this sentence in a Herman post but thought it worked well here... Whatever appears is a mere by-product of "other things" and cannot be accurately considered in isolation of such. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. That's why I always speak against separateness. ----------------------------------------------- Phenomena are empty or coreless because they have nothing of their own ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Exactly. -------------------------------------------- . All they are is a by-product of the supporting conditions. When we experience hardness or warmth, I think that experience is the grand total of the conditions supporting it...not "it" itself. ----------------------------------------- Howard: That is not how I would put matters. It suggests viewing the hardness or warmth as a collection, which it is not. The fact is that it is nothing in-and-of-itself. It lacks own-being, being utterly dependent on other, equally empty, phenomena. It is not, however, the grand total of its conditions, for it is distinguishable from the conditions with which it is co-dependent, and the rest of its conditions are long gone, no longer existing. ------------------------------------------ Although "that" hardness or warmth is the "focus" of what the conditions are doing at that time...at that spot. I suspect you have some interesting reasons for stating it the way you do. None of the above is meant to contradict you...just venting. ............................................................. ........................................................... A "tree" is actually a simpler phenomena because it at least does not have the mental component to consider. --------------------------------------------- Howard: From my phenomenalist perspective, that's not quite so, but that is too complex of a matter to get into - too messy of a can of worms! ................................................. TG: I hear you. Your phenomenalist perspective seems to be where you and I have a problem coming together. I also view the Buddha's teaching from a phenomenological perspective, but also psychological, and physical and slightly religious perspective; but not as much as I should in the latter case. But in all cases, conditionality is the head of the deal. Probably in yours too. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, mine too. ------------------------------------------------- As far as zoning in on hardness or warmth and the such, its no more my thing than anything else I do. I don't hold it in any particular high regard or low regard. (I don't use those terms to deal with that phenomena either. Probably due to our different approach.) For me, whatever arises is just another condition to sort out as impermanent, afflicting, and nonself...and conditioned, empty, coreless, alien, a part of the falling apart process, etc. I don't care whether its internal, or external. I work on both...in fact, can't really understand one without the other. So basically, I want to look at it and say...yikes! And then hopefully relinquish it. But have to keep practicing. TG OUT ============================ With metta, Howard #85874 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:46:23 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > The analogue is incorrect. The Buddha selectively taught one ASPECT > of the teaching to Anathapindika and other NON-CONTRADICTORY aspects > to monks. > > He didn't say to Person A: X never exist > and to Person B: X always exists. > > .................................................... > > > TG: I'm going to have to call you on this Alex. The Buddha did teach "self" to one person > > Please give a link. Bring it on!!! :) :) :) Buddha has taught "atta" to almost (if not everyone). The 100 trillion dollar question is: "Exactly what he was talking about". I suspect that only about emperical self. There is even a chapter called "Attavagga" in Dhammapada http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html 165. Attana va katam papam, ~ attana samkilissati, Attana akatam papam, ~ attana va visujjhati, Suddhi asuddhi paccattaü, nannamanno visodhaye. 165. By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/5Khuddaka- Nikaya/02Dhammapada/12-Attavaggo-p1.html Best Wishes, Alex #85875 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Alex In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:46:23 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: TG: I don't know, but I will claim, based on my understanding, that it all > unfolded due to conditions, in accordance with conditional forces. Hey, > maybe it was "predetermined" that you would garner the conditions necessary to > become enlightened in the near future. (Probably due partially to your meeting > with me.) LOL > And how was this conditionality different from points of view of Other ascetics? Infact how is it different from modern day materialistic/Infact how determinism? ......................................................... NEW TG: The Buddha's teaching is a Path to escape suffering. The above either are not or fell short. The Buddha taught so as to make us able to understand the delusions we have and how to overcome them. Any teaching, psychology, science, phenomenology, that says something that is true, is bound to overlap with the Buddha's teaching at least to some limited extent. The difference is, the Buddha saw it much deeper, and was able to unravel the delusion, that the folks you mention above, are not even aware that they have! The deep understanding of conditionality, through and through, was the crucial aspect IMO. ................................................................. > > Due to the fact that we're looking at a near infinite amount of conditioning possibilities in the universe, and that the forces between moving in one direction or another can be extremely subtle, there is surely no way to predict outcomes very far in advance. > But if there was a supercomputer that could, would the prediction (at least in theory) possible? .......................................................... NEW TG: It would be like predicting the weather....but near infinitely more complicated. We would have no concept of what kind of computing power that would take. ........................................................ > > > I think the idea of "predetermination" bothers you (and me) because it makes you feel that you have no control. Well, you really don't have control. The conditions are moving you like a puppet on strings!!! This makes it even more imperative that you make an effort toward enlightenment while we have these conditions that are favorable to us at this time. And, BTW, this "puppet > on strings" analogy should help! ;-) > > > TG OUT > It is bothersome from a "moral/ethical" standpoint. Basically what you are saying implies that Hitler had no choice, that holocaust couldn't have been avoided, that "whatever happens happens", that there isn't responcibility for actions since they couldn't have happened any other way, 1st or 3rd degree murders were equal choices in terms of "personal" responcibility, etc etc . ............................................................. TG: Under the conditions at that time, there was no choice...which is exactly why the Holocast happened. And may happen again if we don't learn from the conditions. But the conditions are so complicated, that its very difficult to know what to do...whether to act or not to act or how to act, etc. We can't even sort out our own minds to overcome delusion (I can't yet), so how can we control billions of minds with conditions affecting them that we have no control over (even conventionally)? TG OUT ........................................................... #85876 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Alex This was the e-mail I told you was accidentally sent and told you to ignore. FYI In a message dated 5/18/2008 11:03:57 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear TG, --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , TGrand458@.., TG > > In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:46:23 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@ truth_aerator@ > > The analogue is incorrect. The Buddha selectively taught one ASPECT > of the teaching to Anathapindika and other NON-CONTRADICTORY aspects > to monks. > > He didn't say to Person A: X never exist > and to Person B: X always exists. > > ............ .... .... .... .... > > > TG: I'm going to have to call you on this Alex. The Buddha did teach "self" to one person > > Please give a link. Bring it on!!! :) :) :) Buddha has taught "atta" to almost (if not everyone). The 100 trillion dollar question is: "Exactly what he was talking about". I suspect that only about emperical self. There is even a chapter called "Attavagga" in Dhammapada _http://www.accesstohttp://www.ahttp://wwhttp://www.http://www.a_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html) 165. Attana va katam papam, ~ attana samkilissati, Attana akatam papam, ~ attana va visujjhati, Suddhi asuddhi paccattaü, nannamanno visodhaye. 165. By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. _http://www.mettanethttp://www.methttp://www.methttp://www_ (http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/5Khuddaka-) Nikaya/02DhammapadaNikaya/02DhammNikaya/ Best Wishes, Alex #85877 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > A: "Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already 'pre- determined' or "set in stone" from distant past? > > Scott: Is this a serious question? > Very. Best wishes, Alex #85878 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already 'pre- determined' or 'set in stone' from distant past?" Scott: Do you mean like the weather or the loss of the Montreal Canadiens and stuff like that? Sincerely, Scott. #85879 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already 'pre- > determined' or 'set in stone' from distant past?" > > Scott: Do you mean like the weather or the loss of the Montreal > Canadiens and stuff like that? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the "Nama-Rupa called 'Scott' reading this message right now" predetermined billions of years ago? The question of "could Devas (or whomever) have calculated it at that time" is irrelevant. Best Wishes, Alex #85880 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:55:44 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: That is not how I would put matters. It suggests viewing the hardness or warmth as a collection, which it is not. The fact is that it is nothing in-and-of-itself. It lacks own-being, being utterly dependent on other, equally empty, phenomena. It is not, however, the grand total of its conditions, for it is distinguishable from the conditions with which it is co-dependent, and the rest of its conditions are long gone, no longer existing. ........................................................ Hi Howard I agree with what you're saying here for the most part. Its primarily what I meant to say but I expressed it poorly perhaps. One thing though....although there were basically infinite past conditions that unraveled in a causal chain to generate "a present warmth," there is still a multitude of current conditions structuring that experience. And I'm not so sure it is distinguishable from those present conditions. Agreed that all the conditions and the warmth (obviously another condition) are empty and utterly dependent. So when we experience "warmth," it is not "that thing" we are experiencing, but merely a "conditional happening." I'll stop there. TG OUT #85881 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the 'Nama-Rupa called 'Scott' reading this message right now' predetermined billions of years ago? The question of 'could Devas (or whomever) have calculated it at that time' is irrelevant." Scott: What's a 'Nama-Rupa'? I've sought to divine the winning lottery ticket numbers at times, with little success. I've known someone who even dreamed the numbers, only to forget them. Do you think that this sort of thing might be part of it too? Sincerely, Scott. #85882 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the 'Nama- Rupa > called 'Scott' reading this message right now' predetermined billions > of years ago? The question of 'could Devas (or whomever) have > calculated it at that time' is irrelevant." > > Scott: What's a 'Nama-Rupa'? I've sought to divine the winning > lottery ticket numbers at times, with little success. I've known > someone who even dreamed the numbers, only to forget them. Do you > think that this sort of thing might be part of it too? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > You are evading the question. Please reply to it first. Best Wishes, Alex #85883 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 11:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "You are evading the question. Please reply to it first." Scott: Do you recall that Monty Python episode where they kept popping up and saying, 'No one expects the Spanish Inquisition'? Is that like what you're asking about in a way as well? Sincerely, Scott. #85884 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 11:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "You are evading the question. Please reply to it first." > > Scott: Do you recall that Monty Python episode where they kept popping > up and saying, 'No one expects the Spanish Inquisition'? Is that like > what you're asking about in a way as well? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > What are you so afraid of? Why do you keep going to the sides (under any excuse) ? Maybe your non-answer is an answer of some sort... Best Wishes, Alex #85885 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 11:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "What are you so afraid of? Why do you keep going to the sides (under any excuse)? Maybe your non-answer is an answer of some sort..." Scott: I've heard it said that, 'There is nothing to fear but fear itself' but always thought that the phrase was kind of ridiculous. Going to the sides? I'm not sure I follow, but I like the last part where you suggest how a non-answer is an answer of some sort. Who could have predicted you'd wind up saying that? Sincerely, Scott. #85886 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 11:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Please answer the question. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "What are you so afraid of? Why do you keep going to the sides > (under any excuse)? Maybe your non-answer is an answer of some sort..." > > Scott: I've heard it said that, 'There is nothing to fear but fear > itself' but always thought that the phrase was kind of ridiculous. > Going to the sides? I'm not sure I follow, but I like the last part > where you suggest how a non-answer is an answer of some sort. Who > could have predicted you'd wind up saying that? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #85887 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 12:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Please answer the question." Scott: Can you remind me of the question? I seem to have forgotten it. I do appreciate the above little request though, now that you mention it. I'm not sure if, when you do remind me (if you do remind me), I'll even feel like answering the question. It seemed as if I did when I first replied to you but I can't say if I will later... Sincerely, Scott. #85888 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 1:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Please answer the question." > > Scott: Can you remind me of the question? I seem to have forgotten > it. I do appreciate the above little request though, now that you > mention it. I'm not sure if, when you do remind me (if you do remind > me), I'll even feel like answering the question. It seemed as if I > did when I first replied to you but I can't say if I will later... > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already 'pre- > determined' or 'set in stone' from distant past?" > > Scott: Do you mean like the weather or the loss of the Montreal > Canadiens and stuff like that? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the "Nama-Rupa called 'Scott' reading this message right now" predetermined billions of years ago? The question of "could Devas (or whomever) have calculated it at that time" is irrelevant. Best Wishes, Alex #85889 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the 'Nama-Rupa called 'Scott' reading this message right now' predetermined billions of years ago? The question of 'could Devas (or whomever) have calculated it at that time' is irrelevant." Scott: Oh yeah. Nah, I don't think its a very good question at all. Its the same now anyway. Were any of your reactions to this discussion so far predetermined billions of years ago? Sincerely, Scott. #85890 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 2:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "It doesn't matter the exact event we are using. Was the > 'Nama-Rupa called 'Scott' reading this message right now' > predetermined billions of years ago? The question of 'could Devas (or whomever) have calculated it at that time' is irrelevant." > > Scott: Oh yeah. >>> What exactly did you mean by "Oh yeah." >>>> Nah, I don't think its a very good question at all. >>> Why not? >>>>>>>>>>> > Its the same now anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What exactly do you mean by that? >>> Were any of your reactions to this > discussion so far predetermined billions of years ago? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > I would like to hear Abhidhamika answer to that. Best wishes, Alex #85891 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 3:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------ <. . .> H: > 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? ------ It was meant as a completely uncontroversial statement. I would have thought "There is only the present moment" was as uncontroversial as any statement could be. Thinking about the present moment is difficult, however. It is something almost no one likes to do because it doesn't fit into conventional reality. People are only interested in the past and future. Neither exists, of course, but who cares about that? The Dhamma, on the other hand, is all about the reality of the present moment; hence its overwhelming unpopularity. :-) Ken H #85892 From: "colette" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 10:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings ksheri3 Hi Herman, Lets try some more of your pleasant reply. > Your powers of analysis are A1. But I do not get the feeling that you > actually want to be like the masses, or is that just a defence > mechanism? > colette: THANK YOU FOR WHAT MOST PEOPLE CLASSIFY AS DELUSIONS AND/OR MENTAL ILLNESS THAT REQUIRES HOSPITALIZATION (PRISON) AND EXTENSIVE DRUG THERAPY. But I am like everybody else. Why would you think that I have a choice in this matter? The masses are the same as I, so how could I hope to not be a member? It sounds like buying/selling a house or home. The new owners want to do some renovating. The choices of renovation are clearly designed and ordered "to sell the house to others" not for the owners to enjoy living in. This raises that ugly question concerning the Future Dharma since the Present Dharma is not for happiness and samadhi at the Present time, the Present Dharma does not exist, it is the Future Dharma that must be entirely satiated, no? The masses have problems with deviance and deviant enjoyments. For instance Public Exocutions are a staple in the Western society.<...> Thanks for thinking that I have deviant desires but I'm working these tantras and dharmas pretty heavily so I can't deviate too far from that which is given. The status quo, on the other hand, well, in the drunken condition, they wander off anywhere. toodles, colette <....> #85893 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 4:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' truth_aerator Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: People are only interested in the past and future. Neither exists, of course, but who cares about that? > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) If past & future doesn't exist, then what people are thinking about? 2) When are they thinking about past or future? Best Wishes, Alex #85894 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 4:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/18 : > Hi, Herman - > > And they both have consequences in the world. Yet nobody > talks about the kamma or vipaka of landslides, only the kamma and > vipaka of beings. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard1: > I agree. Kamma vipaka is a very particular effect, the fruition of > intention and intentional action within the same mind stream. It is that > conditionality that is of greatest "personal" interest, for it is that kamma over > which "we" have the greatest direct influence, and it is that effect that has the > greatest long-term influence over our experience. > -------------------------------------------------- > > But if anatta is a correct statement of the way > things are, then a being, like a landslide, is merely something that > happens, not something that acts, or intends even. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard2: > There literally is no being - just a system of interacting phenomena, > but within that system there is willing and acting, albeit impersonal > conditions. The kamma is impersonal, and not something directed by any agent or > controller. So kamma itself is anatta. > ----------------------------------------------- The reasons why I say that kamma and anatta are irreconcilable are contained in your statements 1 & 2 above. Because in statement 2, which I agree with, kamma is anatta. But in statement 1 it isn't. In statement 1 kamma is made by and belongs to a being, in statement 2 it is impersonal. Cheers Herman #85895 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 12:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/18/2008 3:09:10 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Scott: Oh yeah. Nah, I don't think its a very good question at all. Its the same now anyway. Were any of your reactions to this discussion so far predetermined billions of years ago? Sincerely, Scott. ................................ Hi Scott, Butting in with an answer... "yes they were." Without the sun and earth, we wouldn't be here at all reacting to this or that. So yes, there are causal factors, from billions of years ago, that are required for the support of present "reactions." TG #85897 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 4:50 pm Subject: Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hi Ken, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > People are only interested in the past and > future. Neither exists, of course, but who cares about that? