#87000 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/14 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > I'd like to first make a general remark, as a separate post, which will allow me to skip over some of your points, I believe. It seems that our discussion is not just a disagreement about our respective understandings. I find it hard to escape the conclusion, from what you write and how you write it, that my understanding is actually a threat to yours. Which leads me to believe that you are very attached to the notion of consciousness being causal, you need it to be that way. Let me assure you that if it turns out that I was completely wrong, and "consciousness" was the causal force behind whatever is experienced, I couldn't care less. Because I still would not identify as being "consciousness". Perhaps you might like to investigate privately why you have this strong attachment to your view, and the strong aversion to mine. Cheers Herman #87001 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:41 pm Subject: Direct Knowledge & Comprehention. truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, ============================================== "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes2 as something separate. 3 He sees the eye as something separate. He sees forms as something separate. He sees eye-consciousness as something separate. He sees eye-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact — experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too he sees as something separate. "He sees the [ear...nose...tongue...body...] as something separate... "He sees the intellect as something separate. He sees ideas as something separate. He sees intellect-consciousness as something separate. He sees intellect-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on intellect-contact — experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too he sees as something separate. "This is how a monk knows, this is how a monk sees, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.080.than.html #87002 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott and Alex, 2008/6/14 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > > H: "Yes. That would also be a good paraphrase of what the Buddha says > in MN121. "And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with > the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its > condition." > > Scott: Here also are the other related quotes: > > H: "Yes, consciousness is an effect, not a cause..." > > H: "...what is there is empty of what is not there." > > H: "...consciousness is a fabrication that arises in dependence on > living bodies in the context of society." > > Scott: The Epiphenomenalist view, and you've not yet corrected the way > I'm representing it, would seem to hold that naama is effect and not > effective (not a cause). It holds that 'consciousness is a > fabrication' - and I don't mean to paraphrase this in the sense of > sankhaara-khandha - I mean to paraphrase it in the sense of 'fiction'. That last line wouldn't be a paraphrase of anything I said, I do not deny consciousness as a reality. I deny that it is a cause of anything. In saying that consciousness is a fabrication I merely mean that it is a product of other things, and that in the absence of those things there wouldn't be consciousness. > Given this view, it would seem that any discussion of any sort of > consciousness which is cause would be unacceptable. As I read MN 121, > it discusses how the penetration, by a mental factor accompanying a > moment of consciousness, of another mental state, leads to the mental > process whereby the Path is attained and release occurs. How about you let me speak for myself, and you speak for yourself. I find our discussion perfectly acceptable. As I read MN121, a being removed from all humanity and their society, is able to achieve cessation. It is not consciousness unravelling itself, it is the conditions for consciousness falling away, one by one. > > I can't see any way around understanding the whole process of > cessation as being a) naama and, b) caused by naama. Hence, since the > Epiphenomenalist view would essentially deny the possibility that > consciousness could be cause for anything, there can be, from this > viewpoint, nothing to prevent the perpetual coming into states of being. Yes, consciousness doesn't make anything happen. In the presence of certain conditions there is C, in the absence of those conditions there is no C. And C is not a condition for itself. I agree with your last point, if by it you mean there is nothing apart from conditions that make things happen. > > In order to support a view holding ruupa to be primary, one would have > to, for example, adopt a single-existence stance, denying the role of > kamma as cause for being in successive states of being. Cessation, > under such a view, would be Death; Death would be the End - Nihilism. > Well, I never had a view that there is any existent that gets reborn. Do you have that view? Cessation is not the cessation of an existent, it is the absence of conditons for becoming. > This is why the suggestion is made that the Epiphenomenalist view is > incompatible with Dhamma because it seems to negate the entire > culminating process (naama) whereby consciousness takes Nibbaana as > object, with this serving as cause for subsequent alteration whereby > there would no longer be any coming into any state of being. There is > no suggestion whatsoever that ruupa has any part of this because ruupa > is not naama. Does this clarify? It clarifies what your view is. Your view seems to me to be quite eternalist in nature. Naama seems to play the role of a persistent entity that is evolving itself. My view is the complete opposite, Nibbana is the devolution of all the conditions that constitute consciousness. > > Scott: In context, the sutta excerpt is simply describing the > experience of the arahat prior to parinibbaana while abiding in > su~n~nataphala-samaapatti. He or she knows that there is nothing but > 'the six bases that are dependent on this body and conditioned by > life'. And it is clear that it is naama - pa~n~naa - which is cause > for liberation (vimmutti). The Epiphenomenalist view cannot accept > this, and therefore negates the validity of the culmination of > existence as taught by a Buddha. > No, the context is: "He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of village are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of village. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure." The context for cessation is solitude. And I wouldn't call cessation the culmination of existence either. Enough for now. I have earmarked the remainder of your post. I will reply to it later. Cheers Herman #87003 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Direct Knowledge & Comprehention. dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - May I ask : what is your hidden message behind SN 35.08? How should this sutta be related to my post (Error in the Vism, Part III) ? Thanks. Tep === #87004 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: "I'd like to first make a general remark, as a separate post, which will allow me to skip over some of your points, I believe.." Scott: Thanks, Herman. Sincerely, Scott. #87005 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "That last line wouldn't be a paraphrase of anything I said..." Scott: I appreciate the effort. Sincerely, Scott. #87006 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/6/14 Tep : > Hi Herman, - > > Issues sometimes can grow from non-issues, depending on how one > interprets another person's words. Dhamma discussion among worldlings > is more complicated than that of the ariyans because of non-issues. > Yes, I'm sorry about how what I meant to say came out. I didn't give it a second thought. >>H: >>I have done as you asked, and thought about what you wrote very > carefully. What you are asking me to do, I believe, is to make a > judgment about suttas that contradict a particular view, in favour of > that view. I think this would be a dishonest, sometimes even > dangerous thing to do. > T: Thank you very much! But I don't follow the logic behind the > dishonest/dangerous thing you are conceiving. > I understand you reservations about what I said. I'm sorry. It came out all wrong. I didn't intend to suggest that you were dishonest or dangerous in what you suggested. I'll reply to your other points later. Cheers Herman #87007 From: han tun Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:35 am Subject: Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended. hantun1 Dear Tep and All, Due to my eye condition I cannot look at the computer monitor screen for long time, and so I cannot digest all your presentations. I do not know whether you have earlier referred to SN 22.106 which clearly indicates that the person that has fully understood is an arahant. SN 22.106 Pari~n~neyya Sutta: To Be Fully Understood (translation by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi) At Saavatthi “Bhikkhus, I will teach you things that should be fully understood, full understanding, and the person that has fully understood. Listen to that ….. “And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. Feeling ….. Perception ….. Volitional formations ….. Consciousness is something that should be fully understood. “And what, bhikkhus, is full understanding? The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion: this is called full understanding. “And who, bhikkhus, is the person that has fully understood? It should be said: the arahant, the venerable one of such a name and clan. This is called the person that has fully understood.