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > 1) If past & future doesn't exist, then what people are thinking about? > > 2) When are they thinking about past or future? > Hi Alex, I am not sure I can answer these questions. I talk about 'past, present and future' in the course of understanding the difference between concepts (illusory realities) and realities (ultimate realities). The computer sitting in front of me now was here yesterday and will still be here tomorrow. But a conditioned paramattha dhamma exists for only one moment. It performs all its functions in that moment and then it is gone forever. Concepts don't operate that way. This helps me to understand the difference between concepts and realities. With this understanding I am on the right track for understanding a conditioned dhamma that is actually arising now. In other words I am on track for satipatthana. So I am not interested in philosophical arguments about time travel and the speed of light etc. I am interested in dhammas. If talk about the non-existence of past and future doesn't help you to understand dhammas then maybe some other line of explanation would be better. Ken H #85898 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi TG, 2008/5/19 : > Hi Herman > > > It is not phenomena that are real or imagined, it is the > conditionality that is attributed to sequences of phenomena that is > real or imagined. > > ........................................................... > > > TG: The dichotomy between the "real" and "imagined" doesn't work for me. > Because the imagined is just mental phenomena...every bit as real as any other > phenomena. > I hear what you are saying, but I don't believe you :-) I say it with a smile, but I do mean it, because it does work for you. See below for an explanation. > ........................................................ > > > I might attribute to the shimmering light in the > distance the being of a lake full of water. That is commonly called a > mirage, but we cannot know whether it was a mirage or not until we > proceed to look for, and find or not find all the qualities that would > suffice to indeed make it a lake. An other example would be the > performance of rites and rituals. These performances are not > imaginary, but the belief in the reality of their efficacy is. > > ................................................................... > > > TG: The "mirage," or rites and rituals "belief" in the rite and rituals > efficacy, is purely mental phenomena. In the "mirages" case, there is no > "unreal mirage" out there. Its all in the mind. In the "beliefs" case, its just > "belief," "views," i.e., mentality. The supposed " projection" of that belief > doesn't exist, so there is no "unreal belief thing" out there that appears. > > ............................................................. Everything you do is guided by beliefs. You have beliefs about how the world works, and how it doesn't work. When you set out to achieve a goal, you do so believing that what you do will get you there. And when you see yourself failing, you alter your beliefs or your goal. Your beliefs are real, not imagined. We agree on that. But the rightness or wrongness of a belief is also real. Some beliefs are right, some are wrong. That is not imagined. Rightness/wrongness is a relation between imagined things and real things. The rightness or wrongness of a belief is not an a priori thing that exists, waiting to be sampled, it is borne out by action in the world. That thing I see, is it only shimmering light, or is it the shimmering light that can be produced by sunlight falling on a lake in the distance? Well, go and find out :-) Cheers Herman #85899 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 1:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality TGrand458@... Hi Herman In a message dated 5/18/2008 6:03:04 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Everything you do is guided by beliefs. You have beliefs about how the world works, and how it doesn't work. When you set out to achieve a goal, you do so believing that what you do will get you there. And when you see yourself failing, you alter your beliefs or your goal. Your beliefs are real, not imagined. We agree on that. ............................................... TG: Yes ............................................ But the rightness or wrongness of a belief is also real. Some beliefs are right, some are wrong. That is not imagined. ...................................................... TG: Yes ...................................................... Rightness/wrongness is a relation between imagined things and real things. ..................................................... TG: OK, I see what you mean I think. I.E., whether the "imagination" is correctly imagined and accords with the actuality of events. If it does, its right. If it doesn't, its wrong. This seems to me a slightly "side-topic" of where I was before...but I'm burnt now and can't remember. LOL ....................................................... The rightness or wrongness of a belief is not an a priori thing that exists, waiting to be sampled, it is borne out by action in the world. That thing I see, is it only shimmering light, or is it the shimmering light that can be produced by sunlight falling on a lake in the distance? Well, go and find out :-) ............................................................ TG: Yes, I agree. TG OUT Cheers Herman #85900 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/18 Alex : > Hi TG & Abhidhammikas, > > A question to you and Abhidhammikas. > > Was the exact things due to happen in 2008-'09 already "pre- > determined" or "set in stone" from distant past? > I am not an Abhidhammika, but I'll happily give you my answer :-) If the Buddha was able to correctly predict the rebirths of people, that would suggest that nothing could be done to alter that. If the Buddha can foretell the future, it means that even He is powerless to alter it, and yes, it is all set in stone. The question is: do you believe that the Buddha could predict the future? (And keep in mind the thing about the Rain-Gods) Cheers Herman #85901 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > If the Buddha was able to correctly predict the rebirths of people, > that would suggest that nothing could be done to alter that. If the > Buddha can foretell the future, it means that even He is powerless to > alter it, and yes, it is all set in stone. > > The question is: do you believe that the Buddha could predict the > future? (And keep in mind the thing about the Rain-Gods) > > Cheers > > > Herman My Humble answer: He saw the tendencies in the mind, their strengths, the roots functioning and general disposition of the character. From that he may have correctly inferred what will happen. It gets much easier to predict (both you and I can do that) more obvious cases: A) A person who has commited heineous acts. B) A destiny of an Arya (in a general way). C) A person with fixed wrong views. (Until they are dropped of course) Regarding "inference", there was a sutta (anybody by any chance know the number?) where the Buddha is strongly saying that "Devadatta is going to hell, I didn't say it until I saw not a bit of goodness in him" . Again, let us be clear on the difference between general predictions and 100% specific & deterministic ones. The former says: So an so will be reborn there, but the exact specifics (such as which though will arise tomorrow at XX:XX:XX.XX) are unknown The latter: It is possible to predict accurately what he will do tomorrow at exactly 10:51:43.3 am and what thought will appear exactly at that time. IMHO of course, Best wishes, Alex #85902 From: "Alex" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:01 pm Subject: Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' truth_aerator Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" > wrote: > > > > 1) If past & future doesn't exist, then what people are thinking > about? > > > > 2) When are they thinking about past or future? > > > > > Hi Alex, > > I am not sure I can answer these questions. I talk about 'past, > present and future' in the course of understanding the difference > between concepts (illusory realities) and realities (ultimate > realities). >>> Is past & future concepts or ultimate realities? >>>>>>>>>> The computer sitting in front of me now was here yesterday >>>>>> Isn't computer a CONCEPT, not to mention "Ken sitting in front of computer". >>> and will still be here tomorrow. >>>> Are you omniscient regarding the future? How do you know 100% for sure? >>>> But a conditioned paramattha dhamma exists for only one moment. It performs all its functions in that moment and then it is gone forever. Concepts don't operate that way. >>> You mean that they have permanence unlike the impermanence of paramattha dhammas? Wow, I've learned something really new and wild today. This is what discussion is all about- learning new things about ultimate and conceptual realities. I better stop now and fully digest what you've said... Best Wishes, Alex #85903 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "What exactly did you mean by 'Oh yeah.'" Scott: Having read the question again, I remembered it - 'Oh yeah'. A: "Why not?" Scott: Because it seems that you think that Conditional Relations refers to 'predetermination', even when it is shown to you that this is not the case in earlier discussions. A: "What exactly do you mean by that?" Scott: Now is like a billion years ago. Things run the same way. Me: "Were any of your reactions to this discussion so far predetermined billions of years ago?" Scott: Perhaps you can answer this question. Sincerely, Scott. #85904 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 2:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/18/2008 7:30:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: The reasons why I say that kamma and anatta are irreconcilable are contained in your statements 1 & 2 above. Because in statement 2, which I agree with, kamma is anatta. But in statement 1 it isn't. In statement 1 kamma is made by and belongs to a being, in statement 2 it is impersonal. ============================ The dynamic system of interacting namas and rupas that I call "me" includes instances of cetana. They are among the namas of that system, ,and so I may refer to them as "my willing". But there is no core or identity underlying that assemblage of dhammas - that is, there is no "self". It is not kamma that you actually think is incompatible with no-self, but the existence of systems of interrelated dhammas. But I see no such incompatibility. 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) #85905 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 6:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/18 Alex : > Dear Scott, > > > So is that how you understand Buddha's liberative teaching? > The liberative teaching of the Buddha is the cessation of craving. > > Purpose can only be if there is a possibility of choice. If there > isn't any possibility of choice or attenuating at least SOME past > causes - then talk > about "Volition", "Choosing", "Responcibility", "Effort", "Kamma" is > empty talk. The possibility of choice is craving in action, because the future is conditioned by craving. Craving is the desire for things to be other than what they are. Craving craves a future that is different to the present. That there are choices to be made in order to make things different to what they are, is what the teachings of the Buddha liberate from. The question is: Is the Buddha right, is a world without craving possible? Cheers Herman #85906 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 7:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/19 : > > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/18/2008 7:30:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > The reasons why I say that kamma and anatta are irreconcilable are > contained in your statements 1 & 2 above. Because in statement 2, > which I agree with, kamma is anatta. But in statement 1 it isn't. In > statement 1 kamma is made by and belongs to a being, in statement 2 it > is impersonal. > ============================ > The dynamic system of interacting namas and rupas that I call "me" > includes instances of cetana. They are among the namas of that system, ,and so I > may refer to them as "my willing". But there is no core or identity underlying > that assemblage of dhammas - that is, there is no "self". It is not kamma > that you actually think is incompatible with no-self, but the existence of > systems of interrelated dhammas. But I see no such incompatibility. > The way I see it, anatta applies to everything, kamma is made to apply to selections/abstractions from everything. These abstractions/selections are imagined, not real You say there are distinct, dynamic system of interacting namas and rupas. By that, do you imply that these are causally independent of ALL namas and rupas? If these systems are not causally independent, then what is the value of identifying as separate and distinct what is in fact not separate and distinct? The other option is to deny that beings interact causally. Cheers Herman #85907 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 3:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:14:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: You say there are distinct, dynamic system of interacting namas and rupas. By that, do you imply that these are causally independent of ALL namas and rupas? ------------------------------------------- Howard: No! They are simply more intimately interrelated. They form a distinguishable pattern. Do you confuse yourself with me? ----------------------------------------- If these systems are not causally independent, then what is the value of identifying as separate and distinct what is in fact not separate and distinct? The other option is to deny that beings interact causally. ======================== 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) #85908 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:14 pm Subject: Happy & Calm Wesak 2008! bhikkhu0 Dear Friend, Happy Wesak 2008 May all beings be calmed cleared, cooled & content! This Sacred Day celebrates the birth, Enlightenment , and passing away of the Blessed Buddha Gotama . About the Awakening of the Buddha on this very day: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Wesak_2008.htm Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #85909 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 8:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/19 : > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:14:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > You say there are distinct, dynamic system of interacting namas and > rupas. By that, do you imply that these are causally independent of > ALL namas and rupas? > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No! They are simply more intimately interrelated. They form a > distinguishable pattern. Do you confuse yourself with me? > ----------------------------------------- You are asking me about a straw man, Howard. I was specifically referring to causal independence. That your body is distinguishable from mine in no way means that our bodies do not have common causes, nor does it mean, as kamma implies, that these bodies act or intend from a limited subset of conditions that is all their own. Cheers Herman #85910 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun May 18, 2008 9:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "Butting in with an answer... 'yes they were.' Without the sun and earth, we wouldn't be here at all reacting to this or that. So yes, there are causal factors, from billions of years ago, that are required for the support of present 'reactions.'" Scott: 'Causal factors' yes, but are you saying that this is 'predetermination'? (The Oxford defines the term as "establish or decide in advance" or "predestine", just to get that clear - I'm recalling the 'identity' thing with the creative etymology.) And are you referring to heat element and earth element here? I believe Alex wishes to assert that Conditional Relations as found in Pa.t.thaana of the Abhidhamma (as opposed to your own theories about conditionality, which you define idiosyncratically) amounts to 'predetermination'. I don't get the impression that Alex accepts much Abhidhamma; but you do, being a newly ordained Abhidhammika. ;-) Congratulations, by the way. Sincerely, Scott. #85911 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun May 18, 2008 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Scott LOL Thanks for recognition I so richly deserve. Its good to be onboard the "team." So what's the procedure now? Are there some forms to fill out, blood test, background check? Predetermination isn't my thing...but if it is forced upon me, I'll jump in the water. Done enough for now though. So now that I believe in ultimate realities, especially those with their own characteristics, and believe that enlightenment is an impossibility...what's next? ... Converting others and telling them there's no hope? Sounds good! Sure takes the pressure off. So basically, as I understand it, all I have to do is believe for rote what's in some key texts and I'm good eh? Just "copy and paste" to tell people what's real? That's cool. Anyway, as you can tell I'm quite a coop for "the group." Please let me know (off-list) what the secret handshake is ok? Thanks Best wishes, Brother TG OUT In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:08:03 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Scott: 'Causal factors' yes, but are you saying that this is 'predetermination''predetermination'? (The Oxford defines the te decide in advance" or "predestine"decide in advance" or "predestine" recalling the 'identity' thing with the creative etymology.) And are you referring to heat element and earth element here? I believe Alex wishes to assert that Conditional Relations as found in Pa.t.thaana of the Abhidhamma (as opposed to your own theories about conditionality, which you define idiosyncratically) amounts to 'predetermination'' I don't get the impression that Alex accepts much Abhidhamma; but you do, being a newly ordained Abhidhammika. ;-) Congratulations, by the way. Sincerely, Scott. #85912 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 12:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alex), --- On Tue, 13/5/08, upasaka@... 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! ============ ========= ========= = H: >Sarah, do you maintain that Alex's mind states and yours are one and the same? If not, then what exactly are you asserting? ===== S: Conventionally we can talk about me and you, mine and yours, people and murderers. Here in this discussion, Alex was specifically asking about the understanding of paramattha dhammas and the object of right awareness and right understanding. Therefore, I wished to stress that at moments of understanding, there's no idea of 'my citta'. Instead, as I said, "Panna can understand seeing or hearing or any other kind of citta..." ===== H: >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. ===== S: It depends whether the discussion is about conventional terms or the understanding of absolute realities. The more understanding, the less idea there is of 'me', 'mine' and 'yours' being involved. Just dhammas roll on.... I picked Alex up on this point because I've noticed how often in his threads, self doing this or that, making this or that effort, 'doing' jhana or vipassana etc creeps in. In the end, of course, only panna itself can know when there's an idea of self. As you rightly suggest, it's not just a matter of the words. Btw, what does the phenomenalist approach say on this ('One's citta') and external perpetrators of deeds etc (which you're discussing with others)? Metta, Sarah ------- #85913 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 12:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How can panna investigate non-existent past cittas? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sat, 17/5/08, Alex wrote: > --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Alex wrote: > 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. > ..... A: >While of course 5 Aggregates are Anatta. Conventional beings and things do exist conventionally. ===== S: We're discussing the understanding of cittas (as raised by the conventional You!). You asked me a question about what exactly is known, so I was indicating that at such moments of right understanding, there is no conventional being or thing involved. ===== > 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. A: >So one see the representation of the non-existent past citta, rather than citta itself. Right? ===== S: I prefer my wording as I'm not sure 'representation' is the right word for an exact duplicate. But, more or less OK:-). ===== A: >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? ===== S: As Nina said, you're touching on another issue now. I've already forgotten what a) and b) were, but I've already responded to them. ===== > A: You can't see a characteristic of something presently non existent! > ... > S: Can you view a perfect photocopy of a page of text? > ... A: >Yes, but the photocopy (rupa) isn't non existent. Mind states aren't like material things. Right? ===== S: The photocopy of the mind state isn't non-existent. It's the present dhamma appearing. Even though, strictly speaking, that dhamma has fallen away, it is still referred to as the present dhamma, because (as I've explained) its characteristic still appears. ======= A: >Thank you for your answers, S: Thanks for your good questions. I think we've exhausted this point for now:-)) Metta, Sarah ========= #85914 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Nina), Thanks for your further comments. Never any hurry:-). --- On Thu, 15/5/08, Scott Duncan wrote: >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. ... S: Yes. .... >Scott: 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: When I read the Pali and translation you supplied in your interesting note to Alex (#85685), it occurred to me that "these things, if undertaken and practised" was a translation of "ime dhammaa samattaa samaadinnaa hitaaya sukhaaya sa.mvattantii'ti", where "samattaa samaadinnaa" might be translated as "completely/fully undertaken" or something along those lines. [I was thinking of sammaadaana siila for example, when there is the undertaking to abstain from breaking precepts etc. Samaadinna, p.p. of samaadiyati, to take upon oneself (Buddhadatta dict). "upasampajja vihareyyaatha - lit. "you should live having entered on" ?? Upasampajja, abs. of upasampajjati, to attian, enter on, become fully ordained. So something like, >these states, when fully undertaken/observed, lead to...., then you should live accordingly.] ..... Just a little idle play with the Pali, following your good lead. I'll be glad of any corrections. Metta, Sarah ======== #85915 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/5/18 Jonothan Abbott : > The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: > (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the > appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and > if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; > (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), > B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be > so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's > unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere > impersonal circumstances. Are these ideas about kamma/action your own, Jon? If not, I wouldn't mind finding out what your sources are. > Jon > > PS Herman, good to see you back! Thank you. I hope you still feel that way next week :-) Cheers Herman #85916 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 5:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 Dear TG, Good one! TG: "Thanks for recognition I so richly deserve. Its good to be onboard the 'team.' So what's the procedure now? Are there some forms to fill out, blood test, background check?..." Scott: No, but you will suddenly become really, really boring at parties. TG: "...Anyway, as you can tell I'm quite a coop for 'the group.' Please let me know (off-list) what the secret handshake is ok? Thanks" Scott: No handshake, no hands, TG - concepts, remember? And I dig the 'coop' thing. I didn't find you to be all that confining of the group - hens, roosters, and coops are all merely conceptual as well... Sincerely, Scott. #85917 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/18/2008 11:54:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/19 : > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/18/2008 10:14:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > You say there are distinct, dynamic system of interacting namas and > rupas. By that, do you imply that these are causally independent of > ALL namas and rupas? > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No! They are simply more intimately interrelated. They form a > distinguishable pattern. Do you confuse yourself with me? > ----------------------------------------- You are asking me about a straw man, Howard. I was specifically referring to causal independence. That your body is distinguishable from mine in no way means that our bodies do not have common causes, nor does it mean, as kamma implies, that these bodies act or intend from a limited subset of conditions that is all their own. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Ok. then I have answered that. I do not think they are causally independent - I do not think they are isolated systems. ---------------------------------------- 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) #85918 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:03 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, We read further on in the Atthasåliní (398) about material courtesy of the monk: A courteous bhikkhu, on seeing a guest arrive, should meet him and take his bowl and robe, offer him a seat, fan him with palmyra leaf, wash his feet, rub him with oil; if there be butter and syrup he should give him medicine, offer him water, scour up the monastery—thus in one part is material courtesy shown. Lay-followers should consider by which means they can in their own situation show material courtesy. As to Dhamma courtesy by which people can help one another, we read in the Atthasåliní: Moreover, at eventide, if there be no junior who comes to pay his respects, the bhikkhu should go to the presence of his guest, sit there and, without asking him irrelevant things, question him on relevant things. He should not ask “What texts do you recite?” but should ask “What scriptural text does your teacher and spiritual adviser use?” and should question him on points within his capacities. Should the guest be able to answer, that is good; if not, he himself should give the reply. Thus in one part is courtesy of Dhamma shown. This shows that there is thoughtfulness when we speak with mettå. When we want to help others with Dhamma we should not explain what is beyond the listeners capacity to understand or to receive. We should take into consideration the accumulations and the disposition of the listener and speak about the Dhamma in such a way that he can understand it. Mettå supports other kusala dhammas and it has many benefits. If we know about these benefits we can verify for ourselves whether mettå is already of such degree that we can have them. Thus, reading about them can remind us to develop mettå to that degree. We read in the “Mettå-sutta” (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Eights, Chapter I, §1): Thus have I heard: Once the Exalted One was dwelling near Såvatthí, at Jeta Grove, in Anåthapindika’s Park. There the Exalted One addressed the monks, saying: “Monks”. “Yes, lord, ” they replied, and the Exalted One said: Monks, by the release of the heart through mettå (mettå cetovimutti), practised, made become, made much of, made a vehicle and a basis, exercised, augmented and set going, eight advantages are to be expected. What eight? Happy one sleeps; happy one awakes; one sees no bad dreams; one is dear to humans; one is dear to non-humans; devas guard one; neither fire, nor poison, nor sword affects one; and though one penetrate not the beyond, one reaches the Brahmå world. Monks, by the release of the heart through amity, practised, made become, made much of, made a vehicle and a basis, exercised, augmented and set going, these eight advantages are to be expected. Who does make mettå to grow Boundless and thereto sets his mind, Seeing the end of birth’s substrate In him the fetters are worn away. If with a heart unsoiled one feels Mettå towards a single being, He is a good man (just) by that. Compassionate of heart to all The ariyan boundless merit makes. Those royal sages who, conquering The creature teeming earth, have ranged Round and about with sacrifice... Such do not share a sixteenth part The worth of mettå-citta made to grow, Just as the radiance of the moon Outshines all the starry host. Who kills not nor makes others kill, Robs not nor makes others rob, Sharing goodwill with all that lives, He has no hate for anyone. ******* Nina. #85919 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 5/19/2008 3:18:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Btw, what does the phenomenalist approach say on this ('One's citta') and external perpetrators of deeds etc (which you're discussing with others)? ============================= I'd sooner not get into my phenomenalist perspective. I have no eagerness to either defend or convert with regard to it. I've talked about it enough in the past. There is so much rehashing of matters on DSG, I see no point in adding to that. 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) #85920 From: "Alex" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality truth_aerator Dear Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > The liberative teaching of the Buddha is the cessation of craving. > Liberation from SUFFERING, Nibbana. > > > > > Purpose can only be if there is a possibility of choice. If there > > isn't any possibility of choice or attenuating at least SOME past > > causes - then talk > > about "Volition", "Choosing", "Responcibility", "Effort", "Kamma" is > > empty talk. > > The possibility of choice is craving in action, because the future is > conditioned by craving. Craving is the desire for things to be other > than what they are. Craving craves a future that is different to the > present. That there are choices to be made in order to make things > different to what they are, is what the teachings of the Buddha > liberate from. The question is: Is the Buddha right, is a world > without craving possible? > > Cheers > > > Herman > FIrst of all, there IS a big difference between: tanha and chanda (or viriya or aditthana) 2nd) At some point, even "craving, desire, conceit" are GOOD. But up to a point (till Arahattamagga or so). -------------------------- This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html ------ 3rd) Even if everything is 100% predetermined, mechanistic, without ANY choice, etc: Then it is still more wholesome to believe that unwholesome states can be removed through wholesome effort and wholesome mental states CAN be developed. YOu know, all the talk about "nothing can be done" can be a strong and self fulfilling prophecy. a) You don't believe in effort b) Without effort the unwholesome (default) states of mind overtake one making it almost impossible to deal with them, which would justify the a) point above. Repeat again and again. 4th) It is untenable position considering the amount of factors involved. If we have certain information about movement of 1 object, then it may be easy to calculate where and when the object will end up. This prediction however is GREATLY complicated if we add another object that exerts force on object #1 and when they both affect each other. When there are 3 objects interacting with each other, then it is extremely hard to predict what will happen. The degree of freedom rises exponentially, it isn't just extra calculations for 3rd body - it totally involves new math and the objects have new degrees of freedom. When we have even more factors (such as 5 aggregates, etc) - then the system doesn't behave "mechanistic". It is more of a "chaotic" than deterministic. Add billions of other creatures and you get the idea.... Best wishes, Alex #85921 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination sarahprocter... Hi Scott & TG, --- On Mon, 19/5/08, Scott Duncan wrote: Scott: >Good one! .... S: Yes! Hopeful signs, TG:-)) .... TG: >"Thanks for recognition I so richly deserve. Its good to be onboard the 'team.' So what's the procedure now? Are there some forms to fill out, blood test, background check?..." Scott: >No, but you will suddenly become really, really boring at parties. .... S: And then you'll find you're no longer invited to them and rejoice:-). Ah yes, you do need to be called a dinosaur by Ken O, to tick 'only present moment' a few times when addressing Ken H, to acknowledge citta processes and heart-base are in the ABh and that the Abh is the B's word (regardless of any ambiguous comments to the contrary by BB) on Nina's and my threads. What else? Oh, you'll need to indicate a serious interest in the Pali terms and pull out a few dictionaries, when addressing Scott & Connie. I'd also avoid mentioning 'energies' to anyone while the application is pending, but you've got the general idea:-)) ... TG: >"...Anyway, as you can tell I'm quite a coop for 'the group.' Please let me know (off-list) what the secret handshake is ok? Thanks" Scott: >No handshake, no hands, TG - concepts, remember? And I dig the 'coop' thing. I didn't find you to be all that confining of the group - hens, roosters, and coops are all merely conceptual as well... ... S: And then of course, no 'you' to be a coop for anything.....Just paramattha dhammas, remember:-). Repeat after me....Just.... Metta, Sarah ============ #85922 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Are the 32 body parts considered "ultimate realities" in your v... scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the reply. I had thought a bit about upasampajja vihareyyaatha as well. As you put it: S: "When I read the Pali and translation you supplied in your interesting note to Alex (#85685), it occurred to me that 'these things, if undertaken and practised' was a translation of 'ime dhammaa samattaa samaadinnaa hitaaya sukhaaya sa.mvattantii'ti', where 'samattaa samaadinnaa' might be translated as 'completely/fully undertaken' or something along those lines...[I was thinking of sammaadaana siila for example, when there is the undertaking to abstain from breaking precepts etc. Samaadinna, p.p. of samaadiyati, to take upon oneself (Buddhadatta dict). 'upasampajja vihareyyaatha - lit. 'you should live having entered on' ?? Upasampajja, abs. of upasampajjati, to attain, enter on, become fully ordained. So something like, >these states, when fully undertaken/observed, lead to...., then you should live accordingly.]" Scott: With this rendering you cite: 'you should live having entered on', there is a non-active sort of vibe to the terms. I'd say that the living becomes a natural sort of 'undertaking' and the 'practising' is a matter of an entering into something that happens or turns out resting upon the understanding of the arisen states. The conventional rendering of 'to take upon oneself' becomes a sort of undertaking which rests on knowledge and becomes a support upon which rests the correctness of the Dhamma - this is something that states 'come to' (sampajjati) and 'rest upon'. Sincerely, Scott. #85923 From: "Alex" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator Dear TG and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > Butting in with an answer... "yes they were." Without the sun and earth, we wouldn't be here at all reacting to this or that. So yes, there are causal factors, from billions of years ago, that are required for the support of present "reactions." > > > TG > > These are necessary but not SUFFICIENT conditions. We could have acted otherwise even if the same sun & moon were present. #85924 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. nilovg Hi Howard, You mentioned rehashing things in dsg and I thought of your new policy. I will answer your post, but you need not react again, to avoid endless debate. I also read your answer to Jon. Op 17-mei-2008, om 21:37 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > I didn't say that, Nina. I spoke of my intention leading to actions > that > prompt intentional actions in others. If A hits B, B may be angered > and > return the blow. A's action prompts the quick intention in B to > respond in kind. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Association with the good friend, > hearing the Good Dhamma from him or her helps the kusala citta of the > listener, but vipaka? > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nina, you misread me, and you are attacking a straw man. > -------------------------------------------- > N: You changed the subject from vipaaka to akusala cittas. People > fighting, Mr A, Mr B! ---------- > ============================= > H: Nina, you didn't understand my post. :-) Please reread it. -------- N: Forgive, forgive, if I misunderstood. > You spoke about interaction of persons in society and want to give > that weight as causes for the vipaaka someone receives. You had the > example of A killing B. Did I understand you here? May I give another picture? I think interaction between humans is important. It is here that we can develop metta, render service to others, not thinking of ourselves, of our tiredness. Or it is an occasion for akusala through body and speech, fighting, scolding, conceit. Thus, it is a scenario of kusala citta and akusala citta expressed through body and speech. But now the subject of vipaka. We do not know which kamma will produce which vipaka, it is one of the unthinkables. The Abhidhamma helps us to distinguish between kusala and akusala citta which can motivate actions and vipakacitta which is the mere receiving of result, which does not act. As I said these are seeing, hearing, etc. Mostly we do not know whether these are results of kusala kamma or akusala kamma, but in the case of bodily pain we know. When I receive an unpleasant object through the bodysense, it is not my concern whether this or that person hit me, this is not helpful to reach the goal. I am likely to notice it with akusala citta, and then I accumulate only more akusala. What is important: knowing when kusala citta or akusala citta arises, and when vipakacitta like seeing, hearing, etc. Learning that they all arise because of their proper conditions, that they are anatta. When they have arisen they cannot be altered. It has happened. I cannot add anything else that is constructive to our discussion. I would repeat myself. Nina. #85925 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Howard > A scenario, Jon: An extremely powerful explosive is cleverly placed by a > terrorist aboard an airline, undetected. All the passengers on board > (amazingly) had kamma coming to fruition that "called for" their death. (Hmm, how > did their vipaka get to influence the terrorist!?) > Let's assume that the worst then happened. I wouldn't say the passengers must've had kamma that "called for" their death. They had kamma that *supported* their death. They might at the same time have had kamma that supported a longer lifespan. But there were conditions for one kamma rather than the other to come to fruition. The action of the terrorist is just a condition for that kamma to come to fruition. It might equally have been a bolt of lightening, mechanical failure or pilot error. > Then one more late-arriving > passenger gets his ticket and boards the plane. HIS time is NOT up. HIS > death-affecting kamma has not come to fruition. So, Jon, does that prevent the > explosion from occurring? Your statement "in the first case (A kills B), B's > death cannot occur unless the appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some > time in the past, and if that were not the case then A's attempt would not > succeed" seems to suggest that magically it will! Jon, do you really buy this? > As I said above, it's not a matter of only one particular 'set' of kamma that must ripen, only one outcome being possible. Who among us would not have committed in the past kamma that would support a violent death? Jon #85926 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman >> The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: >> (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the >> appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and >> if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; >> (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), >> B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be >> so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's >> unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere >> impersonal circumstances. >> > > Are these ideas about kamma/action your own, Jon? If not, I wouldn't > mind finding out what your sources are. > It is how I understand the teachings on kamma (I think I made it clear that I was not claiming to be quoting the gospel ;-)). I'm afraid I don't have any textual references handy. Is there anything you'd like to discuss? >> Jon >> >> PS Herman, good to see you back! >> > > Thank you. I hope you still feel that way next week :-) > Don't see why not (unless you're planning something ;-)). Jon #85927 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination jonoabb Hi TG Loved your post! Bro Jon TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi Scott > > > LOL Thanks for recognition I so richly deserve. Its good to be onboard the > "team." So what's the procedure now? Are there some forms to fill out, > blood test, background check? ... > #85928 From: "connie" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 7:53 am Subject: Perfections Corner (157) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing ch.4: In the "Dasa.n.naka Jaataka"(no. 401) the danger and disadvantage of clinging has been explained. We read in the Commentary to the "Dasa.n.naka Jaataka" : "At the time that the Bodhisatta was the wise Senaka, the royal councillor, Mahaa-Moggallaana was the wise aayura, and Saariputta was the wise Pukkusa. The son of the King's household priest came to wait on the King and when he saw the queen he became enamoured, and when he went home he lay down without taking food. When the King came to know about this, he gave the queen to him for seven days, but asked him to send her back on the eighth day. However, it appeared that the son of the household priest and the queen became enamoured of each other and had fled to another country. The King suffered great sorrow and became very sick. The royal physicians could not cure him. The Bodhisatta knew that the King did not suffer a bodily ailment, but that he was touched by mental sickness because he did not see the queen. He thought of using a specific trick to cure him. He arranged for a display where the King could see a man swallowing a sword with a sharp edge which was thirtythree inches long. Thereupon the King asked the wise aayura (in the first stanza) whether there was anything harder to do than swallowing this sword. The wise aayura, who was to be in his last life Mahaa-Moggallaana, answered (in the second stanza), that saying, 'I shall give this away', is more difficult." This shows that clinging to visible object, sound and the other sense objects is extremely difficult to give up. If someone still clings, how can he say that he will give something away? We read: "When the King had heard the words of the wise aayura, he thought, 'I have said that I would give the queen to the son of the household priest, and so I have done what is very hard to do.' Hence his sorrow at heart became a little lighter, since he had done what was hard to do. The King wondered whether there was something else harder to do than saying, 'I shall give something to someone else'. He considered that speaking in such a way is difficult, but he wondered whether there was something else more difficult. Thereupon the King asked the wise Pukkusa (in the third stanza) whether there was anything else more difficult to do than saying that one would give something away. Thereupon the wise Pukkusa spoke, in order to solve this problem, the fourth stanza: 'People do not value words that are vainly spoken, and that are without effect. But when someone makes a promise and can decrease clinging, this is more difficult than swallowing a sword or merely promising something.' " This passage deals with sincerity, with truthfulness pertaining to one's thinking and to the words one has spoken. Thus, someone may say that he shall give, but it is more difficult to truly give. When confidence in kusala, saddhaa, arises, someone may say that he shall give, but afterwards he may not be able to give. It is more difficult to act according to one's promise. When there is sincerity and truthfulness someone is able to follow up in action what he has promised. .. to be continued, connie #85929 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:02 am Subject: A Science Article of Possible Analogical Value upasaka_howard Hi, all - I refer you to the following article in the newspaper NEWSDAY, as an analogy that may elicit some insight into the nature of systems (or aggregations) of phenomena: _http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story_ (http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story) 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) #85930 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 5:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... Hi Sarah, (DSG Buddies), Consider it done. I'll try to get you a cyber stamp that says "TG Approved!" and you can just pre-nascently stamp your and Nina's posts with it. This apparent "dinosaur hazing" by Ken O and Ken H sounds a bit kinky but should I have expected any different? As far as BB is concerned...shame shame shame. Energies out, namas and rupas in...got it! I'll try to learn how to spell "coup" properly as a bonus... but like you say though...concepts....who needs em! Sung to the tune of "War" ----> Concepts...what arrrrreeeee they good for...absolutely nothing! hoo, say it again.... Hey, this is easier than I thought. I may get myself some ruby slippers and chant -- "There's no relaities like namas and rupas, there's no realities like namas and rupas, there's no realities like namas and rupas," etc. That may be too advanced for my tender stage but I'll ask permission first. Anyway, thanks for the guidance. And BTW, do you folks sell the blindfolds "in house" or do I go (I mean do namas and rupas go) "out of house" to find those? Thanks. TG Approved! In a message dated 5/19/2008 7:22:40 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: And then you'll find you're no longer invited to them and rejoice:-). Ah yes, you do need to be called a dinosaur by Ken O, to tick 'only present moment' a few times when addressing Ken H, to acknowledge citta processes and heart-base are in the ABh and that the Abh is the B's word (regardless of any ambiguous comments to the contrary by BB) on Nina's and my threads. What else? Oh, you'll need to indicate a serious interest in the Pali terms and pull out a few dictionaries, when addressing Scott & Connie. I'd also avoid mentioning 'energies' to anyone while the application is pending, but you've got the general idea:-)) ... TG: >"...Anyway, as you can tell I'm quite a coop for 'the group.' Please let me know (off-list) what the secret handshake is ok? Thanks" Scott: >No handshake, no hands, TG - concepts, remember? And I dig the 'coop' thing. I didn't find you to be all that confining of the group - hens, roosters, and coops are all merely conceptual as well... ... S: And then of course, no 'you' to be a coop for anything....S: And then of course, no 'you' to be a coop for anything.... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 10:15 am Subject: Re: Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination scottduncan2 TG: "...Sung to the tune of "War" ---->Concepts...what arrrrreeeee they good for...absolutely nothing! hoo, say it again...." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48KVZXroyjA&feature=related Scott: Good God Y'all. (Graphic wartime images). Sincerely, Scott. #85932 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/19/2008 11:16:24 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: TG: "...Sung to the tune of "War" ---->Concepts.Concepts...what ar good for...absolutely nothing! hoo, say it again...." _http://www.youtube.http://wwwhttp://www.yo&feature=re_ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48KVZXroyjA&feature=related) Scott: Good God Y'all. (Graphic wartime images). Sincerely, Scott. ........................................... I bear the shield of Abhidhamma and am at war against concepts! TG Approved! #85933 From: "colette" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 9:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death, ksheri3 Good Morning Jon, and Herman, "Planning something"? Herman? come now, are you, Jon, suggesting that Herman is a developer in the Planned Community setting or involved in the Prison institution? Weren't Prisons the cause of tatoos, body art, for the Japanese and the Chinese? I would love to deconstruct Herman's response to you but if I did I would be taking it completely out of context and viewing it in a natural state of existance, so I won't BUT I will comment below > >> The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: > >> (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the > >> appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and > >> if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; > >> (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), > >> B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be > >> so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's > >> unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere > >> impersonal circumstances. > >> > > > > Are these ideas about kamma/action your own, Jon? If not, I wouldn't > > mind finding out what your sources are. > > > > It is how I understand the teachings on kamma (I think I made it clear > that I was not claiming to be quoting the gospel ;-)). I'm afraid I > don't have any textual references handy. > > Is there anything you'd like to discuss? > > >> Jon > >> > >> PS Herman, good to see you back! > >> > > > > Thank you. I hope you still feel that way next week :-) > > > > Don't see why not (unless you're planning something ;-)). colette: that's where I got the impression that Planned Communities existed outside of Florida. To put an end to my "butting in" I'll say: "Certainly there is no self-existence (svabhava) of existing things in conditioning causes, etc; And if no self-existence exists, neither does 'other-existence" (parabhava)." I can't wait to dig deep into parabhava but things take time. toodles, colette #85934 From: "colette" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 9:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination ksheri3 Thanx Jon, I laughed too, it is a lovely thought to have. Pity isn't it, now Scott realizes the beauracracy he's gotta go through. <.....> Thanx for giving me the "heads up". toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi TG > > Loved your post! > > Bro Jon > > TGrand458@... wrote: > > > > Hi Scott > > > > > > LOL Thanks for recognition I so richly deserve. Its good to be onboard the > > "team." So what's the procedure now? Are there some forms to fill out, > > blood test, background check? ... > > > #85935 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? glenjohnann Hello Nina This is all very interesting. Can you please say more about "the four rupas that are characteristics of rupa, namely, birth, continuity, deacy and impermanance." Am I understanding this correctly to think that these characteristics (birth, continuity, decay and impermanance) are rupas themselves? If so, then I have difficulty understanding this. I appreciate all of your posts following up on questions and various threads. Ann -- 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. 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. > #85936 From: han tun Date: Mon May 19, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: Patthaana (38) hantun1 Patthana (38) Dear Friends, We are now studying (8) Support Condition (nissaya paccya). (Simile: The conditioning state is related to the conditioned state in a manner similar to the way the earth supports trees and vegetation.) Two main categories of Support Condition are: (i) Conascence-Support Condition (sahajaata-nissaya paccaya), and (ii) Prenascence Support Condition (purejaata-nissaya paccaya). It has eleven points to study. ------------------------------ We will take up the first point. (1) 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. Here, of the two main categories of Support Condition, the four mental aggregates (four namakkhandhas) are mutually related to one another by Conascence-Support Condition (sahajaata-nissaya paccaya). Citta and cetasikas always arise together and they are depending on one another. Citta cannot arise without cetasikas and cetasikas cannot arise without citta. As we have seen, they are also related to one another by way of Conascence Condition (sahajaata-paccaya) and by way of Mutuality Condition (a~n~nama~n~na-paccaya). Citta and cetasikas need one another to perform their functions. Citta is the chief in cognizing an object, and cetasikas share the same object while they perform each their own function. For example, when greed (lobha-mula-citta) arises it is dependent on the accompanying cetasikas. The roots of moha and lobha condition that citta and the other cetasikas by way of Root Condition (hetu-paccaya), and also by way of Support Condition (nissaya-paccaya). Ignorance and attachment are also a support for the lobha-mula-citta. There are also desire-to-do (chanda), and effort (viriya) accompanying the lobha-mula-citta. Chanda and viriya can be Predominance Condition (adhipati-paccaya). While one tries to acquire the things one clings to, lobha-mula-citta just cognizes the desirable object which presents itself, and it needs chanda and viriya to accomplish in acquiring the object. The desirable object here becomes the Object Condition (aaramma.na-paccaya). When kusala citta arises it is dependent on non-attachment (alobha), and non-aversion (adosa), and also on other cetasikas as Root Condition (hetu-paccaya). It also needs, for example, chanda and viriya as Predominance Condition (adhipati-paccaya) for the performance of giving (daana), the observance of precepts (siila), and the mental development (bhaavana). Thus, each of the accompanying cetasikas which performs its own task, supports citta and conditions it by way of Support Condition (nissaya-paccaya), apart from the afore-mentioned other Conditions. You will now see that there are many Conditions to enable cittas and cetasikas to function. The Conditions which we have studied before all come in, such as Root Condition (hetu-paccaya), Object Condition (aaramma.na-paccaya), Predominance Condition (adhipati-paccaya), Conascence Condition (sahajaata-paccaya) and Mutuality Condition (a~n~nama~n~na-paccaya). We will see these manifold conditions as we proceed in our study of Patthaana. That’s why the Patthaana is said to be very deep and profound. To be continued. Metta, Han #85937 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? glenjohnann Hello Nina and Sarah Nina, I sent my question to you a few minutes ago about the four characteristics of rupa as being rupa themselves and since then I have read the other posts about this thread. I still do not really understand why these are rupas - is it that those characteristics themselves (birth, continuity, decay and impermanance) are simply instrisic in every rupa? Ann - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > 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. > #85938 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/19 Alex : > Dear Herman and all, > > > FIrst of all, there IS a big difference between: > tanha and chanda (or viriya or aditthana) > OK. > > 2nd) At some point, even "craving, desire, conceit" are GOOD. But up > to a point (till Arahattamagga or so). > Accepted. > > 3rd) Even if everything is 100% predetermined, mechanistic, without > ANY choice, etc: > Then it is still more wholesome to believe that unwholesome states > can be removed through wholesome effort and wholesome mental states > CAN be developed. > We agreed a while ago that causes of consciousness and content of consciousness do not occur at the same time. Whatever we are aware of now, occurred somewhere between 1/4 second to 1/2 second ago. When this is not realised, it is so easily believed that intentions arise presently, in real time. That allows for the belief "I am intending, I am making this happen". But we know this is not true. The intention that I am aware of now happened causally upto 1/2 second ago. "We" are not witness to the present, we are witness to what has already happened. "We" are not choosing a future, we are watching the choices that have already been made. How does this relate to the above? What ever effort is arising in awareness, has already ceased. There is no I in there making it happen, monitoring it, modyfying it. At best, for the most developed mindfulness, there is still only a belated and selective awareness of what has already gone. There is no opportunity to modify the past. In the unwholesome / wholesome stakes, the kamma that ends kamma wins. No "I" belief can be a condition for the cessation of "I" belief, IMO. > > YOu know, all the talk about "nothing can be done" can be a strong > and self fulfilling prophecy. > a) You don't believe in effort > b) Without effort the unwholesome (default) states of mind overtake > one making it almost impossible to deal with them, which would > justify the a) point above. Repeat again and again. > I'm sure that that there are good ways to get a message across, and bad ways. I would be amongst the world's worst teachers. The Bahiya Sutta is my favourite, very to the point, yet full of humanity. If we adapt that Sutta to our discussion, it would say that there is no "I" in effort. And it would say there is no "I" who is dealing with anything. And after having rightly understood that we would be gored by a cow. > > > 4th) It is untenable position considering the amount of factors > involved. If we have certain information about movement of 1 object, > then it may be easy to calculate where and when the object will end > up. This prediction however is GREATLY complicated if we add another > object that exerts force on object #1 and when they both affect each > other. When there are 3 objects interacting with each other, then it > is extremely hard to predict what will happen. The degree of freedom > rises exponentially, it isn't just extra calculations for 3rd body - > it totally involves new math and the objects have new degrees of > freedom. > > When we have even more factors (such as 5 aggregates, etc) - then the > system doesn't behave "mechanistic". It is more of a "chaotic" than > deterministic. Add billions of other creatures and you get the > idea.... I think that whether the Universe is (pre)determined or not makes not one iota of difference to the reality of anatta :-) > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > All the best Herman #85939 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 6:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/5/20 Jonothan Abbott : > Hi Herman > >>> The reason why it is of no real significance, I believe, would be that: >>> (a) in the first case (A kills B), B's death cannot occur unless the >>> appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, and >>> if that were not the case then A's attempt would not succeed; >>> (b) in the second case (B reacts with unwholesome actions of his own), >>> B's action is according to his accumulated tendencies, and this will be >>> so whether the 'provocation' in question comes from another's >>> unwholesome actions, from another's wholesome actions, or from mere >>> impersonal circumstances. >>> > > It is how I understand the teachings on kamma (I think I made it clear > that I was not claiming to be quoting the gospel ;-)). I'm afraid I > don't have any textual references handy. > > Is there anything you'd like to discuss? > Sure. I wonder why you would say that B cannot die, or be killed, unless an appropriate prior kamma was commited by B? Would you say the same about the opposite, that B cannot be born without an appropriate prior kamma by B? >>> Jon >>> >>> PS Herman, good to see you back! >>> >> >> Thank you. I hope you still feel that way next week :-) >> > > Don't see why not (unless you're planning something ;-)). If anything happens, it'll be them pesky conditions :-) Cheers Herman #85940 From: Sukinder Date: Mon May 19, 2008 5:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] was: Rain Gods - Cold blooded conditionality sukinderpal Hi TG, ======== 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. S: From where I am, there is problem in communication, both in expressing as well as being able to clearly understand the other person. I am generally impatient and inattentive esp. when reading, and wish that I could listen better to what others are saying. Added to this I think, there is also the problem of coming from a different interpretation of the Dhamma. In this regard I know that you have been generally quite patient all along, when expressing your disagreements. But perhaps this has put a limit to your clearly expressing your viewpoint and stating exactly where and why you disagree with what I and others say? I’ll try to lay out what I think you to have been saying all along and you can correct me if you want: -The Buddha in the Suttas never used the term Paramattha Dhamma but instead only used Dhatu, Ayatana and Khandha (Nibbana excluded here) to represent that which is included in the 4NTs. -Paramattha Dhamma or Ultimate Realities is a commentarial invention which you consider to be misleading. -The impression you get from reading the Suttas is that the Buddha meant for his audience to view experiences as being ‘conditioned’ in a way that no ‘reality’ ought to be singled out and given any particular significance, even if this be merely to distinguish the so called ‘reality’ from ‘concept’. -Defining any experience as ‘ultimate reality’ leads to viewing them unwittingly, as “independentâ€?, even though we state at the same time that *no reality arises without conditions*. -In fact the reason why the commentators introduced the idea of Paramattha Dhamma was because they failed to recognize “self viewâ€? and therefore they and those of us who appreciate the particular distinction, do it in order to maintain the “Selfâ€? which happens to continue popping its head up. In short, “Ultimate Realityâ€? is an expression of “Selfâ€? which then goes on to use the many concepts such as Anatta and conditionality, to hide behind. -Furthermore, by qualifying with ‘ultimate’ one is suggesting “degreesâ€? of reality and this is delusory. Is this close enough TG? I’ll wait for your response before then going on to explaining more about my own position including why I wrote what I did in my last post. Metta, Sukin #85941 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon May 19, 2008 4:19 pm Subject: Sumedha's Similes... bhikkhu0 Friends: What made the Bodhisatta seek Enlightenment? Sitting in his upper chamber the immensely rich young brahmin Sumedha thought like this: Not seeking Purity: When a man soiled in dirt sees a pure lotus covered lake, but does not seek it to get a clean bath, it is not an error of the lake, but a fault of the dirty man... Even and exactly so: When there is the great lake of the deathless NibbÄ?na capable of purifying all the mental defilements, yet it is not being sought by the mentally polluted being, then it is not an error of this immortal state, but a fatal fault of the mentally contaminated human being... Neglecting the Way: When a man surrounded by robbers does not flee, though there is a possible way to escape, then it is not an error of this open way, but a fault of the man neglecting to break free by this road... Even and exactly so: When there is this blessed Noble 8-fold Way leading straight to absolute freedom, yet it is not being used, then is not an error of this supreme method, but a fault of the man failing to follow, clear and develop this ancient path... Rejecting the Doctor: When a seriously sick man does not seek the help of the doctor, who knows the effective cure, then is neither a fault of the doctor nor of the medical treatment, but a mistake of the sick man! Even and exactly so: When there is this sublime Teacher, who can cure all mental diseases & thereby allay all frustration and pain, yet he is not being sought, then - indeed - it is not a fault of this guide, but a grave error of anyone mentally unhealthy and defiled and thus prone for downfall... These thoughts made the young man give away all his richness and become recluse in Himalaya: Later he met the Buddha DÄ«pankara and at his feet made the determination to be come Buddha ! <....> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) <....> #85942 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 12:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Herman(& Alex), --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. H: >You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are characteristics of red. How is the absence of a characteristic related to what characteristic it is an absence of? ============= S: Sorry, I couldn't follow this, but I appreciate others were able to:-). ============== >S: If we talk about impermanence conventionally or in general, it is not the characteristic of impermanence that the Buddha taught. <...> .... H: >As B. Bodhi has pointed out in his introduction to CMA, the cittavitthi theory is entirely commentarial in origin, as are the paramattha and sabhava views of elements. I think it is unwise that even when we know these views and theories to be entirely commentarial to continue to present them as originating with the Buddha. ============== S: We are referring to the Abhidhamma and CMA specifically, because this is the text Alex has been asking questions on. Here, Wwe are discussing the impermanence of dhammas vs a conventional impermanence. .... SN 35:1 'The Internal as Impermanent, (B.Bodhi transl.) " "Bhikkhus, the eye is impermanent. What is impermanent is suffering. What is suffering is nonself. What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: 'this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' "The ear is impermanent.....The nose...The tongue....The body...The mind is impermanent. What is impermanent is suffering. What is suffering is nonself. What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: 'this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' "Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards the eye......ear.....mind. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion [his mind] is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: 'It's liberated.' He understands: 'Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.' " " ..... Metta, Sarah ========= #85943 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, I'm not sure that anyone responded to this one.... (#85682) I'd just like to respond to the first paragraph: --- On Thu, 15/5/08, Alex wrote: A:> 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? ========== S: Do these meditators really understand what samatha is, do you think? Can anyone 'calm the mind'? What is calm or tranquility now? If it is really understood, can there be any question about samatha as a 'pointless waste of time', do you think? If we don't clearly understand what samatha is at this moment, is there any purpose in talking about its development, let alone about jhana? Metta, Sarah ======== #85944 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bodily feeling in satipatthana sarahprocter... Hi Larry, oops, a late reply to #85158 --- On Wed, 30/4/08, LBIDD@... wrote: >Sarah: "There are many different classifications of feelings, but all feelings (vedana) are included." .... >Larry: How does painful bodily feeling fit into the classifications of worldly and spiritual feeling? ============= S: I'm always a little thrown by the word 'spiritual', but I've just looked at the sutta you were referring to before (MN 137), referring to pleasant feeling based on the household life and pleasnat feeling based on renunciation, associated with insight. With regard to unpleasant feeling, it's easy to understand that (with aversion), based on the household life. The unpleasant feeling based on insight refers to aversion with unpleasant feeling associated with a longing for higher insight and liberation. In any case, these feelings all refer to those associated with the javana processes, nothing to do with the pleasant or painful bodily feelings which arise with moments of body consciousness. ============== L:>It can't be a joyful worldly feeling and it can't be worldly grief because that is concerned with "non-acquisition" . It could be an object of insight, but if so, the feeling we are concerned with is the joy, grief or equanimity that arises with that insight. =============== S: This is unpleasant feeling that is conditioned by insight. Remember, there were discussions and quotes before about how kusala can condition akusala and so on? Remember the upa-kilesa in the Vism and a sutta I quoted quite recently on this. Pls let me know if this part is clear before we go on. Feel free to re-quote from your earlier message if you wish. Now I have the texts out:-). Metta, Sarah ========= #85945 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 2:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Science Article of Possible Analogical Value egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/20 : > Hi, all - > > I refer you to the following article in the newspaper NEWSDAY, as an > analogy that may elicit some insight into the nature of systems (or > aggregations) of phenomena: > _http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story_ (http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story) > Thank you for that, Howard. I have no dispute whatsoever with the article you linked to. I'm sorry if I'm being thick, or perhaps we were just discussing at cross-purposes. But I did not read anything in the article that made me realise that systems or aggregations are inheritors of their own kamma. I hope that I do not appear obstinate. I genuinely do just not understand what kamma could refer to in the context of anatta, other than anatta. And if kamma does indeed refer to anatta, then the idea of kamma is only likely to lead to confusion, and is entirely superfluous, IMO. Cheers Herman #85946 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings egberdina Hi colette, 2008/5/19 colette : > Hi Herman, > > Lets try some more of your pleasant reply. > > >> Your powers of analysis are A1. But I do not get the feeling that > you >> actually want to be like the masses, or is that just a defence >> mechanism? >> > colette: THANK YOU FOR WHAT MOST PEOPLE CLASSIFY AS DELUSIONS AND/OR > MENTAL ILLNESS THAT REQUIRES HOSPITALIZATION (PRISON) AND EXTENSIVE > DRUG THERAPY. > > But I am like everybody else. Why would you think that I have a > choice in this matter? The masses are the same as I, so how could I > hope to not be a member? > > It sounds like buying/selling a house or home. The new owners want to > do some renovating. The choices of renovation are clearly designed > and ordered "to sell the house to others" not for the owners to enjoy > living in. This raises that ugly question concerning the Future > Dharma since the Present Dharma is not for happiness and samadhi at > the Present time, the Present Dharma does not exist, it is the Future > Dharma that must be entirely satiated, no? > > The masses have problems with deviance and deviant enjoyments. For > instance Public Exocutions are a staple in the Western society.<...> > > Thanks for thinking that I have deviant desires but I'm working these > tantras and dharmas pretty heavily so I can't deviate too far from > that which is given. The status quo, on the other hand, well, in the > drunken condition, they wander off anywhere. > I don't think you have deviant desires, but I do think you are one sharp cookie (sharp as in incisively observant - but that comes with it's own pain, as you are no doubt aware :-)) Blessings Herman #85947 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 4:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Blessings egberdina Hi colette, 2008/5/18 colette : > Hi Herman, > > Another good post/reply, AND IT JUST SO HAPPENS that I'm working on > the strategy, if the Dharmas can or could have a strategy, of the > PAST DHARMA, the PRESENT DHARMA, and the FUTURE DHARMA. Naturally, I > guess I'll have to make the last the first, no? > I thought I would just meddle with your mind, while interfering with the arrow of time, and answer a later post before a prior one :-) The things you suggest are huge in ramification. Neither of us seem to be in a hurry to achieve cessation, in a manner of speaking, so we may as well whittle away the moments trying to understand what's going on, how say you ? In asking you questions BTW I do not believe I have a standard with which to measure your answers. Do you think that the past can exert an influence on the future? Cheers Herman PS Please feel free to turn the tables on me at any time, and ask away. #85948 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Ann (and Nina & Sarah) - In a message dated 5/19/2008 7:01:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, glenjohnann@... writes: Hello Nina and Sarah Nina, I sent my question to you a few minutes ago about the four characteristics of rupa as being rupa themselves and since then I have read the other posts about this thread. I still do not really understand why these are rupas - is it that those characteristics themselves (birth, continuity, decay and impermanance) are simply instrisic in every rupa? Ann ============================ Likewise, namas also have birth, continuity, decay, and cessation, and accordingly they would be namas. It would seem that the rule is "A characteristic of an X is a subtle kind of X". But I personally do not buy this. For me, birth, continuity, decay, and cessation are abstractions (hence concepts) derived by grammatical reification from the true observations that conditioned dhammas arise, continue, decay, and cease. So, for example, anger arises, but there is no thing that is "the arising of anger," and a pain lessens, i.e., decays, but there is no thing that is "the lessening of pain." [Note: "Pain" here refers to the unpleasant bodily sensation - the usual usage, rather than the unpleasant feeling of that sensation.] 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) #85949 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/19/2008 9:34:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Sure. I wonder why you would say that B cannot die, or be killed, unless an appropriate prior kamma was commited by B? Would you say the same about the opposite, that B cannot be born without an appropriate prior kamma by B? ============================ Wouldn't you say it? Consider, for example, the sutta I copy at the end, which, BTW, I take to pertain not only to lifetimes but to moment-by-moment existence, just as I do dependent origination. With metta, Howard _____________________________________________________ Cetanaa Sutta Volition Translated from the Pali by Maurice O'Connell Walshe Alternate translation: _Thanissaro_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.than.html) _Walshe_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html) PTS: S ii 65 CDB i 576 The Pali title of this sutta is based on the PTS (Feer) edition. ____________________________________ Source: From _Samyutta Nikaya: An Anthology (WH 318-321)_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/walshe/wheel318.html) , by M. O'C. Walshe (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1985). Transcribed from the print edition in 2007 by a volunteer, under the auspices of the Access to Insight Dhamma Transcription Project and by arrangement with the Buddhist Publication Society. Minor revisions were made in accordance with the ATI style sheet. Pali diacritics are represented using the Velthuis convention. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1985 Buddhist Publication Society. Access to Insight edition © 2007 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ _1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html#n-1) [At Saavatthii the Blessed One said:] "Monks, what a man wills, what he plans, what he dwells on forms the basis for the continuation of consciousness._2_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html#n-2) This basis being present, consciousness has a lodgment. Consciousness being lodged there and growing, rebirth of renewed existence takes place in the future, and from this renewed existence arise birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, sorrow and despair. Such is the uprising of this entire mass of suffering. "Even if a man does not will and plan, yet if he dwells on something this forms a basis for the continuation of consciousness:... rebirth... takes place... "But if a man neither wills nor plans nor dwells on anything, no basis is formed for the continuation of consciousness. This basis being absent, consciousness has no lodgment. Consciousness not being lodged there and not growing, no rebirth of renewed existence takes place in the future, and so birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, sorrow and despair are destroyed. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering." ____________________________________ Notes _1._ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html#t-1) Cetanaa. This is equated in AN vi, 13 with kamma. [Cf. _AN 6.63_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html) , sect. [5]: "... Intention, I tell you, is kamma."] _2._ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html#t-2) Consciousness (defined as "karmic consciousness" in SA [SN Commentary]) is dependent on the formations (sankhaaraa) of which volition (_n. 1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html#n-1) ) is one. ____________________________________ Revised: Saturday 2008-05-17 _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.wlsh.html) #85950 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 1:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 5/20/2008 3:29:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Can anyone 'calm the mind'? ============================= Yes, of course, by a variety of means. 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) #85951 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Science Article of Possible Analogical Value upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/20/2008 5:23:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/20 : > Hi, all - > > I refer you to the following article in the newspaper NEWSDAY, as an > analogy that may elicit some insight into the nature of systems (or > aggregations) of phenomena: > _http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story_ (http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hshow0519,0,3850359.story) > Thank you for that, Howard. I have no dispute whatsoever with the article you linked to. I'm sorry if I'm being thick, or perhaps we were just discussing at cross-purposes. But I did not read anything in the article that made me realise that systems or aggregations are inheritors of their own kamma. I hope that I do not appear obstinate. I genuinely do just not understand what kamma could refer to in the context of anatta, other than anatta. And if kamma does indeed refer to anatta, then the idea of kamma is only likely to lead to confusion, and is entirely superfluous, IMO. Cheers Herman =============================== I think you're making much more of this than the matter warrants. Say there are two trees in your garden. There is interaction between the trees with regard to the surrounding soil, water, CO2, and so on. But the leaves of one are not the leaves of the other. Likewise, there are two "persons" (namarupic streams) who interact, but the mental fruition (like the leaves of a tree) of the cetana of one person is not that of the other. With metta, Howard #85952 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/20 Alex : > Dear TG and all, > > These are necessary but not SUFFICIENT conditions. We could have acted > otherwise even if the same sun & moon were present. > The idea that one could have acted differently under the same circumstances is identical to the idea of free will. Two thoughts on the matter follow below: 1] The proposition is entirely untestable. In other words, it is always possible to say it, but never possible to realise it. It is entirely metaphysical ie in the realm of: I was, I am, I will be. 2] The same circumstances never arise. Anything is just what it is, it is not a characteristic of anything that it is an instance of something else. Cheers Herman #85953 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/20 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman(& Alex), > > --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. > > H: >You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic > of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are > characteristics of red. How is the absence of a characteristic related > to what characteristic it is an absence of? > ============= > > S: Sorry, I couldn't follow this, but I appreciate others were able to:-). > ============== If I had a cent for every time someone referred to eg the sound or red that has just fallen away I'd have over $4.35 by now. The problem I have with this formulation is that a sound or red that has fallen away is not there, it is neither red nor sound. You cannot refer to something that isn't there, and say that it was this or that before it fell away. Especially not if you want to crown that red or sound that isn't there as being an ultimate reality. If you do not understand what I am saying, please keep asking. Cheers Herman #85954 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:14 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, One of the benefits of the development of mettå is that one sleeps happily. If we are angry with someone can we then sleep happily? If we are not angry with anyone, if we have no hate and we can forgive anybody whatever wrong he may have done, we can really sleep happily. If sati-sampajañña arises when it is time to go to sleep, we can find out what type of citta arises before falling asleep. We can find out whether there is at such a moment lobha, dosa, satipatthåna or mettå. If we develop satipatthåna there can be paññå which knows the characteristics of realities as they are. When the reality which appears at a particular moment is akusala, sati-sampajañña (paññå arising with sati) can realize akusala as akusala. Paññå can distinguish the difference between kusala dhamma and akusala dhamma and thus it is able to eliminate akusala more and more. The development of kusala is the only way to have the benefit of sleeping happily. Waking up happily is another benefit. When it is time to get up in the morning we can find out whether mettå has been sufficiently developed so that we can have this benefit. If there is anger remaining in our heart, the citta will be disturbed when we wake up; we are preoccupied with events we can’t forget. In reality there is no self, being or person, but there are conditions for citta to be disturbed. As soon as we wake up saññå (remembrance) remembers the event which causes us to be annoyed. Or when we have done something wrong and we worry because of this, we cannot help thinking of this as soon as we wake up. When we have done something wrong we are likely to worry about it and to feel unhappy when we go to sleep, and then we are also unhappy when we wake up. When there is akusala citta before going to sleep there will also be akusala citta as soon as we wake up. When there is akusala citta rooted in lobha, and there is no mindfulness of it, we will not realize it that there is clinging as soon as we wake up. There is clinging to the objects which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense and mind-door. We usually do not notice attachment to the sense objects when it is of a slight degree and we do not see its disadvantage and danger. Dosa is a reality which is more coarse and thus it is less difficult to realize it as akusala than in the case of lobha. When there is dosa the citta is disturbed and unhappy. Lobha is not coarse and fierce like dosa, it is difficult to realize it as akusala. If we develop satipttìhåna naturally, in daily life, we will know the characteristics of realities just as they are, we will know when there is lobha and when there is dosa. ****** Nina. #85955 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Herman, I'll start again with this: --- On Tue, 20/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: From: Herman Hofman > --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. > > H: >You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic > of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are > characteristics of red. ============= S: No I'm not. It's all a projection of what you (wrongly) think I've said. Metta, Sarah ========== #85956 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/20 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > I'll start again with this: > > --- On Tue, 20/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > > From: Herman Hofman >> --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. >> >> H: >You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic >> of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are >> characteristics of red. > ============= > S: No I'm not. It's all a projection of what you (wrongly) think I've said. > OK. What is impermanent about red or sound? Cheers Herman #85957 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > I wonder why you would say that B cannot die, or be killed, > unless an appropriate prior kamma was commited by B? Would you say the > same about the opposite, that B cannot be born without an appropriate > prior kamma by B? > When I said that B's death cannot occur unless the appropriate kamma has been committed by B at some time in the past, I was referring to the timing or manner and general circumstances of death, and not to the fact of death per se. Death is of course an inevitable consequence of birth. Birth is likewise the inevitable successor of death, for all except the arahant (he/she having gone beyond birth). Birth occurs at the moment succeeding the moment of death (and so there is not quite the same 'timing' issue as with death). I am of course merely stating matters learnt from book study or listening to talks. No particular authenticity is being asserted ;-)). Hoping this clarifies. Does it answer your question(s)? Jon #85958 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:50 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 261-263 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 261-263 Intro: In the following sections the Visuddhimagga explains which kind of clinging conditions which kind of becoming. As we have seen, there are four kinds of clinging: clinging to sense-desires, to wrong view, to wrong practice and to self doctrine. Clinging to wrong view includes eternalism, annihilation view, denial of kamma and vipaaka. Clinging to wrong practice is clinging to ‘rites and rutuals’. One assumes that a certain wrong practice such as observance of the conduct of a cow or a dog leads to liberation, one takes the wrong Path for the right Path. Clinging to self doctrine is sakkaaya di.t.thi, personality belief. One identifies the self with each of the five khandhas, or sees the self as their possessor, container or inner nucleus. The Visuddhimagga explains that any of these kinds of clinging can condition any kind of becoming: sensuous becoming, fine- material becoming and immaterial becoming. The Visuddhimagga explains first that clinging to sense-desires conditions any kind of becoming. ---------- Text Vis. 261:. '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. ------- N: The Tiika refers to the opinion of some teachers that one cannot be successful in jhaana by the second kind of clinging, namely by conduct as a cow or dog, by clinging to rites and rituals. But such opinion is not acceptable as the text states. While observing rites and rituals one may take to the wrong way or to the right way, and it cannot be said that taking the right way is not suitable for material jhaana and immaterial jhaana. One may still be able to develop samatha to the stage of jhaana, and these stages of jhaana can have as results fine material becoming and immaterial becoming. ------- Text Vis. 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. ------ N: The khattiya was the highest rank. The Tiika adds that he thinks that in the deva planes sense desires will be even more fulfilled. -------- Text Vis.: Misled by listening to wrong doctrine, etc., ------- N: The Tiika gives as an example listening to the stories of the Mahaa-Bhaarata, the fight of the Bhaaratas and the abduction of Siita. The word etc. (aadii), in the text is further explained by the Tiika which mentions other factors leading to wrong view including clinging to the wrong view of self. These factors are: dependence on wrong friendship and not having performed kusala kamma in the past. ------ Text Vis.: 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. ------ N: He performs kamma for the sake of being in heaven for a long time, according to the Tiika. -------- Text Vis.: 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. ------- Text Vis. 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. -------- N: As to synthesis, the one term of sense-desire becoming is used. But when this is analysed, sense-desire becoming includes kamma process becoming as well as rebirth-process becoming. The Tiika explains that there is, (conditioned by clinging to sensedesires) happy rebirth and unhappy rebirth; there is rebirth as a human etc. (manussaadi). This word etc. (aadi) includes rebirth in a devaplane which is also in a happy sensous plane, as well as birth in an unhappy plane. -------- Conclusion: As the text states, the ordinary person, the non-ariyan, is like a madman. He is attached to rebirth and he will not follow the right Path that leads to liberation from the cycle. Motivated by clinging he develops jhaana which has as result fine-material becoming and immaterial becoming but not liberation from the cycle. The Visuddhimagga and the Tiika mention conditions for wrong view: association with the wrong persons, listening to the wrong teachings, not having performed kusala kamma in the past. The Expositor (II, p. 330) states about the conditions for wrong view: < ...the hearing of evil doctrine, evil friendship, the desire not to see Ariyans, unsystematic thought [N: unwise attention]; ...unskilfulness in the Arian Law [N: Dhamma] of different kinds, such as the four applications of mindfulness, etc.; the absence of discipline or the destruction of restraint with respect to the Ariyan Law (divided into restraint taught in the Paatimokkha, the controlling faculties, mindfulness, knowledge, elimination) and the doctrine of good men; and addiction to tumultuous festivities by means of unsystematic thought developed by the foregoing reasons.