â€? --------------------- Saavatthi-nidaanam: Pari~n~neyyeca bhikkhave, dhamme desessaami, pari~n~na~nca, pari~n~naataavi~nca puggalam. Tam su.naatha: Katame ca bhikkhave, pari~n~neyyaa dhammaa: Ruupam bhikkhave pari~n~neyyo dhammo, vedanaa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, vedanaa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, sa~n~naa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, sankhaaraa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, vi~n~naa.nam pari~n~neyyo dhammo, ime vuccanti bhikkhave, pari~n~neyyaa dhammaa. katamaa ca bhikkhave, pari~n~naa: Yo bhikkhave, raagakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo, ayam vuccati bhikkhave, pari~n~naa. Katamo ca bhikkhave, pari~n~naataavii puggalo: Arahaatissa vacaniiyam. Yvaa yam aayasmaa evamnaamo evamgotto. Ayam vuccati bhikkhave, pari~n~naataavii puggaloti. Respectfully, Han #87008 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:02 am Subject: Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended. dhammanusarin Dear Han and all - As usual the Pali text you have given me is very helpful. pari~n~neyyaa dhammaa = something that should be fully understood raagakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo = the destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion: pari~n~naa = this is called) full understanding. One great beauty of the Dhamma is its consistency. SN 22.106, Pari~n~neyya Sutta, is consistent with SN 22.23, Pariñña Sutta: Comprehension (full understanding). The Buddha did not teach the three-fold full understanding in the Vism. Thank you very much. Tep === #87009 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:15 am Subject: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch. five continues: When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. Without the right conditions the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy for the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipa.t.thaana. Satipa.t.thaana is developed when sampaja~n~na (pa~n~naa) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. Pa~n~naa develops gradually so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the right cause, and it will arise without difficulty. However, we should have patience and energy to persevere with the development of understanding. We read in "Ardent Energy" (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch V, § 49) that the Buddha said: Monks, on three occasions ardent energy is to be exerted. What three? To prevent the arising of evil, unprofitable states not yet arisen; to cause the arising of good, profitable states not yet arisen; to endure the bodily feelings that have arisen, feelings which are painful, sharp, bitter, acute, distressing and unwelcome, which drain the life away. These are the three occasions... Now, when a monk exerts himself on these three occasions, he is called "strenuous, wise and mindful so that he makes an end of dukkha". Even a very short text can remind us of the effort that should be exerted on three occasions, so that patience and endurance can further develop. .. to be continued, connie #87010 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:22 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Hi Herman, - I truly appreciate your wisdom to accept something wrong as wrong. > Herman: > I understand you reservations about what I said. I'm sorry. It came > out all wrong. I didn't intend to suggest that you were dishonest or > dangerous in what you suggested. > > I'll reply to your other points later. > T: Based on my observation over the years, you've not failed to accept something right as right either. Tep === #87011 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 1:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (184) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and all) - In a message dated 6/15/2008 8:16:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Friends, ch. five continues: When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. Without the right conditions the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy for the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. We SHOULD apply that energy. But precisely in what manner? --------------------------------------------------- we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: How should we find out? And what are the characteristics that are essential to be known? ------------------------------------------------ This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipa.t.thaana. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. ------------------------------------------------ Satipa.t.thaana is developed when sampaja~n~na (pa~n~naa) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Why should that occur? How is effort to be applied? did not the Buddha say? ------------------------------------------------ Pa~n~naa develops gradually so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. --------------------------------------------- Howard: It does? Unconditionally? By study and thinking? Why should it develop? Did the Buddha teach that studying and thinking over and discussing his teachings is all that one need do for wisdom to develop? --------------------------------------------- When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the right cause, and it will arise without difficulty. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! What is the right cause for that time to arrive so that enlightenment "easily" arises? What specifically? --------------------------------------------- However, we should have patience and energy to persevere with the development of understanding. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Patience is certainly required if nothing but study is ever to be done! And what constitutes the energetic perserverence we should engage in. Energy to perservere with WHAT? -------------------------------------------- We read in "Ardent Energy" (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch V, § 49) that the Buddha said: Monks, on three occasions ardent energy is to be exerted. What three? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh! Now the Buddha is speaking, and he says what needs to be done. He says that we should exert ardent energy/effort in three cases: ------------------------------------------- To prevent the arising of evil, unprofitable states not yet arisen; to cause the arising of good, profitable states not yet arisen; to endure the bodily feelings that have arisen, feelings which are painful, sharp, bitter, acute, distressing and unwelcome, which drain the life away. These are the three occasions... Now, when a monk exerts himself on these three occasions, he is called "strenuous, wise and mindful so that he makes an end of dukkha". --------------------------------------------- Howard: So, a practitioner of the Dhamma must exert himself/herself! The practitioner's actions provide the conditions, the causes, referred to above! They are not random nor are they impersonal in the sense of being independent of will. Without active, intentional maintaining of mindful attention to what arises and ceases, carefully guarding the senses, there is NO REASON to expect cultivation of the mind. -------------------------------------------- Even a very short text can remind us of the effort that should be exerted on three occasions, so that patience and endurance can further develop. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes indeed!! --------------------------------------------- .. to be continued, connie ====================== With metta, Howard #87012 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 6:59 am Subject: I'm Sorry pannabahulo Dear All, Looking back,I now realise that the way I presented my criticisms of Ajan Sujin's teaching this week were harsh. The reasons for that were the dispute I was having with my neighbour - which, sadly, is now irreconcilable. And also my own personal problem which results in incredibly strong mood swings which find expression in that way.Believe me, it is a Hell for one who has this condition and often for those close to them. I shall attend this coming Saturday's discussion and will apologise to Ajan Sujin for any harm I have done to her.And I will raise the points that I made to see what practical advice she might give. I ask for you all to forgive me for the way I presented my case. With metta and every best wish, Pannabahulo #87013 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] I'm Sorry upasaka_howard Dear Bhante - In a message dated 6/15/2008 9:59:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pannabahulo@... writes: Dear All, Looking back,I now realise that the way I presented my criticisms of Ajan Sujin's teaching this week were harsh. The reasons for that were the dispute I was having with my neighbour - which, sadly, is now irreconcilable. And also my own personal problem which results in incredibly strong mood swings which find expression in that way.Believe me, it is a Hell for one who has this condition and often for those close to them. I shall attend this coming Saturday's discussion and will apologise to Ajan Sujin for any harm I have done to her.And I will raise the points that I made to see what practical advice she might give. I ask for you all to forgive me for the way I presented my case. With metta and every best wish, Pannabahulo ========================== I applaud you for your introspection and self-evaluation, and for your moral courage. I agree that manner of presentation is important in at least three ways: As regards effectiveness in putting forward your understanding, as regards right speech, and as regards your personal non-agitation. I would urge you to consistently make the effort to maintain equanimity, without running from one extreme to the other. It is always proper to address the relative correctness and incorrectness of positions. There is nothing wrong in the slightest with calmly examining, analyzing, and evaluating a perspective on the Dhamma. Whether one's conclusions are, at any time, positive or negative or mixed is of less importance than the matter of one's approach consistently being calm, fair, as objective as possible, and rooted in the desire to see clearly for oneself and be of assistance to oneself and to others. Again, Sir, as I previously urged, I do hope you will search for a senior monk of great quality who exhibits a depth of Dhammic knowledge and fruitful practice, and who is a fine teacher motivated by genuine metta to serve as your guide. With metta, Howard P. S. As regards mood swings, I do hope that you have obtained or will obtain good medical help. I think it would be a grave error to not take appropriate medication, thinking that such might violate a precept. I do believe the Buddha made it clear that appropriate medicine is most assuredly allowed. #87014 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:00 am Subject: Re: I'm Sorry dhammanusarin Dear Bhikkhu Pannabahulo, - I think your strategy of playing "bad cop and good cop" seems to work well. First you aroused attention of several members to look at the issues you had presented earlier. And that succeeded. Next you will meet with Khun Sujin, who by now is probably well aware of "the issues" you raised, so you'll almost certainly get her full attention too. So the good cop strategy will work for you as well. Please inform us about your meeting with Khun Sujin. Thanks. Tep ==== #87015 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:05 am Subject: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn Dear Howard, When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. Without the right conditions the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy for the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. We SHOULD apply that energy. But precisely in what manner? --------------------------------------------------- Connie: Precisely that which would avoid "the intricate entanglements of wrong dispositions." But really, no SHOULD - what arises is already in application. ================================== we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: How should we find out? And what are the characteristics that are essential to be known? ------------------------------------------------ Connie: Dispassionately. The shared and specific; the other three "definings" beining function, manifestation & proximate cause. ======================= This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipa.t.thaana. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. ------------------------------------------------ Satipa.t.thaana is developed when sampaja~n~na (pa~n~naa) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Why should that occur? How is effort to be applied? did not the Buddha say? ------------------------------------------------ Connie: It is the nature of the beast. Asked and answered. Yes. ================== Pa~n~naa develops gradually so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. --------------------------------------------- Howard: It does? Unconditionally? By study and thinking? Why should it develop? Did the Buddha teach that studying and thinking over and discussing his teachings is all that one need do for wisdom to develop? --------------------------------------------- Connie: It does. Unconditionally as in 'given this, arises that', yes. Study and thought would be of assistance, yes. Because the conditions are there, but again, no should. I believe he taught analysis, yes. Also, hearing was mentioned. What is wise reflection or consideration? ===================== When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the right cause, and it will arise without difficulty. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! What is the right cause for that time to arrive so that enlightenment "easily" arises? What specifically? --------------------------------------------- Yes, really. Conditions might be better, but taken together, we can use the singular Cause. What would hinder its arising at that point? Prior development or accumulation comes to mind. ============================== However, we should have patience and energy to persevere with the development of understanding. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Patience is certainly required if nothing but study is ever to be done! And what constitutes the energetic perserverence we should engage in. Energy to perservere with WHAT? -------------------------------------------- Patience would always be admirable. Endurance, which might even be patience. The development of understanding. What is perseverance? ============================= We read in "Ardent Energy" (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch V, § 49) that the Buddha said: Monks, on three occasions ardent energy is to be exerted. What three? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh! Now the Buddha is speaking, and he says what needs to be done. He says that we should exert ardent energy/effort in three cases: ------------------------------------------- To prevent the arising of evil, unprofitable states not yet arisen; to cause the arising of good, profitable states not yet arisen; to endure the bodily feelings that have arisen, feelings which are painful, sharp, bitter, acute, distressing and unwelcome, which drain the life away. These are the three occasions... Now, when a monk exerts himself on these three occasions, he is called "strenuous, wise and mindful so that he makes an end of dukkha". --------------------------------------------- Howard: So, a practitioner of the Dhamma must exert himself/herself! The practitioner's actions provide the conditions, the causes, referred to above! They are not random nor are they impersonal in the sense of being independent of will. Without active, intentional maintaining of mindful attention to what arises and ceases, carefully guarding the senses, there is NO REASON to expect cultivation of the mind. -------------------------------------------- What constitutes a Practitioner? Where does this "randomness" we keep reading about come from? I joke about life being a crap-shoot & all, but really, 'causes and events' follow particular orders/niyaama. Really, the die is cast. What arises and ceases apart from "the characteristics that are essential to be known"? I like this, from Buddhist Legends 02 (pdf), p.9: <<"Monk, if you can guard one thing, it will not be necessary for you to guard the rest." "What is that, Reverend Sir?" "Can you guard your thoughts?" "I can, Reverend Sir." "Well then, guard your thoughts alone.">> peace, connie #87016 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:07 am Subject: the truth pannabahulo Dear Tep, There was no such 'strategy' in what happened. I am just being completely honest and, with humility, expressing remorse that my words were too harsh. Why can't you accept what I have said simply as it is said? It is always easy to see another persons faults. Sincerely, Pannabahulo #87017 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:37 am Subject: poster nichiconn Herman: Seriously, there's a feeling I get, when discursive thought is absent. I call that joy. Connie: And there's "discursive thought" again. What is that -- vitakka, vipakka? I've already ventured my "no real aim to it". Herman: It is not like this: MN137 "And what are the six kinds of household joy? The joy that arises when one regards as an acquisition the acquisition of forms cognizable by the eye - agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, connected with worldly baits - or when one recalls the previous acquisition of such forms after they have passed, ceased, & changed: That is called household joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.) Connie: Assuming the word there was piiti ... Nina: Piiti arises with somanassa in the case of kaamaavacara cittas. Herman: or this: AN 4:62 "These are the four kinds of bliss that can be attained in the proper season, on the proper occasions, by a householder partaking of sensuality." Knowing the bliss of debtlessness, & recollecting the bliss of having, enjoying the bliss of wealth, the mortal then sees clearly with discernment. Seeing clearly - the wise one - he knows both sides: that these are not worth one sixteenth-sixteenth of the bliss of blamelessness. Connie: Reminds me of MN 39: "In the same way, when these five hindrances are not abandoned in himself, the monk regards it as a debt, a sickness, a prison, slavery, a road through desolate country. But when these five hindrances are abandoned in himself, he regards it as un-indebtedness, good health, release from prison, freedom, a place of security. Seeing that they have been abandoned within him, he becomes glad. Glad, he becomes enraptured. Enraptured, his body grows tranquil. His body tranquil, he is sensitive to pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated." peace, connie #87018 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (184) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 6/15/2008 12:06:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Howard, When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. Without the right conditions the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy for the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. We SHOULD apply that energy. But precisely in what manner? --------------------------------------------------- Connie: Precisely that which would avoid "the intricate entanglements of wrong dispositions." But really, no SHOULD - what arises is already in application. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: So, it seems that according to you there is no kamma and no learning! Gotama, it seems, became a buddha by dumb luck! ---------------------------------------------------- ================================== we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: How should we find out? And what are the characteristics that are essential to be known? ------------------------------------------------ Connie: Dispassionately. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Cute, but of course not an answer to how we should find out. ---------------------------------------------- The shared and specific; the other three "definings" beining function, manifestation & proximate cause. ======================= This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipa.t.thaana. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. ------------------------------------------------ Satipa.t.thaana is developed when sampaja~n~na (pa~n~naa) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Why should that occur? How is effort to be applied? did not the Buddha say? ------------------------------------------------ Connie: It is the nature of the beast. Asked and answered. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Inadequately, IMO. Not usefully. Not of benefit to persons who wish to actually follow the Buddha. ----------------------------------------------- Yes. ----------------------------------------- Howard: And... ???? --------------------------------------- ================== Pa~n~naa develops gradually so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. --------------------------------------------- Howard: It does? Unconditionally? By study and thinking? Why should it develop? Did the Buddha teach that studying and thinking over and discussing his teachings is all that one need do for wisdom to develop? --------------------------------------------- Connie: It does. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! For everyone, no matter what actions are taken? As you know, of course, I find this absurd. ------------------------------------------- Unconditionally as in 'given this, arises that', yes. -------------------------------------------- Howard: That is unconditional? "Given this" you say, but you don't seem to allow for willing as constituting a "this". That is what kamma is. The Buddha did recognize the reality and importance of kamma. ------------------------------------------ Study and thought would be of assistance, yes. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Nothing else? That's not the Dhamma that I have studied. -------------------------------------------- Because the conditions are there, but again, no should. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha taught shoulds and should-nots! -------------------------------------------- I believe he taught analysis, yes. Also, hearing was mentioned. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: So, all but the hearing impaired are saved. Halleluyah! Praise God ... er, conditions! ----------------------------------------------- What is wise reflection or consideration? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: IMO, not thinking that there are no intentional activities. That is just basic wrong view. ----------------------------------------------- ===================== When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the right cause, and it will arise without difficulty. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! What is the right cause for that time to arrive so that enlightenment "easily" arises? What specifically? --------------------------------------------- Yes, really. -------------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) ------------------------------------------ Conditions might be better, but taken together, we can use the singular Cause. What would hinder its arising at that point? ----------------------------------------- Howard: At WHAT point? ------------------------------------------- Prior development or accumulation comes to mind. ------------------------------------------ Howard: What would have led to such prior development? There is one clear thing that you and some others here adhere to that is contrary to the Dhamma, non-recognition of the reality of volitional action; i.e., disbelief in kamma. --------------------------------------------- ============================== However, we should have patience and energy to persevere with the development of understanding. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Patience is certainly required if nothing but study is ever to be done! And what constitutes the energetic perserverence we should engage in. Energy to perservere with WHAT? -------------------------------------------- Patience would always be admirable. Endurance, which might even be patience. The development of understanding. What is perseverance? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: This is just more non-response, Connie. ----------------------------------------------- ============================= We read in "Ardent Energy" (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch V, § 49) that the Buddha said: Monks, on three occasions ardent energy is to be exerted. What three? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh! Now the Buddha is speaking, and he says what needs to be done. He says that we should exert ardent energy/effort in three cases: ------------------------------------------- To prevent the arising of evil, unprofitable states not yet arisen; to cause the arising of good, profitable states not yet arisen; to endure the bodily feelings that have arisen, feelings which are painful, sharp, bitter, acute, distressing and unwelcome, which drain the life away. These are the three occasions... Now, when a monk exerts himself on these three occasions, he is called "strenuous, wise and mindful so that he makes an end of dukkha". --------------------------------------------- Howard: So, a practitioner of the Dhamma must exert himself/herself! The practitioner's actions provide the conditions, the causes, referred to above! They are not random nor are they impersonal in the sense of being independent of will. Without active, intentional maintaining of mindful attention to what arises and ceases, carefully guarding the senses, there is NO REASON to expect cultivation of the mind. -------------------------------------------- What constitutes a Practitioner? Where does this "randomness" we keep reading about come from? I joke about life being a crap-shoot & all, but really, 'causes and events' follow particular orders/niyaama. Really, the die is cast. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Connie, this is fatalism, pure and simple, one that utterly ignores the reality of intention and intentional action. The randomness lies in the unavoidable conclusion from such volition-less fatalism that it matters not what one chooses, for, in fact, there is no choosing, no intention, no kamma. Connie, the Buddha would blanch at this being called Buddhadhamma. ---------------------------------------------------- What arises and ceases apart from "the characteristics that are essential to be known"? I like this, from Buddhist Legends 02 (pdf), p.9: <<"Monk, if you can guard one thing, it will not be necessary for you to guard the rest." "What is that, Reverend Sir?" "Can you guard your thoughts?" "I can, Reverend Sir." "Well then, guard your thoughts alone.">> ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha is saying to guard ones thoughts! That is exactly what the four right efforts are. That *should* be done. The more it is done, the more capable one will become at doing it, and the mind will be purified. But this takes consistent effort. That's why these are referred to as efforts! There is a choice: 1) Just keep on repeating the mantra "It's all conditions" while others cultivate calm, clarity, and insight by the intentional and regular practicing of sila, samadhi, and ongoing mindful paying of attention and guarding the senses, or 2) get on board with Dhamma practice oneself. -------------------------------------------------------- peace, connie ============================= With metta, Howard #87019 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:15 am Subject: RE: [dsg] I'm Sorry bitakarma _Oo_ (bows) Ray > [Original Message] > From: pannabahulo > To: > Date: 6/15/2008 5:59:21 AM > Subject: [dsg] I'm Sorry > > #87020 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:35 am Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? jonoabb Hi Tep > 1) The development of pa~n~na that leads to strem-entry is explained > in the following Study Guide : > > Stream Entry > Part 1: The Way to Stream-entry > prepared by Thanissaro Bhikkhu > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/stream.html > I've had a brief look at the study guide. It is basically a number of sutta passages arranged under headings corresponding to the 4 factors for the development of insight and attainment of enlightenment (association with the right person, hearing the dhamma, appropriate attention/reflection, and practice in accordance with the teachings). Most of the sutta passages would be familiar to regular readers of dsg messages. However, it doesn't tell me how you (Tep) understand the development of panna in the case of the worldling, that is to say, what it is that the panna of the worldling knows. So if you care to continue this thread, please share your views on this question (if not, never mind). Jon #87021 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:42 am Subject: Re: the truth dhammanusarin Dear Bhikkhu Pannabahulo, - I appreciate your reply. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > There was no such 'strategy' in what happened. I am just being > completely honest and, with humility, expressing remorse that my words > were too harsh. > Why can't you accept what I have said simply as it is said? It is > always easy to see another persons faults. > Sincerely, > > Pannabahulo > ================== Most "smart" people I know always have at least one strategy to help them succeed in life. The desire to be smart drives them to outsmart others. However, I am willing to accept your words "simply as it is said", since on the second thought I do see honesty in your confession message. It is true that I for one easily see other person's faults. Such a temptation to look for faults in others is dangerous, because it makes me fail to see (and correct) my own faults. Thank you. Tep === #87022 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Jon and Howard, you wrote: There are not different *definitions* of nama, but in the case of DO the term "nama", as part of the compound "namarupa", is used with a different *meaning* than the usual (defined) meaning of nama elsewhere. D: thanks for your comment ( and for yours , Howard..sorry for my former reaction probably due to some kind of frustration , that things are not like as I think they should be. The points you made deserve to be better contemplated ) Jon: (D: Vinnaya =consciousness, nama = mind .. what is the difference between both in English language? I assume the former excels the latter, which excludes that the latter can include the former, doesn't it? ) To my understanding: Vinnana = consciousness (other synonyms are: mano, citta) Nama = the kind of dhamma that experiences an object (vs. rupa, which = the kind of dhamma that does not experience an object). Nama comprises all cittas and all cetasikas. Thus, vinnana (= citta) is a subset of nama.# D: I found following in 'Philowiki': Mind refers to the collective aspects of intellect and consciousness which are manifest in some combination of thought, perception, emotion, will and imagination. There are many theories of what the mind is and how it works, dating back to Plato, Aristotle and other Ancient Greek and Indian philosophers. Consciousness is a quality of the mind generally regarded to comprise qualities such as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment. It is a subject of much research in philosophy of mind, psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive science' which I think is much in line with your and Howard's comments, the expression 'quality of mind ' fitting to the Abh. 