> If one does not develop satipa.t.thaana one will continue to see realities as permanent and self, and wrong view cannot be eradicated. When someone has evil friendship, he will have no confidence in the development of the eightfold Path leading to the end of the cycle of birth and death. ----------- Nina. #85959 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 7:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death, jonoabb Hi Colette colette wrote: > Good Morning Jon, and Herman, > > "Planning something"? Herman? come now, are you, Jon, suggesting that > Herman is a developer in the Planned Community setting or involved in > the Prison institution? Weren't Prisons the cause of tatoos, body > art, for the Japanese and the Chinese? > Well, I wasn't taking it quite so far. Just a bit of mayhem here and there, I thought, knowing Herman ;-)) > I would love to deconstruct Herman's response to you but if I did I > would be taking it completely out of context and viewing it in a > natural state of existance, so I won't BUT I will comment below > Sorry that we're not going to have the benefit of your deconstruction of Herman's post. But thanks for the comments below, anyway. > To put an end to my "butting in" I'll say: > > "Certainly there is no self-existence (svabhava) of existing things > in conditioning causes, etc; > And if no self-existence exists, neither does 'other-existence" > (parabhava)." > > I can't wait to dig deep into parabhava but things take time. > Looking forward to hearing more about it (if relevant to the discussions here). Jon #85960 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 7:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination jonoabb Hi Colette colette wrote: > Thanx Jon, > > I laughed too, it is a lovely thought to have. > > Pity isn't it, now Scott realizes the beauracracy he's gotta go > through. <.....> > An inevitable part of any well-run organization ;-)) > Thanx for giving me the "heads up". > Glad you're enjoying the threads at the moment. Jon #85961 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:55:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Sarah, 2008/5/20 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman(& Alex), > > --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. > > H: >You are saying that both [a] sound and its absence are characteristic > of that sound. You are saying that both red and its absence are > characteristics of red. How is the absence of a characteristic related > to what characteristic it is an absence of? > ============= > > S: Sorry, I couldn't follow this, but I appreciate others were able to:-). > ============== If I had a cent for every time someone referred to eg the sound or red that has just fallen away I'd have over $4.35 by now. The problem I have with this formulation is that a sound or red that has fallen away is not there, it is neither red nor sound. You cannot refer to something that isn't there, and say that it was this or that before it fell away. Especially not if you want to crown that red or sound that isn't there as being an ultimate reality. If you do not understand what I am saying, please keep asking. Cheers Herman ============================== OTOH, Herman, one can't keep picking on normal speech. To be very precise, one could say that there was just a sight (or sound) that fell away, and it had such & such a characteristic. But that kind of speaking only hinders easy conversation, it seem to me. 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) #85962 From: "connie" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 8:00 am Subject: Perfections Corner (158) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.4 continues: We read that the wise Pukkusa said: " 'All other things are easy to do, King Maagadha, I have answered you.' The King, when he had heard this, considered, 'I first said, I will give the queen to the priest's son, and and then I did according to my word and gave her; surely I have done a difficult thing.' So his sorrow became lighter." We see that the King could give up attachment. He could take action in accordance with the words he had spoken. This is harder to do than swallowing a sword of thirtythree inches long. We read: "Then it came to his mind: 'There is no one wiser than wise Senaka, I will ask this question of him.' " Senaka would be in his last life the Sammaasambuddha, the Exalted One. We read that the King asked wise Senaka: "What is harder to do than giving something away?" One may say that one will give and then do so according to his words. The King wanted to know whether there was something harder than that. We read: "Wise Senaka, when he answered the King's question, spoke the sixth stanza: 'If a man should give a gift, whether small or great, in charity, Nor regret the giving afterwards, nor sorrow about it. Not having regret is harder than swallowing a sword. It is harder than saying that one will give, It is harder than giving what is dear to one, All other things are easier to do than this. King Magadha, I have answered you.' When the King had heard the words of the Bodhisatta, he reflected, 'When I gave the queen to the priest's son I had sorrow about this, and this is not proper. If the queen loved me she would not forsake her kingdom and flee away. But since she acted like this, of what use is it to have sorrow about her?' When the King reflected in this way all his sorrow disappeared as a drop of water falling off from a lotus leaf. At that moment he was cured of his sickness and became well and happy. He praised the Bodhisatta and spoke the last stanza: 'Wise aayura and wise Pukkusa answered my questions. The answer of wise Senaka solved my problems completely, saying, when one gives something, one should not regret it afterwards.' The King who was delighted praised him and gave him an abundance of gifts." When the Buddha gave this Dhamma discourse, he explained the true Dhamma and finally told the story of this Jaataka to a monk who wanted to leave the Order because he was tempted by his former wife. In a former life he was the King, and now he attained the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sotaapanna. The Buddha said that Mahaa-Moggallaana was wise aayura and Saariputta wise Pukkusa, and that he, the Tathaagata, was wise Senaka. .. to be continued, connie #85963 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 20, 2008 11:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Patthaana (38) nilovg Dear Han, I like this part I highlighted below. It is helpful to see the manifold conditions, no place for a self. If we just say: it is conditioned, it does not mean so much. Nina. Op 20-mei-2008, om 0:16 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > You will now see that there are many Conditions to enable cittas > and cetasikas to function. The Conditions which we have studied > before all come in, such as Root Condition (hetu-paccaya), Object > Condition (aaramma.na-paccaya), Predominance Condition (adhipati- > paccaya), Conascence Condition (sahajaata-paccaya) and Mutuality > Condition > (a~n~nama~n~na-paccaya). We will see these manifold conditions as > we proceed in our study of Patthaana. That’s why the Patthaana is > said to be very deep and profound. #85964 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 20, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Howard, Op 20-mei-2008, om 13:36 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Likewise, namas also have birth, continuity, decay, and cessation, and > accordingly they would be namas. It would seem that the rule is "A > characteristic of an X is a subtle kind of X". But I personally do > not buy this. -------- In the case of nama it is different from rupa. As you know, rupa lasts longer than nama. I wrote (in my Physical Phenomena): < After the arising of rúpa there are moments of its presence, namely, continuity or development. Decay, jaratå rúpa, is the characteristic indicating the moment close to its falling away and impermanence, aniccatå rúpa, is the characteristic indicating the moment of its falling away.... After a rúpa such as visible object has arisen, there are the moments of its presence, it is decaying and then it falls away. > After all, a sense object lasts as long as a whole sense-door process plus the preceding bhavangacittas. These four characteristics are listed in the Dhammasangani as rupa paramattha dhamma, thus they are not concepts. They are inherent in the sabhava rupas (concrete matter of rupa-rupa). We cannot call them concepts. --------- > H: For me, > birth, continuity, decay, and cessation are abstractions (hence > concepts) > derived by grammatical reification from the true observations that > conditioned > dhammas arise, continue, decay, and cease. So, for example, anger > arises, but > there is no thing that is "the arising of anger," and a pain > lessens, i.e., > decays, but there is no thing that is "the lessening of > pain." [Note: "Pain" > here refers to the unpleasant bodily sensation - the usual usage, > rather than > the unpleasant feeling of that sensation.] -------- N: Now you speak of nama. This is a different matter. These characteristics are not in the list of citta or cetasikas. The submoments of citta are given in the Co: arising, presence and falling away, just these three. They are all in a flash. Nina. #85965 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 20, 2008 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Dear Ann, Op 20-mei-2008, om 1:00 heeft glenjohnann het volgende geschreven: > I still do not really > understand why these are rupas - is it that those characteristics > themselves (birth, continuity, decay and impermanance) are simply > instrisic in every rupa? ------ N: Intrinsic in all sabhava rupas, concrete matter. See my post to Howard. Is there anything else you would like to discuss? Nina. #85966 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/20/2008 2:28:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: ... a pain > lessens, i.e., > decays, but there is no thing that is "the lessening of > pain." [Note: "Pain" > here refers to the unpleasant bodily sensation - the usual usage, > rather than > the unpleasant feeling of that sensation.] -------- N: Now you speak of nama. This is a different matter. ============================ No, as I clarified, I'm not speaking of the vedana here, but of the (unpleasant) bodily rupa that people informally call "pain." I'm speaking of the rupa, itself, not the feeling of it that is the actual pain. That painful bodily sensation (rupa) lessens in intensity (fades/decays) and then ceases, but there is no "thing" that is its lessening and no "thing" that is its cessation. That is just a way of speaking - forming nouns from verbs. The fading of a rupa is not a rupa - it is a speech engendered concept. The rupa fades, but there is no phenomenon, nama or rupa, that is its "fading". With metta, Howard #85967 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 2:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Tue, 20/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: H:> OK. What is impermanent about red or sound? ========= S: What is red? Metta, Sarah ========= #85968 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 4:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/21 : > > > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:55:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > Hi Sarah, > > 2008/5/20 sarah abbott : >> Hi Herman(& Alex), >> >> --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. >> > OTOH, Herman, one can't keep picking on normal speech. To be very > precise, one could say that there was just a sight (or sound) that fell away, and > it had such & such a characteristic. But that kind of speaking only hinders > easy conversation, it seem to me. > What is normal speech about what I'm "picking on"? Cheers Herman #85969 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/21 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > --- On Tue, 20/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > > H:> OK. What is impermanent about red or sound? > ========= > S: What is red? > I made my statements with regards to the following: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. If it was just a throwaway line of yours, something you've heard someone say, let's forget it. But if you want to maintain the above position as some sort of absolute truth, do you think it is nitpicky of me to ask you to back it up? However, let mel put it to you that if you do not know what red is then you certainly don't know what a paramattha dhamma could be. Cheers Herman #85970 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:02 pm Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Sarah - > > In a message dated 5/20/2008 3:29:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > Can anyone 'calm the mind'? > > ============================= > Yes, of course, by a variety of means. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, Sarah's question was rhetorical. ('Rhetorical' in the sense of 'using language effectively or persuasively' (Encarta)) The rhetorical feature here was the juxtaposition of the conventional meaning of 'calm the mind' with the Middle Way's Right Understanding of 'calm the mind.' We all know the conventional meaning, in which - usually - any rational person can calm the mind if he really wants to. Hopefully, we are also familiar with the Buddha's teaching, in which the mind is a fleeting - trillionth of a second - phenomenon that arises and falls away purely by conditions. Therefore, the intention here is that we should ask ourselves "*With regard to the Buddha's teaching* can anyone calm the mind?" I repeat; we all know the conventional meaning. Now is not the time to talk about counting to ten or taking deep breaths etc. :-) Ken H #85971 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/5/21 kenhowardau : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >> > > Sarah's question was rhetorical. ('Rhetorical' in the sense of 'using > language effectively or persuasively' (Encarta)) You too are a dragon, hey? Encarta, I mean to say :-) Cheers Herman #85972 From: "Larry" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:06 pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 261-263 and Tiika. lbidd2 Hi Nina, I don't understand this: "The Tiika refers to the opinion of some teachers that one cannot be successful in jhaana by the second kind of clinging, namely by conduct as a cow or dog, by clinging to rites and rituals. But such opinion is not acceptable as the text states. While observing rites and rituals one may take to the wrong way or to the right way, and it cannot be said that taking the right way is not suitable for material jhaana and immaterial jhaana. One may still be able to develop samatha to the stage of jhaana, and these stages of jhaana can have as results fine material becoming and immaterial becoming. Larry: Is there a typo here? Should it read "and it cannot be said that taking the WRONG way is not suitable for fine material and immaterial becoming"? In other words, it can happen that clinging conditions kusala becoming, sometimes. Larry #85973 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 5:21 pm Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi KenH, > . . . > You too are a dragon, hey? Encarta, I mean to say :-) > Hi Herman, Am I to assume that the internet in-crowd considers Encarta out of date? :-) And when you said a 'dragon' did you mean 'dinosaur?' I'd have to admit DSG's dinosaurs do have a penchant for ancient texts. :-) Ken H #85974 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:32 pm Subject: Re: Very Cold blooded conditionality & pre destination truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > 2008/5/20 Alex : > > Dear TG and all, > > > > > These are necessary but not SUFFICIENT conditions. We could have acted > > otherwise even if the same sun & moon were present. > > > > The idea that one could have acted differently under the same > circumstances is identical to the idea of free will. Two thoughts on > the matter follow below: > > 1] The proposition is entirely untestable. In other words, it is > always possible to say it, but never possible to realise it. It is > entirely metaphysical ie in the realm of: I was, I am, I will be. > > 2] The same circumstances never arise. Anything is just what it is, it > is not a characteristic of anything that it is an instance of > something else. > > > Cheers > > > Herman > But the Buddha did teach moral responcibility which assumes a degree of choice. Attakaro... Not to mention lines such as this: 160. One truly is the protector of oneself; who else could the protector be? With oneself fully controlled, one gains a mastery that is hard to gain. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html Best wishes, Alex #85975 From: "Alex" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > S: Do these meditators really understand what samatha is, do you think? >>> I suspect that some of them understand it much better than non meditators (even though they may lack the proper terminology to describe it). >>> Can anyone 'calm the mind'? >>>> Of course, otherwise Buddha wouldn't teach such a crucial technique. It is a prerequisite to seeing as it is. Calming involves first of all, removal of hindrances which are obstructions to seeing as it is. Best Wishes, Alex #85976 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 6:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? TGrand458@... Hi Herman In a message dated 5/20/2008 6:01:14 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > H:> OK. What is impermanent about red or sound? > ========= > S: What is red? > I made my statements with regards to the following: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. If it was just a throwaway line of yours, something you've heard someone say, let's forget it. But if you want to maintain the above position as some sort of absolute truth, do you think it is nitpicky of me to ask you to back it up? However, let mel put it to you that if you do not know what red is then you certainly don't know what a paramattha dhamma could be. Cheers Herman ........................................................... TG: Let me come to the defense of my "soul sister" Sarah. Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color. As a concept, you see, that's mental, but not really, because a concept doesn't in truth exist...even though it seems to arise, it doesn't, because, concepts are ideas of things that don't arise and don't cease, existing permanently throughout the universe without existing at all. Now, a paramattha dhamma is also a mental idea but not a concept because it occurs in the present moment, when we can't actually be aware of it yet, but real close. Like you say, 1/4 of a second is 'present enough' for abhidhamma. Anyway, these paramattha's, although absolutely real in and of themselves, apparently pop in and out of existence like Mexican jumping beans. Now, there are 17 paramattha namas for every paramattha rupa. Essentially this means -- R=N(4)squared+1 Maybe Howard can check the math for us...I got a D in Algebra. Anyway, this is all in the Buddha's teaching which you will find correctly presented in the commentaries of the commentaries. So don't take my word for it, all you got to do is memorize those works. I hope I was able to shed some light on this for you. TG Approved! #85977 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 11:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... HI TG (& Herman), S: >TG, You're certainly getting full marks for effort whilst in pending. [Now, before you get big-headed about it, just remember that the right effort has to be kusala, doesn't belong to you and cannot be made to arise by any of the will some of your old pals would have you believe!] --- On Wed, 21/5/08, TGrand458@... wrote: TG: Let me come to the defense of my "soul sister" Sarah. ======= S: That's the idea...help me out any time. {You might also start encouraging Sukin to write even longer posts....hint, hint!] ========== TG: >Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color. As a concept, you see, that's mental, but not really, because a concept doesn't in truth exist...even though it seems to arise, it doesn't, because, concepts are ideas of things that don't arise and don't cease, existing permanently throughout the universe without existing at all. ========= S: Consider deleting the "existing permanently throughout the universe" when you next re-hash this one..... a little too close to energies and Star Wars for an Abhidhammika... =========== TG: >Now, a paramattha dhamma is also a mental idea ===== S: Ooh, 'idea', for a p.d. - that's Thanissaro's influence again....painful:) ====== TG: >but not a concept because it occurs in the present moment, when we can't actually be aware of it yet, but real close. Like you say, 1/4 of a second is 'present enough' for abhidhamma. ======= S: Oooh, just how many cittas can arise in 1/4 of a second, lol!! ========= TG: >Anyway, these paramattha's, although absolutely real in and of themselves, apparently pop in and out of existence like Mexican jumping beans. Now, there are 17 paramattha namas for every paramattha rupa. Essentially this means -- R=N(4)squared+ 1 Maybe Howard can check the math for us...I got a D in Algebra. =========== S: Just make sure he doesn't take R for RED again! Better remind him that what is seen (even when it seems that one is seeing RED)is only visible object, otherwise your math will get even more complicated:-). I rather like the Mexican jumping beans, btw. You might just get away with them, though some adjudicators might consider them a little radical. ============== TG: >Anyway, this is all in the Buddha's teaching which you will find correctly presented in the commentaries of the commentaries. So don't take my word for it, all you got to do is memorize those works. ======== S: Just remind him that the commentaries of the commentaries are called Tiika and that's as far as the accepted authorities go (apart from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, of course:-)) Any of the modern commentaries, other 'schools', let alone modern science, philosophy, psychology, count for nothing! [And don't bother to mention Nagarjuna......:-))] ======== TG: >I hope I was able to shed some light on this for you. S: And that's an interesting one in itself......as an Abhidhammika, you'll know that it's panna that illuminates and sheds light. You'll also know that when there is seeing in a dark room, there's no light and no colour (we won't mention that R colour again), but still, visible object appears. Oh, when we have a new brother, we can wax lyrical for ever:-) Loved the music btw with Scott's assistance like another good bro. ========= TG Approved! S: Another step forward.... Metta, Sarah ========== #85978 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 20, 2008 11:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Wed, 21/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. H: >If it was just a throwaway line of yours, something you've heard someone say, let's forget it. But if you want to maintain the above position as some sort of absolute truth, do you think it is nitpicky of me to ask you to back it up? ===== S: Seeing is impermanent, visible object is impermanent, eye-base is impermanent, hearing and all other realities are impermanent. You indicated that this was a commentarial gloss, so I quoted a sutta clearly pointing to just the same truth. No, it's not "a throwawy line". Because these dhammas are impermanent, arising and falling away, they are dukkha. This is the absolute truth as taught by the Buddha. ========= H: >However, let mel put it to you that if you do not know what red is then you certainly don't know what a paramattha dhamma could be. ========== S: What is seen now? Metta, Sarah ============ #85979 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue May 20, 2008 8:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? TGrand458@... Hi Sarah Thanks for the help! In a message dated 5/21/2008 12:42:16 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: HI TG (& Herman), S: >TG, You're certainly getting full marks for effort whilst in pending. [Now, before you get big-headed about it, just remember that the right effort has to be kusala, doesn't belong to you and cannot be made to arise by any of the will some of your old pals would have you believe!] ......................................................... NEW TG: Now, does right effort HAVE to be 'kusala' or could it be 'wholesome' or 'skilful'? I just want to make sure I'm on board with having the "look" of knowing what I'm talking about by properly placing the key foreign term right at the spot where clear communication is the most important. I think its that special "slight of hand" that sets us Abhidhammikas apart from the regular folks. ........................................................... --- On Wed, 21/5/08, _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) <_TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) > wrote: TG: Let me come to the defense of my "soul sister" Sarah. ======= S: That's the idea...help me out any time. {You might also start encouraging Sukin to write even longer posts....hint, hint!] ........................................................... NEW TG: Yea, I need something I can sit down for the entire weekend to work on. That last 4 pager was hardly worth taking seriously. ............................................................. ========== TG: >Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color. As a concept, you see, that's mental, but not really, because a concept doesn't in truth exist...even though it seems to arise, it doesn't, because, concepts are ideas of things that don't arise and don't cease, existing permanently throughout the universe without existing at all. ========= S: Consider deleting the "existing permanently throughout the universe" when you next re-hash this one..... a little too close to energies and Star Wars for an Abhidhammika.S: ........................................................... NEW TG: Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh. How about -- "a free floating stationary sub-reality"? How about -- "a delusionary that does not rise to the occasion of actual delusion"? ............................................... =========== TG: >Now, a paramattha dhamma is also a mental idea ===== S: Ooh, 'idea', for a p.d. - that's Thanissaro's influence again....painful:S ............................................... NEW TG: But when we're writing to express an idea, isn't the word at that time an idea or does it bypass that idea stage and become a reality by virtue of its ultimateness? ... therefore it is the "anti-concept" and cannot lower to the concept stage even as a language component? Interesting conce....I mean...interesting reality! Actually, I have to translate Thanissaro's English translations into other English translations before I can understand them....so when I'm reading something he's done, I have to translate it into different English terms on the fly. That way I've come full circle. I figure that's as good as knowing Pali. With Thanissaro, English isn't a game, its an adventure! ..................................................... ====== TG: >but not a concept because it occurs in the present moment, when we can't actually be aware of it yet, but real close. Like you say, 1/4 of a second is 'present enough' for abhidhamma. ======= S: Oooh, just how many cittas can arise in 1/4 of a second, lol!! ========= TG: >Anyway, these paramattha's, although absolutely real in and of themselves, apparently pop in and out of existence like Mexican jumping beans. Now, there are 17 paramattha namas for every paramattha rupa. Essentially this means -- R=N(4)squared+ 1 Maybe Howard can check the math for us...I got a D in Algebra. =========== S: Just make sure he doesn't take R for RED again! Better remind him that what is seen (even when it seems that one is seeing RED)is only visible object, otherwise your math will get even more complicated:S: Just make sure he doesn't take R for RED again! Better remind him that what is seen (even when it seems that one is seeing RED)is only visible objec ============== TG: >Anyway, this is all in the Buddha's teaching which you will find correctly presented in the commentaries of the commentaries. So don't take my word for it, all you got to do is memorize those works. ======== S: Just remind him that the commentaries of the commentaries are called Tiika and that's as far as the accepted authorities go (apart from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, of course:-)) Any of the modern commentaries, other 'schools', let alone modern science, philosophy, psychology, count for nothing! [And don't bother to mention Nagarjuna...S: Just ======== TG: >I hope I was able to shed some light on this for you. S: And that's an interesting one in itself......S: And that's an interesting one in itself......as an Abhidhammika, you'll know that it's panna that illuminates and sheds light. You'll also know that when there is seeing in a dark room, there's no light and no colour (we won't mention tha ............................................................. NEW TG: An appearing visible object with no light or color?....fascinating! Would those by any chance be "tachion emissions"? I saw something like that on Star Trek, the Next Generation. I believe they came from "Rupa Beings" who were out of phase with our present moment. Anyway, Mark Twain stepped in and saved the day! I think I know what you mean though...that only "panna" could know that! Well, growing, one dhamma at a time. :-) TG Bows .................................................................. Oh, when we have a new brother, we can wax lyrical for ever:-) Loved the music btw with Scott's assistance like another good bro. ========= TG Approved! S: Another step forward.... Metta, Sarah #85980 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 21, 2008 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 261-263 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Larry, Op 21-mei-2008, om 2:06 heeft Larry het volgende geschreven: > While observing rites > and rituals one may take to the wrong way or to the right way, and it > cannot be said that taking the right way is not suitable for > material jhaana and immaterial jhaana. > One may still be able to develop samatha to the stage of jhaana, and > these stages of jhaana can have as results fine material becoming and > immaterial becoming. > > Larry: Is there a typo here? Should it read "and it cannot be said > that taking the WRONG > way is not suitable for fine material and immaterial becoming"? In > other words, it can > happen that clinging conditions kusala becoming, sometimes. ------ N: Pali: suddhimaggaparaamasanena ruupaaruupaavacarajjhaanaana.m nibbattana.m na na yujjatiiti. See the double negation: na na: it is not not. The form yujjati is not to be found, so I am not sure it is from yutta engaged in, suitable, or yu~njati: to engage in. The Vis. tetx has: without considering 'Is this right or not?'. He may still follow the proper way (not the wrong way) to develop jhana and this has as result rebirth, becoming, in rupa brahmaplanes or arupa brahma planes. Further on more examples of wrong view are given and it is said that these are natural decisive condition for those kinds of becoming, not conascent condition. -------- Nina. #85981 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 21, 2008 2:37 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, One of the benefits of the development of mettå is not having bad dreams. Unwholesome, impure thoughts can arise even in dreams, they cannot be prevented. Our accumulated inclinations condition the arising of cittas in mind-door processes which think about the objects which were formerly experienced through the six doors. We remember all these objects and dwell on them with our thoughts. People’s accumulated defilements condition different dreams. We can sometimes know whether there were kusala cittas or akusala cittas while we were dreaming. Then we can scrutinize ourselves as to our accumulations, we can see whether kusala or akusala has been accumulated. If one has accumulated a great deal of mettå one will not have bad dreams, thus, there will not be akusala citta which dreams. “One is dear to humans” is another benefit of the development of mettå. Do we know of ourselves whether we are usually liked by others? When we investigate the characteristics of our cittas we can know why we are liked or disliked by others. Some people blame kamma of the past for the fact that, although they do all kinds of good deeds they are still not liked by other people. Therefore they feel slighted and disappointed. Other people can hurt or harm us only through their actions and speech. When they speak in a disagreeable way, the rúpa which is ear-sense is a condition to hear different sounds which can disturb us. However, in reality our citta cannot be harmed by someone else at all, it can only be harmed by ourselves. Other people can only cause us to have bodily suffering; it is our own akusala citta which is the cause of mental suffering. Thus, instead of thinking of all the different things which cause us to be distressed we should cultivate mettå and we should forgive other people. Then the citta is not disturbed and it is evident that nobody can do harm to our citta. ******* Nina. #85982 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 4:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/5/21 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > --- On Wed, 21/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > >>>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. > > H: >If it was just a throwaway line of yours, something you've heard > someone say, let's forget it. But if you want to maintain the above > position as some sort of absolute truth, do you think it is nitpicky > of me to ask you to back it up? > ===== > > S: Seeing is impermanent, visible object is impermanent, eye-base is impermanent, hearing and all other realities are impermanent. You indicated that this was a commentarial gloss, so I quoted a sutta clearly pointing to just the same truth. No, it's not "a throwawy line". Because these dhammas are impermanent, arising and falling away, they are dukkha. This is the absolute truth as taught by the Buddha. > > ========= > H: >However, let mel put it to you that if you do not know what red is > then you certainly don't know what a paramattha dhamma could be. > ========== > > S: What is seen now? > Avoidance of a question, mainly. Cheers Herman #85983 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 4:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Science Article of Possible Analogical Value egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/5/20 : > > =============================== > I think you're making much more of this than the matter warrants. Say > there are two trees in your garden. There is interaction between the trees with > regard to the surrounding soil, water, CO2, and so on. But the leaves of one > are not the leaves of the other. Likewise, there are two "persons" > (namarupic streams) who interact, but the mental fruition (like the leaves of a tree) > of the cetana of one person is not that of the other. Sure, the leaves of one tree are not the leaves of another tree. Neither is one person's cetana the cetana of the other person. But the doctrine of kamma does not only associate kamma with individuals, it holds that each individual actively makes their kamma, and is not just passively receiving it as an unfolding of conditions. That view of kamma is self-view. Cheers Herman PS This was composed 10 hours ago. Our phones dropped out suddenly. It turns out half of the town lost telephone and Internet communication. Someone, somewhere dug up a cable. No doubt all those affected by this tragedy contributed to it with deeds in the past. Anyway, I'm off to a conference and won't be back for a few days. #85984 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 2:21 am Subject: The Ideal Person! bhikkhu0 Friends: Which 7 Knowledges makes a Person Ideal? 1: Knower of the Dhamma, Principles, and Causes (DhammaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows the speeches, the sayings, the stories, the poems of the Buddha. He furthermore all knows the inspirations, questions/answers and commentarial explanations. The ideal lay person knows the underlying principles of everyday life, & what is reasonable to do. He knows and understands the duties & responsibilities of his own & other posts & occupations. 2: Knower of the Goals, Objectives, and Meanings (AtthaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person fully knows the complete meaning of this and that speech and text. The ideal lay person knows the aim of his duty, position, or occupation & the real purpose of life. 3: Knower of Oneself (MattaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows so far can I remember the texts, so far can I reach in meditation. So far is my pure morality, so far am I in faith, energy, awareness, concentration, & understanding. The ideal lay person knows his exact status, condition, strength, knowledge, ability, & morality. He then acts accordingly and does what is needed to improve and reach greater maturity. 4: Knower of Moderation (AttaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows moderation in using any alms, robes, lodgings, and medicines. The ideal lay person knows moderation in consumption, spending, speech, work, rest, & recreation. 5: Knower of Right Occasion (KalaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows the right time for study, meditation, practical work, & solitude. The ideal lay person knows the proper & punctual occasion for any dealing with other people. 6: Knower of Groups (ParisaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows any group of Nobles, priests, recluses, and householders and how one ideally should approach, sit, speak, & behave in any such group for the greatest mutual advantage. The ideal lay person knows individual differences, temperaments, abilities, & virtues of other people. He knows this community have these rules & regulations; culture & tradition; they have these needs. 7: Knower of Persons (PuggalaññūtÄ?): The ideal monastic person knows those who wish to see nobles, hear true Dhamma, & pay attention. He knows those who are aware, testing, learning, & who acts accordingly. He knows those who do not. The ideal lay person knows whether particular other people should be associated with, what can be learned from them, & how they should be related to, employed, praised, criticized, advised, & taught. Source: AN IV 113 The Ideal Person! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ..... #85985 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Tue May 20, 2008 4:53 pm Subject: The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar - I * rwijayaratne <....> Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Ñanamoli Thera & Bhikkhu Bodhi THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE LION'S ROAR - I Majjhima Nikâya 12 - Maha-sihanada Sutta2 1. Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Vesali in the grove outside the city to the west.   2. Now on that occasion Sunakkhatta, son of the Licchavis, had recently left this Dhamma and Discipline.3 He was making this statement before the Vesali assembly: "The recluse Gotama (Comy. Refers to the Lord Buddha) does not have any superhuman states, any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones.4 The recluse Gotama teaches a Dhamma (merely) hammered out by reasoning, following his own line of inquiry as it occurs to him, and when he teaches the Dhamma to anyone, it leads him when he practices it to the complete destruction of suffering."5   3. Then, when it was morning, the Venerable Sâriputta dressed, and taking his bowl and outer robe, went into Vesali for alms. Then he heard Sunakkhatta, son of the Licchavis, making this statement before the Vesali assembly. When he had wandered for alms in Vesali and had returned from his almsround, after his meal he went to the Blessed One, and after paying homage to him, he sat down at one side and told the Blessed One what Sunakkhatta was saying.   4. (The Blessed One said:) "Sâriputta, the misguided man Sunakkhatta is angry, and his words are spoken out of anger. Thinking to discredit the Tathagata (Comy. Refers to the Lord Buddha), he actually praises him; [69] for it is a praise of the Tathagata to say of him: 'When he teaches the Dhamma to anyone, it leads him when he practices it to the complete destruction of suffering (nibbâna).'   5. "Sâriputta, this misguided man Sunakkhatta will never infer of me according to Dhamma: 'That Blessed One is accomplished, fully enlightened, perfect in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of worlds, incomparable leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of gods and humans, enlightened, blessed.'6   6. "And he will never infer of me according to Dhamma: 'That Blessed One (Comy. Refers to the Lord Buddha) enjoys the various kinds of supernormal power: having been one, he becomes many; having been many, he becomes one; he appears and vanishes; he goes unhindered through a wall, through an enclosure, through a mountain, as though through space; he dives in and out of the earth as though it were water; he walks on water without sinking as though it were earth; seated cross-legged, he travels in space like a bird; with his hand he touches and strokes the moon and sun so powerful and mighty; he wields bodily mastery even as far as the Brahma-world.'   7. "And he will never infer of me according to Dhamma: 'With the divine ear element, which is purified and surpasses the human, that Blessed One hears both kinds of sounds, the heavenly and the human, those that are far as well as near.'   8. "And he will never infer of me according to Dhamma: 'That Blessed One encompasses with his own mind the minds of other beings, other persons. He understands a mind affected by lust as affected by lust and a mind unaffected by lust as unaffected by lust; he understands a mind affected by hate as affected by hate and a mind unaffected by hate as unaffected by hate; he understands a mind affected by delusion as affected by delusion and a mind unaffected by delusion as unaffected by delusion; he understands a contracted mind as contracted and a distracted mind as distracted; he understands an exalted mind as exalted and an unexalted mind as unexalted; he understands a surpassed mind as surpassed and an unsurpassed mind as unsurpassed; he understands a concentrated mind as concentrated and an unconcentrated mind as unconcentrated; he understands a liberated mind as liberated and an unliberated mind as unliberated.' To be continued... Notes1. More suttas from AccessToInsight.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.012.ntbb.html 3. The story of Sunakkhatta's defection is found in the Patika Sutta (DN 24). He became dissatisfied with the Buddha and left the Order because the Buddha would not perform miracles for him or explain to him the beginning of things. He also showed great admiration for those who engaged in self-mortification, and probably resented the Buddha for emphasizing a "middle way" that condemned such extreme austerities as unprofitable. 4. Superhuman states (uttari manussadhamma) are states, virtues or attainments higher than the ordinary human virtues comprised in the ten wholesome courses of action; they include the jhanas, direct knowledges (abhiñña), the paths and the fruits. "Distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones" (alamariyañana-dassanavisesa), an expression frequently occurring in the suttas, signifies all higher degrees of meditative knowledge characteristic of the noble individual. In the present context, according to Comy., it means specifically the supramundane path, which Sunakkhatta is thus denying of the Buddha. 5. The thrust of his criticism is that the Buddha teaches a doctrine that he has merely worked out in thought rather than one he has realized through transcendental wisdom. Apparently, Sunakkhatta believes that being led to the complete destruction of suffering is, as a goal, inferior to the acquisition of miraculous powers. 6. All the sections to follow are intended as a rebuttal of Sunakkhatta's charge against the Buddha. Sections 6-8 cover the first three of the six direct knowledges, the last three appearing as the last of the ten powers of the Tathagata. The latter, according to Comy., are to be understood as powers of knowledge (ñanabala) that are acquired by all Buddhas as the outcome of their accumulations of merit. The Vibhanga of the Abhidhamma Pitaka provides an elaborate analysis of them, the gist of which will be discussed in subsequent notes. <.....