's 89 kinds of specification in accordance with their kammic result. In Ven. Narada's Abh. manual it is said: 'Citta, Ceta, Cittupada , Nama , Mano, Vinnaya are all used as synonymous terms in Abh. Hence from the Abh. point of view no distinctionis made between mind and consciousness. When the so-called being is divided into its constituent parts, Nama (mind) is used . When its is divided into 5 aggregates (Pancakkhanda) Vinnaya is used. ' I remember the specification in acc. with the 5 clinging aggregates ..asking myself whether the nama rupa reference is limited to Abh or as well to be found in the suttas.. and then, perhaps as matter of convenient speech ..to which the simile of the blind and the cripple makes sense Considering vinnaya aspects from D.O. like being condioned by sankhara (avijja), the interdependance with (3)nama rupa and its aspects of rebirth continuity , the nama understanding mind involving consciousness is not yet clear to me.Moreover in the advanced Jhana states of consciousness , like pure awareness, the aspect of mind seems to me not to apply.. it is to me like pieces of puzzles which do no yet fit for the picture .. hopefully I haven't bored you too much with Metta Dieter #87023 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 6/15/2008 1:54:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: D: thanks for your comment ( and for yours , Howard..sorry for my former reaction probably due to some kind of frustration , that things are not like as I think they should be. The points you made deserve to be better contemplated ) =========================== Thanks, Dieter - that's kind of you. :-) With metta, Howard #87024 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:03 am Subject: Trim reminder! dsgmods Hi All, Just a couple of reminders. Trimming When replying to another post, please remember to trim any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply. If the post you are replying to is a recent one, you may assume that other members will have seen it. Salutation etc To avoid confusion, please use a salutation at the beginning of each post, and sign off at the end (preferably with a real name). We appreciate your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS The full guidelines can be found in the files section. Comments or questions off-list only. Thanks Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com #87025 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > You wrote the following to me on the 5th of June, in this thread: > > >To my understanding, there is no entity of 'stream of consciousness'. > >The only 'entities' are things having a characteristic that can be > >directly experienced (referred to in the texts as "dhammas", > >"khandhas", "dhatus", etc). > > But in the post I am replying to you say " ....the vipaka > consciousness conditioned by the kamma intention arises in the same > stream of consciousness as the intention." > > I'm always happy to be convinced that I'm being dense, but to me it > seems you are contradicting yourself. What is it you are refering to > when you refer to a "stream of consciousness"? A fair question. The explanation for the apparent contradiction is as follows. There is no dhamma called "stream of consciousness". "Stream of consciousness" is a designation for successive moments of consciousness (cittas) that are related each to the next by contiguity condition, that is to say, the falling away of the predecessor citta is both a necessary prerequisite for, and a condition for, the arising of the successor citta. It is this relationship that gives rise to the (conventional) designation "stream", which is used for convenience instead of the more laborious explanation of being (indirectly) related by contiguity condition. Thus there can be no "internal" or "external" when it comes to conditioning factors in relation to streams of consciousness, which I think was a point you were pursuing in an earlier post. Hoping this clarifies. Jon #87026 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:19 am Subject: Re: Jhana Meditation. Again. jonoabb Hi Alex Thanks for coming in on this thread. > > Jon:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > If you are interested (and I hope you are), then a possible starting > > point would be for you to indicate how you are using the term > > "meditation" (since it is not a term met in the texts). The > > possibilities would include, for example: > > - as a synonym for samatha bhavana and/or vipassana bhavana > > - as a technique/method of practice for a person who aspires to the > > development of samatha or bhavana > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Jhana and Immaterial spheres - base of (infinite space, > consciousness, nothingness, neither perception nor non perception). I appreciate your eagerness to discuss this subject. But I was asking the Ven how *he* used the term "meditation" (and I think only he can answer that). I gather from the rest of your post (snipped for now) that you are taking up the question of whether or not jhana is a necessary prerequisite to the development of insight (or perhaps the attainment of enlightenment). While this is a subject well worth discussing, I don't know as yet whether it would be a question arising from Ven Pannabahulo's use of the term "meditation". However, I'm happy to discuss this question with you in a separate thread, and will reply to you on this point in my next post. Jon #87027 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:22 am Subject: Re: Jhana Meditation. Again. jonoabb Hi again Alex Thanks for the 2 sutta quotes (MN52, MN64) and the series of questions that follow. Before answering the questions, I'd like to confirm the issue being discussed. Was I correct in my earlier post when I stated it as: whether or not jhana is a necessary prerequisite to the development of insight (or to the attainment of enlightenment). On the assumption that it is that question, let me comment on MN52 first. The key passage is the part that says: > He reflects on this and > discerns, 'This first jhana is fabricated & intended. Now whatever is > fabricated & intended is inconstant & subject to cessation.' Staying > right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. This I see as a description of developed insight with jhana as object. The reflecting in question is not itself jhana citta, that is to say, the reflection does not occur while in jhana. Is this how you read it? Looking forward to your comments on this point and our further discussion. Jon > ================================================================ > Lets take MN52: 11 doorways to Nibbana. > > "As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Ananda: "Venerable sir, is > there a single quality declared by the Blessed One — the one who > knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened — where the > unreleased mind of a monk who dwells there heedful, ardent, & > resolute becomes released, or his unended fermentations go to their > total ending, or he attains the unexcelled security from the yoke > that he had not attained before?" > > "Yes, householder, there is..." > "And what is that one quality, venerable sir...?" > "There is the case, householder, where a monk, withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in > the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied > by directed thought & evaluation. He reflects on this and > discerns, 'This first jhana is fabricated & intended. Now whatever is > fabricated & intended is inconstant & subject to cessation.' Staying > right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. Or, > if not, then — through this very Dhamma-passion, this Dhamma-delight, > and from the total wasting away of the first five Fetters1 — he is > due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, > never again to return from that world. " > > "This, householder, is a single quality declared by the Blessed One — > the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened — > where the unreleased mind of a monk who dwells there heedful, ardent, > & resolute becomes released, or his unended fermentations go to their > total ending, or he attains the unexcelled security from the yoke > that he had not attained before. > > [Similarly with the second, third, and fourth jhanas.] #87028 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition moellerdieter Hi Ken , you wrote: If I understand you correctly you are saying that satipatthana *is* a meditation technique. In other words: it is not the mere arising of the conditioned dhammas known as 'panna' and 'samma-sati' etc., to know a paramattha dhamma. If you are right then, certainly, A.S. and her students have been neglecting their N.P. training. :-) D: not really as I mentioned 'if you like' : I do not suppose that you see much distinction between meditation and meditation technique (?)