> #85986 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 21, 2008 12:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sarah, and Ken, whom I briefly mention) - In a message dated 5/20/2008 7:53:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/5/21 : > > > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:55:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > Hi Sarah, > > 2008/5/20 sarah abbott : >> Hi Herman(& Alex), >> >> --- On Sun, 18/5/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >>> S: Impermanence is a characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. >> > OTOH, Herman, one can't keep picking on normal speech. To be very > precise, one could say that there was just a sight (or sound) that fell away, and > it had such & such a characteristic. But that kind of speaking only hinders > easy conversation, it seem to me. > What is normal speech about what I'm "picking on"? Cheers Herman =============================== I just spent 10 minutes drafting a reply to this when we had a power outage & it was lost. So, now 'lmake brief. What was replying to is exactly material that you wrote that you failed to copy here! What I was replying to was the following: ___________________ If I had a cent for every time someone referred to eg the sound or red that has just fallen away I'd have over $4.35 by now. The problem I have with this formulation is that a sound or red that has fallen away is not there, it is neither red nor sound. If I had a cent for every time someone referred to eg the sound or red that has just fallen away I'd have over $4.35 by now. The problem I have with this formulation is that a sound or red that has fallen away is not there, it is neither red nor sound. You cannot refer to something that isn't there, and say that it was this or that before it fell away. Especially not if you want to crown that red or sound that isn't there as being an ultimate reality. Especially not if you want to crown that red or sound that isn't there as being an ultimate reality. --------------------------------- It seems that you object to using the present tense in referring to what has already ceased. Actually, you go further than that. You write "You cannot refer to something that isn't there, and say that it was this or that before it fell away." That seem to indicate that you wish to disallow discussing the past in any manner, which is rather extreme as I see it. Even Ken occasionally takes a thought-vacation away from the Present Moment Ranch! ;-) ========================= With metta, Howard #85987 From: "Alex" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? truth_aerator Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > TG: > Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color. >>> That doesn't follow, slippery slope. One could say about anything: "Its rupa and therefore it is a concept of rupa" (or citta. >>> As a concept, you see, that's mental, but not really, > because a concept doesn't in truth exist...even though it seems to arise, it doesn't, because, concepts are ideas of things that don't arise and don't cease, existing permanently throughout the universe without existing at all. >>>> How do you explain traffic lights with red/yellow/green colors? Are those concepts too? Can one change one's conceptual understanding to turn red to green? >>> > Now, a paramattha dhamma is also a mental idea but not a concept because it occurs in the present moment, when we can't actually be aware of it yet, but real close. Like you say, 1/4 of a second is 'present enough' for abhidhamma. Anyway, these paramattha's, although absolutely real in and of themselves, apparently pop in and out of existence like Mexican jumping beans. >>> From where do they pop out, where do they go when they've ceased? >>> Anyway, this is all in the Buddha's teaching which you will find correctly presented in the commentaries of the commentaries. So don't take my word for it, all you got to do is memorize those works. > Depends what you mean by all. Commentaries by definition cannot surpass Buddha himself and are subordinate to Suttas. Best Wishes, Alex #85988 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 21, 2008 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some thoughts on Samatha/Samadhi/Jhana is it really "mindless"? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken(and Sarah) - In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:02:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Sarah's question was rhetorical. ('Rhetorical' in the sense of 'using language effectively or persuasively' (Encarta)) The rhetorical feature here was the juxtaposition of the conventional meaning of 'calm the mind' with the Middle Way's Right Understanding of 'calm the mind.' We all know the conventional meaning, in which - usually - any rational person can calm the mind if he really wants to. Hopefully, we are also familiar with the Buddha's teaching, in which the mind is a fleeting - trillionth of a second - phenomenon that arises and falls away purely by conditions. Therefore, the intention here is that we should ask ourselves "*With regard to the Buddha's teaching* can anyone calm the mind?" I repeat; we all know the conventional meaning. Now is not the time to talk about counting to ten or taking deep breaths etc. :-) Ken H =============================== Calming the mind involves creating conditions which, after a period of time, result in mind states that are calmer. That is what I am referring to when I say that, yes, of course we can calm the mind. As for what Sarah was actually asserting, I don't know. I took it to be an instance of the often-heard DSG "We can't do anything" refrain, which, when challenged becomes a just a denial of the "we," but when left unchallenged communicates the denial of an everyday, conventional assertion. The switching back and forth between so-called ultimate speech and so-called conventional speech is at best illogical and at worst a possibly unintentional but definitely unfair and misleading debating technique. As for the speed of "the mind", the Buddha said in the suttas that the mind changes more quickly than form, but I don't believe he got into such exact numerical measures there. With metta, Howard #85989 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 21, 2008 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? nilovg Hi Howard, Op 20-mei-2008, om 21:04 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > . a pain > > lessens, i.e., > > decays, but there is no thing that is "the lessening of > > pain." [Note: "Pain" > > here refers to the unpleasant bodily sensation - the usual usage, > > rather than > > the unpleasant feeling of that sensation.] > -------- > N: Now you speak of nama. This is a different matter. > ============================ > H: No, as I clarified, I'm not speaking of the vedana here, but of the > (unpleasant) bodily rupa that people informally call "pain." I'm > speaking of the > rupa, itself, not the feeling of it that is the actual pain. -------- N: I should have remembered that you mean rupa. It is somewhat confusing, because pain seems to know something whereas rupa does not know anything. O.k. if you like to use it this way. ------- > N:That painful bodily sensation (rupa) lessens in intensity (fades/ > decays) > and then ceases, but there is no "thing" that is its lessening and no > "thing" that is its cessation. That is just a way of speaking - > forming nouns from > verbs. ------- N: It is a characteristic inherent in it. We do not speak of things, but of characteristics of realities, that is all. ------- H: > The fading of a rupa is not a rupa - it is a speech engendered > concept. > The rupa fades, but there is no phenomenon, nama or rupa, that is its > "fading". ------ N: I do understand your point and your difficulty swallowing the text of the Dhammasangani. However, it classifies these four characteristics of rupa as asabhaava ruupas, I cannot do anything about this. Also lightness of matter is classified as a rupa, though it is not concrete matter. It is asabhaava ruupa. Nina. #85990 From: "connie" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 7:37 am Subject: Perfections Corner (159) nichiconn Dear Friends, the chapter on The Perfection of Wisdom continues: We can see that it is important not to have regret after we have given something away. When we have regret, it is evident that we cling and that we have attachment to the object we give away, but this object is only something outside us. In reality there is not anybody who can possess it or who can be the owner all the time. We should be mindful of the "momentary death" of realities. When we have seen an object just for an extremely short moment, attachment to it arises, but seeing falls away immediately and then visible object does not appear any more. We cannot own visible object. Pa~n~naa and all kinds of kusala must have sufficient strength so that one is able to further develop and accumulate them time and again, for an endlessly long time, from life to life. Pa~n~naa has to be developed so that we know the nature of our citta, and understand what is beneficial and what not, when there is kusala citta and when there is akusala citta. We may have regret after we have given something away, because of our clinging. However, when satipa.t.thaana arises, we can notice that we cling to the naama and ruupa that appear, and that we do not want to let go of them, that we do not want to give up the idea of self, being or person. The stages of insight are of many degrees, its development is a gradual process, because it is so difficult to give up naama and ruupa. ..to be continued, connie #85991 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 21, 2008 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/21/2008 9:43:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 20-mei-2008, om 21:04 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > . a pain > > lessens, i.e., > > decays, but there is no thing that is "the lessening of > > pain." [Note: "Pain" > > here refers to the unpleasant bodily sensation - the usual usage, > > rather than > > the unpleasant feeling of that sensation.] > -------- > N: Now you speak of nama. This is a different matter. > ============================ > H: No, as I clarified, I'm not speaking of the vedana here, but of the > (unpleasant) bodily rupa that people informally call "pain." I'm > speaking of the > rupa, itself, not the feeling of it that is the actual pain. -------- N: I should have remembered that you mean rupa. It is somewhat confusing, because pain seems to know something whereas rupa does not know anything. O.k. if you like to use it this way. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's the way most people normally speak. For example, they will say "I have a pain in my leg". They are referring to the bodily rupa that is felt by vedana as unpleasant and reacted to with aversion. ---------------------------------------------------- ------- > N:That painful bodily sensation (rupa) lessens in intensity (fades/ > decays) > and then ceases, but there is no "thing" that is its lessening and no > "thing" that is its cessation. That is just a way of speaking - > forming nouns from > verbs. ------- N: It is a characteristic inherent in it. We do not speak of things, but of characteristics of realities, that is all. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: What people usually call "characteristics" are the characteristics of conventional objects, and those qualities are exactly the paramattha dhammas of which those objects are composed. When someone says a table is hard, they mean that when the events that we call "touching the table" occur, experienced hardness arises. As for impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self-ness, these are concepts formed from the adjectives 'impermanent', 'unsatisfactory', and 'not-self'. They are not actual phenomena - they are neither rupas, nor (paramatthic) namas, nor nibbana. I view treating them as realities as a kind of Buddhist Platonism. --------------------------------------------------- ------- H: > The fading of a rupa is not a rupa - it is a speech engendered > concept. > The rupa fades, but there is no phenomenon, nama or rupa, that is its > "fading". ------ N: I do understand your point and your difficulty swallowing the text of the Dhammasangani. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you! I appreciate your willingness to grasp my meaning and to consider it. Such willingness shows, IMO, a reality-based perspective, an orientation aimed at truth rather than dogmatic belief. -------------------------------------------------- However, it classifies these four characteristics of rupa as asabhaava ruupas, I cannot do anything about this. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course. --------------------------------------------------- Also lightness of matter is classified as a rupa, though it is not concrete matter. It is asabhaava ruupa. Nina. ========================== Withy metta, Howard #85992 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 21, 2008 11:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (159) nilovg Dear Connie and Han, Op 21-mei-2008, om 16:37 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > We should be mindful of the "momentary death" of realities. When we > have seen an object just for an extremely short moment, attachment > to it arises, but seeing falls away immediately and then visible > object does not appear any more. We cannot own visible object. ------- N: Yes, it is helpful to be reminded of this. It can be consoling when having a hard time, facing sad events. How does Han feel about this, does it help? Nina. #85993 From: han tun Date: Wed May 21, 2008 2:48 pm Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (159) hantun1 Dear Nina (Connie), Text: We should be mindful of the "momentary death" of realities. When we have seen an object just for an extremely short moment, attachment to it arises, but seeing falls away immediately and then visible object does not appear any more. We cannot own visible object. Nina: Yes, it is helpful to be reminded of this. It can be consoling when having a hard time, facing sad events. How does Han feel about this, does it help? Han: It should help. But at the moment I cannot see the Dhamma, to be honest. It may help later, as the time is the best healer. But not now! It reminds me of an anecdote. In Burma, there was once a monk, who used to tell his followers not to be sad and not to cry when their loved ones died, citing the well-known passage, “Anicca vata sankhaaraa …..â€? One day, the followers saw him crying at a funeral, and asked him why he was crying, as he used to tell them not to cry. The monk replied, “Oh, she (the deceased) was my mother!â€? ==================== Han: Nina, can I ask you a question? In the text: < However, when satipa.t.thaana arises, we can notice that we cling to the naama and ruupa that appear, and that we do not want to let go of them, that we do not want to give up the idea of self, being or person. The stages of insight are of many degrees, its development is a gradual process, because it is so difficult to give up naama and ruupa.> I still find it difficult to know when the satipa.t.thaana arises? Let me ask you citing the passage from MN 10 Satipatthana Sutta, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html Quote: ["There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. Just as a skilled turner or his apprentice, when making a long turn, discerns that he is making a long turn, or when making a short turn discerns that he is making a short turn; in the same way the monk, when breathing in long, discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short... He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself.] End Quote. Now, the question is at what stage in the above passage, the satipa.t.thaana arises? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #85994 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "TG: Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color..." TG's entire response was IRONIC. Just a heads up... Sincerely, Scott. #85995 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 21, 2008 1:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and TG, and Alex, and Sarah) - In a message dated 5/21/2008 8:08:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "TG: Red isn't a paramattha dhamma because it, you see, its a color and therefore a concept of a color..." TG's entire response was IRONIC. Just a heads up... Sincerely, Scott. ============================== As I understand the issue, a sight/visible object is a paramattha dhamma. Such a sight may have quite complex structure, including a variety of colors. But the initially known object, the sight per se, is known as a whole, and only further mental processing reveals the details to our understanding. As far as I'm concerned, that structure, including multi-coloration, is not illusion, and, in fact, is important information about the original visible object. I don't expect Sarah or Nina or Jon or you, Scott, or the other Abhidhammikas here to agree with me on this, but that is my perspective. Not to be able to distinguish the colors within a visible object is a deficiency of cognition. With metta, Howard #85996 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 7:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "As I understand the issue, a sight/visible object is a paramattha dhamma. Such a sight may have quite complex structure, including a variety of colors..." Scott: When one suggests that a 'paramattha dhamma' has a 'quite complex structure, including a variety of colours', one has created a totally new definition for the term 'paramattha dhamma'. The term, as I understand it, is used to refer to the most reduced, most basic, and not further reducible level of phenomena. It is, therefore, not in any way a 'quite complex structure'. This is, in my opinion, your own idiosyncratic definition. H: "...But the initially known object, the sight per se, is known as a whole, and only further mental processing reveals the details to our understanding..." Scott: Again, this is completely idiosyncratic, and in no way resembles the standard definition of paramattha dhamma. A 'whole' is a total mental construct and not paramattha dhamma. The visible object is ruupa; the 'whole' concept. H: "As far as I'm concerned, that structure, including multi-coloration, is not illusion, and, in fact, is important information about the original visible object..." Scott: This is a sort of simplified,warmed-over psychology of perception. And it is archaic at that. 'Information' is concept. If 'information' is meant otherwise, then the above is some sort of cognitive/neuropsychological theory. H: "I don't expect Sarah or Nina or Jon or you, Scott, or the other Abhidhammikas here to agree with me on this, but that is my perspective..." Scott: Correct. The theory is idiosyncratic. H: "Not to be able to distinguish the colors within a visible object is a deficiency of cognition." Scott: The so-called distinguishing of colours is a deficiency of delusion. I should know, Howard, I'm colour-blind (a deficiency of vipaaka). ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #85997 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 21, 2008 4:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 5/21/2008 10:10:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "As I understand the issue, a sight/visible object is a paramattha dhamma. Such a sight may have quite complex structure, including a variety of colors..." Scott: When one suggests that a 'paramattha dhamma' has a 'quite complex structure, including a variety of colours', one has created a totally new definition for the term 'paramattha dhamma'. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't care what it is called. But when we open our eyes and see the visible object, it is typically multi-colored. That's just a plain fact. -------------------------------------------------- The term, as I understand it, is used to refer to the most reduced, most basic, and not further reducible level of phenomena. It is, therefore, not in any way a 'quite complex structure'. This is, in my opinion, your own idiosyncratic definition. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: What is it that YOU see, Scott? And what is the basis for the various colors we see? ------------------------------------------------- H: "...But the initially known object, the sight per se, is known as a whole, and only further mental processing reveals the details to our understanding..." Scott: Again, this is completely idiosyncratic, and in no way resembles the standard definition of paramattha dhamma. A 'whole' is a total mental construct and not paramattha dhamma. The visible object is ruupa; the 'whole' concept. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think this is utter nonsense. And I see nothing like it in the suttas. ---------------------------------------------- H: "As far as I'm concerned, that structure, including multi-coloration, is not illusion, and, in fact, is important information about the original visible object..." Scott: This is a sort of simplified,warmed-over psychology of perception. And it is archaic at that. 'Information' is concept. If 'information' is meant otherwise, then the above is some sort of cognitive/neuropsychological theory. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: And I think you're living in a dream world. What do you think visible object is, Scott? Where do you think colors come from? ------------------------------------------------- H: "I don't expect Sarah or Nina or Jon or you, Scott, or the other Abhidhammikas here to agree with me on this, but that is my perspective..." Scott: Correct. The theory is idiosyncratic. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: And I'm not frightened of that word that you seem to love so much. I think you are lost in a world of concept that has no bearing on reality in the slightest. -------------------------------------------------- H: "Not to be able to distinguish the colors within a visible object is a deficiency of cognition." Scott: The so-called distinguishing of colours is a deficiency of delusion. I should know, Howard, I'm colour-blind (a deficiency of vipaaka). ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Red/green color blindness or no colors at all? Do you see shades of gray? Is it all one color for you? I don't believe that. If it were so, you couldn't be typing. When you open your eyes, Scott, what do you see? What one sees is what visible object is. --------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ======================= Sincerely and 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) #85998 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed May 21, 2008 8:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abh teaches Permanent rupa phenomenon? scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply. I'm glad you got that out of your system. I'd have appreciated a reply to the other post you ignored, rather than this displaced response. The other is a much more serious concern. Sincerely, Scott. #85999 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 22, 2008 2:45 am Subject: Metta, Ch 5, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, We want to be dear to others but we may forget that we ourselves should also show affection to other people. We should not expect that other people will first show kindness and affection; there should be no delay in being kind and considerate to others. At such moments we have no sadness or worry. The citta with mettå is kusala, at that moment there is no lobha, no wish to have affection from someone else in return. If one knows the characteristic of kusala citta and discerns the difference between kusala citta and akusala citta there are conditions to develop a great deal of kusala without being concerned about it whether one is liked by other people or not. When there is mettå and generosity, when one helps other people, there is the cetasika chanda, “wish-to-do”, which conditions the arising of kusala citta. The desire for kusala is different from lobha. When lobha arises we desire to be liked by others. Whereas when kusala chanda arises, we desire to develop loving-kindness towards others, even when we do not receive any kindness from them. If satipatthåna is not developed, we cannot clearly distinguish between the different characteristics of lobha and of kusala chanda which desires the development of kusala. There may be attachment to the development of kusala or to the benefits of kusala because clinging cannot yet be eliminated. We know that good deeds bring their appropriate results but when we have expectations, when we hope that our good deeds will bring pleasant results, there is lobha. When there is kusala chanda, desire for the development of kusala, there is no attachment, there are no expectations with regard to the result of kusala. Then we can develop kusala with a sincere inclination, we can develop it naturally and spontaneously. ******* Nina.