... correctly I would say that technique (calming body and mind , keeping direction etc..e.g. by watching the breathing ) refers to preparation and access . Recalling and repeated contemplation of the details of 4 references of mindfulness is the kind of samma sati training for which - when consequently practised - the Buddha indicated possible liberation in 7 years, weeks ,days..) Therefore I said it is laying the foundation allowing panna to arise ( i.e. involving the 3rd part of the training). So the simile isn't quite a technique .. but in my opinion suitable to remind about the establishment of the broad aspects the mind needs to get used to recognize the multitude of aspects of mindfulness. Ken, I don't expect that the students of A.S. confirm the negligence of the training , the long lasting discussions about mediation among the members have taught me otherwise , but when you say: ''We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - it seems to me to indicate at least a favorable tendency.. ;-) with Metta Dieter #87029 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:15 pm Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? dhammanusarin Dear Jon, - You wrote: > > Hi Tep > I've had a brief look at the study guide. It is basically a number of sutta passages arranged under headings corresponding to the 4 factors for the development of insight and attainment of enlightenment (association with the right person, hearing the dhamma, appropriate attention/reflection, and practice in accordance with the teachings). Most of the sutta passages would be familiar to regular readers of dsg messages. However, it doesn't tell me how you (Tep) understand the development of panna in the case of the worldling, that is to say, what it is that the panna of the worldling knows. So if you care to continue this thread, please share your views on this question (if not, never mind). Jon ========== I do care to continue, Jon. :-) What is it that the pa~n~na of the worldling knows? The un-instructed worldling only knows the a-dhamma (non-Dhamma). See MN 1 that I reviewed in Part III of "Error in the Vism". He does not comprehend the Dhamma. He does not have pa~n~na ! When I say pa~n~na I mean understanding (in the sense of knowing accurately) the Teaching of the four Ariya Saccas. Please note that pa~n~na in the arahants is a synonym for pari~n~na (comprehension, full understanding), see for example the Metta.net dictionary. The sekha comrehends the Dhamma and the arahant comprehended (fully understood) it. Arahants already comprehended the dhammas such that lobha, dosa, moha are completely destructed and vijja appears. The kind of instructed worldling's understanding (not the true pa~n~na in the strict sutta sense) in ones who have turned to the Dhamma (like you and me) is supported by unshakable faith (saddha) in the Buddha and the Teachings on wholesomeness & unwholesomeness, their advantages/disadvantages and their roots(mula). With an unshakable saddha in the Dhamma we avoid akusalas and develop kusala dhammas. We are ashamed to break the Precepts, etc. To proceed from this level of understanding to the trainer (sekha) level, we need to practice abandoning the five hindrances (using kayagatasati and indriya-samvara) and, when the mind is without the hindrances, frequently and repeatedly contemplate the Dependent Origination both forward(origination) and backward(cessation) expositions. "There is the case where a monk is a learner. He discerns, as it actually is, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' "This is a manner of reckoning whereby a monk who is a learner, standing at the level of a learner, can discern that 'I am a learner.' "[SN 48.53 Sekha Sutta] I hope the above explanation satisfies your requirement. If it does not, please let me know and I'll try to do better (but at DSG, expecting satisfaction is not worthwhile). Tep === #87030 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 1:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana szmicio dear Sarah, I am so happy that I have so good friends, which show me the Dhamma, thank you :> > [Btw, I think you would like and find Nina's book 'Cetasikas' (on-line) particularly helpful.] Surely I will read it > L:>so mana is a cetasika? > ... > S: Yes. It's a cetasika which always arises with lobha (attachment). Just only with lobha? I always thought that if we quarreling we have dosa-mula-citta, and I always thought that mana is the main cause of it. > Attachment is the proximate cause of conceit, but it is attachment > which is dissociated from wrong view (di.t.thigata-vippayutta). As > we have seen, conceit does not arise together with wrong view; it > arises with lobha-m�la-citta which is dissociated from wrong view. So If i feel mana I have no wrong view in such moment? What is a wrong view, is it a cetasika too? > S: So whenever there is the finding of ourselves important, the 'waving of the banner', the comparing of ourselves with others (even when finding ourselves equal or inferior in some regard), there is maana (conceit) present. but this moments when we feel that somebody is worst then us and we feel dosa. Is it still mana(conceit)??? > L:>Is it another citta which is aware of mana or that is panja which > accompany mana? Can mana and panja arise together? > S: Maana and pa~n~naa cannot arise together. However, the > characteristic of the maana can be known by the subsequent pa~n~na > arising immediately afterwards. So another citta with panja must arise, but how it knows something what is absent now(the old moment of mana)? > P.S. Btw, You mentioned that you're interested to collect all Nina's translations of A.Sujin's books. If you'd care to give your postal address off-line to Sukin or myself, we can send you a copy of her book 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'. That's really great. I will send you my e-mail adress. > I think you'd also appreciate the edited audio recordings of discussions with A.Sujin at: > www.dhammastudygroup.org > At this link, scroll down to the audio files below the archived messages. > > Also, the PTS translation of the Vinaya (which Nina referred to) by I.B.Horner, is now available on-line. Connie can gave the link again, if you're interested. yes I am very interested. bye Lukas Sarah, At home, in my daily life my practice is very weak. I sit maybe 2x30 minutes a day, and I can't do anything with my practice. I can't see that or that or have a panja or not,to feel agitation or not so I am just sitting. There can be a few days , when i will feel mental agitation and i cant practice? But what is practice? isn't it just this present moment? People says that I should concentrate on my breath, but I cant. No matter how hard I try , there is just a lot of thinking, a lot of tanha , a lot of so many things. So should I try to do somethnig or just sit? #87031 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:29 pm Subject: Re: I'm Sorry buddhatrue Hi Ven. P., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > Dear All, > > Looking back,I now realise that the way I presented my criticisms of > Ajan Sujin's teaching this week were harsh. > The reasons for that were the dispute I was having with my neighbour - > which, sadly, is now irreconcilable. And also my own personal problem > which results in incredibly strong mood swings which find expression > in that way.Believe me, it is a Hell for one who has this condition > and often for those close to them. > I shall attend this coming Saturday's discussion and will apologise to > Ajan Sujin for any harm I have done to her.And I will raise the points > that I made to see what practical advice she might give. > I ask for you all to forgive me for the way I presented my case. > With metta and every best wish, > > Pannabahulo > James: I don't think that anything you wrote about K. Sujin was harsh; it was just the truth. But, if it makes you feel better to apologize then I guess that's fine. For whatever reason you posted about K. Sujin it cannot be denied that you raised some very good points; points which were never adequately addressed. The members of this group aren't made of glass and if K. Sujin is all that they claim that she is, they should be able to calmly accept strong criticism. Ven. P, as far as I'm concerned, you didn't do anything wrong and you have nothing to apologize for. If you suffer from mood swings then realize that this newfound "regret" might also be just another unreasonable mood swing. Mood disorders are an illness just like any other physical illness. You should get medical treatment, get your head on straight, and then make decisions about your spiritual path. Metta, James #87032 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:26 pm Subject: Re: I'm Sorry kenhowardau Dear Venerable Pannabahulo and Howard, ------ <. . .> Howard: > Again, Sir, as I previously urged, I do hope you will search for a senior monk of great quality who exhibits a depth of Dhammic knowledge and fruitful practice, and who is a fine teacher motivated by genuine metta to serve as your guide. ------- This reminds me of something I saw on television last week; an interview with the Dalai Lama. His Holiness was asked about any particular weaknesses he might have had and said he was susceptible to anger. He related, as an example, a recent incident (on another television show) in which he had become angry. Then the interviewer asked how we can deal with anger. His Holiness gave the usual Buddhist meditator's reply (that we all know so well). That was the end of the segment, and the interviewer turned to camera and said, "There you have it; a lesson in anger management from the Delai Lama himself!" That is exactly what it was. It was the ordinary conventional advice on anger management (Take some time off on a regular basis to go to a quiet place . . calm the mind . . etc etc.) that we could have heard from anyone, anywhere. What a wasted opportunity! Had the interview been with A. Sujin (or with one of her students) the Australian audience - which knows nothing about Dhamma - could have heard for the first time the Buddha's ultimate remedy for defilements. In other words, they could have been given an insight into conditioned reality. (!) What a wonderful, unique, event that would have been! Bhante, I am glad you are going to the Foundation on Saturday. And I hope you know what Ajahn's response will be. :-) It won't be the conventional pep-talk that you could get from anyone, anywhere; it will be insight into conditioned reality. There is no need to wait until then, though, is there? Right now is the best time for insight. So, is there right understanding of a reality that is arising now? Visible object, for example, . . . :-) Ken H #87033 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/6/14 Tep : > Hi Herman, - > >>H: >>I have done as you asked, and thought about what you wrote very > carefully. What you are asking me to do, I believe, is to make a > judgment about suttas that contradict a particular view, in favour of > that view. I think this would be a dishonest, sometimes even > dangerous thing to do. > > My good friend, I only asked you to rely on your saddha in the > Tathagata and your knowledge about Him in order to guide your sutta > reading with confidence. The non-issues here are judging the suttas > and dishonesty. As Alex rightly observed, lacking of proper English > words or wrong translation may be an issue. Get the Pali version. Here are some more thoughts on what we have been discussing. You suggest I be guided by my saddha in the Tathagata in reading the suttas, and getting a Pali version. I appreciate that you are trying to help me answer some questions, but I fear that I would only end up going around in circles if I followed your advice. For, where does my understanding of the Tahagata come from, but from those who have studied and translated and categorised and explained the suttas before me. We all are inheritors of certain traditions. And as you are pointing out in your series on parinna, what is said to be the case by one commentator may be not at all self-evident, or a view which cannot reasonably be doubted. Through your series you are in fact making a very good case that a student of the texts must not be led by the tradition, but by the source of the tradition, the original texts. Which leads to your point on getting Pali versions of suttas. It makes a lot of sense, but for one difficulty. Pali is not my native tongue, and in trying to determine what certain words mean in different contexts, I would again have to rely on the understanding of other people. And these people would have had to rely on others again, and so forth. Without a Rosetta Stone, I can only rely on one tradition or another to find my way through the texts. All is not lost, though :-) There is universal agreement as to the basics of what the Buddha taught, no matter what tradition one looks at. It does not cause me to doubt what I already understand about the Buddha's teachings if there is a sutta that says he had feelings or emotions of any kind. It is not necessary, for me, to see the Buddha as a Superman, before I can realise the truth of what he says about the causes of dukkha. Nor do I have an expectation that the Buddha's teaching must lead to the complete eradication of craving and suffering, before it can be of value. I am happy enough to find , time and time again, that suffering can be lessened by doing as He said, in any tradition. Cheers Herman #87034 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 1:59 pm Subject: Daily Words of the Buddha: Infinite Friendliness! bhikkhu0 Daily Words of the Buddha for 16 June 2008 The Blessed Buddha once said: Yo ca mettam bhÄ?vayati AppamÄ?ma patissato TanÅ« samyojanÄ? honti, Passato upadhikkhayam. For one who deliberately develops Infinitely Kind Friendliness, The fetters are worn away and such one will experience the elimination of clinging! Itivuttaka 1.27 Infinite Friendliness! The Daily Words of the Buddha is a service of Pariyatti. http://www.pariyatti.org Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net #87035 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:48 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Tep, Thanks for the question: ------- > T: I do not think they are totally independent; therefore, developing one separately from the others is not possible. But I do not know how "with panna, they will all arise and develop together". Please explain. ------ As you know, they are not conventional objects; they are conditioned dhammas. When the cetasika known as panna is conditioned to arise, other cetasikas - saddha, samma-viriya, samma-sati (etc) - are conditioned to arise with it. It's as simple as that, really. Don't ask me for details; I am sure you know the Paccaya better than I do. :-) I think panna acts on the others by way of root condition as well as co-nascence condition doesn't it? So where is the problem? I think a problem often arises when people try to learn the Dhamma from the conventional-language discourses first, and from the Abhidhamma second. It is infinitely more advisable to do it the other way around (IMHO). When we get the idea that samma-samadhi, for example, is not a conditioned dhamma, but a conventional practice (that can be carried out by the wise and the ignorant alike) then we have a problem. Wouldn't you agree? Ken H #87036 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:46 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition dhammanusarin Hi KenH, - Thank you for the advice that I should think about pa~n~na differently. >T : But I do not know how "with panna, they will all arise and develop together". Please explain. The main points in your message are: 1. "When the cetasika known as panna is conditioned to arise, other cetasikas - saddha, samma-viriya, samma-sati (etc) - are conditioned to arise with it." 2. " .. a problem often arises when people try to learn the Dhamma from the conventional-language discourses first, and from the Abhidhamma second. It is infinitely more advisable to do it the other way around..." .................... T: Allow me to ask a few more questions. I promise not to annoy you with sutta quotes. ;-)) 1. What does pa~n~na mean to you that is different from the sutta definition, e.g. AN 8.2 : Pañña Sutta? Also, can you give one real- word case that supports your point? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.002.than.html 2. If the "Abhidhamma-first" approach is really wonderful, how come the Buddha only taught the Dhamma as we see in the conventional- language discourses? I am looking forward to your excellent answer. Thanks. Tep === #87037 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:41 pm Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn Dear Howard, Are you purposely sarcastic or do i dump on "you" my conclusions in much the same manner followed by you in your consideration of "my" beliefs and daily life? Both, I guess. You go too far with your fatalism! I stop at pessimistic & that depends, too; when it comes to Devadatta, I'm optimistic. I believe cetanaa is not really "my intention". Maybe there is "emotional comfort" in a tendency to believe in an "ordered universe" but I have about as much confidence in dumb luck as I do in people. I'm not sure how to read the following in light of your (#86523) "No one has the right to require of anyone the adoption of a particular belief." =========== There is a choice: 1) Just keep on repeating the mantra "It's all conditions" while others cultivate calm, clarity, and insight by the intentional and regular practicing of sila, samadhi, and ongoing mindful paying of attention and guarding the senses, or 2) get on board with Dhamma practice oneself. ------------------------------- .. as you see it? peace, connie #87038 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Howard (and Jon), 2008/6/14 : > > Hi, Herman (and Jon) - > > It is not so much that kamma has its results within the same > mind stream as that what conventionally constitutes a given mind stream is > largely determined by what phenomena are related by kamma! In other words, the > matter is close to the reverse of the way it is usually formulated. I like it a lot. > A final point that I would quickly hasten to make, is that unless one > accepts streams of dhammas as having some level of existence/reality, the > notion of kammic inheritance as given by the Buddha is incoherent nonsense. Exactly so. I see that Jon has also written something about relations, and I will pursue that conversation with him there. Cheers Herman #87039 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:46 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Ken , > > you wrote: > > If I understand you correctly you are saying that satipatthana *is* a meditation technique. In other words: it is not the mere arising of the conditioned dhammas known as 'panna' and 'samma-sati' etc., to know a paramattha dhamma. > If you are right then, certainly, A.S. and her students have been neglecting their N.P. training. :-) > > D: not really as I mentioned 'if you like' : I do not suppose > that you see much distinction between meditation and meditation > technique (?) No I don't. However, the word 'meditation' is sometimes used as a translation of 'bhavana' which is a conditioned reality. And so I add the word 'technique' to make clear I am not using 'meditation' to refer to bhavana (or any conditioned reality): I am using it to refer to the conventional practice commonly known as meditation. -------------------- D: > correctly I would say that technique (calming body and mind , keeping direction etc..e.g. by watching the breathing ) refers to preparation and access. -------------------- I am not familiar with those terms with regard to the Dhamma. I do know the term 'accesss concentration' but that refers to the conditioned dhamma, samadhi, whenever it (samadhi) occurs at a very high level slightly below that of the first jhana. ----------------------------- D: > Recalling and repeated contemplation of the details of 4 references of mindfulness is the kind of samma sati training for which - when consequently practised - the Buddha indicated possible liberation in 7 years, weeks ,days..) ---------------------------- Again, our understandings differ. The only training I am aware of from the Dhamma is the momentary arising of the various path-factor cetasikas. Just one such moment in a lifetime would be an indescribably precious thing. To have them consistently for seven years would be . . . . Well, how could anyone even begin to describe how precious that would be? :-) ------------------------------------- D: > Therefore I said it is laying the foundation allowing panna to arise ( i.e. involving the 3rd part of the training). ------------------------------------- As I understand it, panna (of one degree or another) is present at *every* step of the training. From beginning to end! ----------------------- D: > So the simile isn't quite a technique .. but in my opinion suitable to remind about the establishment of the broad aspects the mind needs to get used to recognize the multitude of aspects of mindfulness. Ken, I don't expect that the students of A.S. confirm the negligence of the training , the long lasting discussions about mediation among the members have taught me otherwise , but when you say: ''We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - it seems to me to indicate at least a favorable tendency.. ;-) -------------------------- I'm not sure what you mean by that. The way I see it, Dhamma- study starts and ends with right understanding. If we have the [wrong] understanding that the Dhamma is about conventional 'beings' and conventional 'things to do' (techniques) then, in my humble opinion, we haven't even started yet. There is no point in going on without right understanding. (There can be no progress in the Dhamma without right understanding.) Ken H #87040 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (184) egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/15 connie : > Dear Friends, > > When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. What is meant by difficult in this context? To me, to be difficult means to be hard to do. Are you referring to actions that are hard to do? And what is the development of the cause? Seriously and Cheerfully, Herman #87041 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:59 pm Subject: Another apology pannabahulo Dear Dhamma friends, Thank you for all your advice and kind support. I also want to apologise for criticising my next door neighbour.That was a very bad thing to do.Especially bad as we are both monks. We all have our viewpoints and our own problems.All I can say is that - during this past week - I have been forced to face up to my own kilesa in a very big way. My work is now to turn attention to that. May all who I have offended, in any way, please forgive me. Sincerely and with all the Metta I can gather, Pannabahulo #87042 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 12:32 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Tep, ------- < . . . > T: > Allow me to ask a few more questions. I promise not to annoy you with sutta quotes. ;-)) ------- I know that was meant as a joke, but it completely misses the point I was making, doesn't it? The suttas are not annoying. The ones that use conventional language are very hard for beginners to understand, but they are not annoying. ------------------ T: > 1. What does pa~n~na mean to you that is different from the sutta definition, e.g. AN 8.2 : Pañña Sutta? Also, can you give one real- word case that supports your point? ------------------- The panna that is described in the Abhidhamma is exactly the same as the panna that is described in the suttas. ------------------------ T: > 2. If the "Abhidhamma-first" approach is really wonderful, how come the Buddha only taught the Dhamma as we see in the conventional- language discourses? ------------------------ What makes you think the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma? I think you will find he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught it to everybody. According to what I have read, many of the people who were lucky enough to hear a discourse directly from the Buddha were unsure of its precise meaning. This sometimes included those to whom a discourse was specifically addressed. The standard procedure for such people was to then go to their teacher (often an arahant in those days) and ask him/her to explain the teaching they had received in a way that was easier to understand. (That is: to explain it in Abhidhamma terms.) Corrections welcome. Ken H #87043 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/15 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > >> The Buddha said quite a lot about seeking out the base of trees and >> empty huts. He said nothing about abhidhamma in daily life. I think it >> is quite dangerous for anyone to suggest that He did. > > Yes, the Buddha did on occasion mention the base of trees and empty > huts; but this was to selected audiences and not in terms of declaring > those situations to be a necessary prerequisite to the development of > insight. > > The Buddha also mentioned, and much, much more frequently, the > khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas, that is to say, presently occurring > dhammas, and how it was the understanding of these dhammas that > constituted the development of the path; and he did so without > specifying the need for the base of trees and empty huts for that > understanding to occur. > On reading your post, the thought arose that I could read all the suttas of a representative body of Buddhist teachings, like the 152 suttas of the MN, and index them as to whether the audience was householders, and whether the message was a recommendation from the Buddha that the householders life was a good context in which understanding would develop. I then realised that I already knew, and didn't need to be convinced of what the outcome of such a statistical analysis would be. I also realised that I would be going to all that effort in vain, if my hope was that some people would realise that these teachings of the Buddha were not directed at people with their snouts in the trough of sensuality and fully intent on keeping them there (Do you like the turn of phrase ? :-)) So I resolved not to waste my time, and wrote this instead. Cheers Herman #87044 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/16 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > A fair question. The explanation for the apparent contradiction is as > follows. > > There is no dhamma called "stream of consciousness". "Stream of > consciousness" is a designation for successive moments of > consciousness (cittas) that are related each to the next by contiguity > condition, that is to say, the falling away of the predecessor citta > is both a necessary prerequisite for, and a condition for, the arising > of the successor citta. It is this relationship that gives rise to > the (conventional) designation "stream", which is used for convenience > instead of the more laborious explanation of being (indirectly) > related by contiguity condition. Given that this relationship between preceding and succeeding cittas has come to be conventionally designated, I assume that this relationship can become known. This relationship is a knowable reality. I assume from your next paragraph, in which you deny the possibility of factors "external" to a stream, that the knowing of this very real relationship between succeeding and preceding cittas can be part and parcel of this very "stream". In other words, you are saying that it is possible for a stream to know itself, and refer to itself, if only partly. > Thus there can be no "internal" or "external" when it comes to > conditioning factors in relation to streams of consciousness, which I > think was a point you were pursuing in an earlier post. > > Hoping this clarifies. > Well, I hope that I have clarified for you that if "stream of consciousness" is an approved designation for a knowable set of relationships, then the designations "I", "me" or "self" are to be preferred because they 1) refer to exactly the same reality and 2) require far less typing. Cheers Herman #87045 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (184) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 6/16/2008 1:42:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Howard, Are you purposely sarcastic or do i dump on "you" my conclusions in much the same manner followed by you in your consideration of "my" beliefs and daily life? Both, I guess. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I apologize for my tone being an upsetting one to you. I was upset at what I saw as cryptic non-replies to my questions about what I view as an approach contrary to the Buddha's teaching, and didn't properly rein myself in. I should have been less strong, and I apologize for not having been more gentle. But I was not purposely sarcastic. I think what I said, strong as it was, was straight out there. To me the position you espouse as the Buddha's is one in which there is no intentional action to be taken. And that, to me, puts all people in exactly the same position - helpless victims of circumstance. I consider that to be a damaging view to adopt. ------------------------------------------------ You go too far with your fatalism! I stop at pessimistic & that depends, too; when it comes to Devadatta, I'm optimistic. I believe cetanaa is not really "my intention". Maybe there is "emotional comfort" in a tendency to believe in an "ordered universe" but I have about as much confidence in dumb luck as I do in people. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Volition that occurs in one mind stream is not the volition that occurs in another. What you decide to do and then, by implementation of will, do act upon is, in ordinary speech, *your* kamma. It certainly is not mine. (And vice-versa.) The Buddha said that each person is heir to his/her own kamma. I don't believe he was confused in that. More importantly, I think that if we don't recognize the actuality of kamma and its creating a kammic debt *for the person who acts*, then morality and progress both go out the window. ---------------------------------------------- I'm not sure how to read the following in light of your (#86523) "No one has the right to require of anyone the adoption of a particular belief." =========== There is a choice: 1) Just keep on repeating the mantra "It's all conditions" while others cultivate calm, clarity, and insight by the intentional and regular practicing of sila, samadhi, and ongoing mindful paying of attention and guarding the senses, or 2) get on board with Dhamma practice oneself. ------------------------------- .. as you see it? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: You are correct. I should have said that "I see" the Buddha as having taught such a choice. I understand that it is just a particular view that the Buddha taught actually engaging in intentional practice. I view not engaging in intentional practices such as the four right efforts to be a perversion of the anatta teaching that puts Buddhists who adhere to that view in the same boat as non-Buddhists, especially fatalists. I find the no-intentional-practice perspective to be as odd and off the mark as anything can be. But you are right that what I do or do not see to be the way things are needn't be what others see and needn't necessarily be correct. What was missing from what I wrote, quoted above, about "the choice" was words to the effect "as I see it" and "I believe". I apologize for asserting what I said as fact rather than as my opinion. --------------------------------------------------- peace, connie =========================== With metta, Howard #87046 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:18 am Subject: Perfections Corner (185) nichiconn Dear Friends, we have finished all the chapters and move on to the Epilogue - The Defilements of the Perfections: When attachment arises, when we have enjoyment and clinging, the ten perfections are defiled. The defilements of each of the ten perfections are explained as follows: "Taken separately, discriminating thoughts (vikappa) over gifts and recipients are the defilement of the perfection of giving." Sometimes when we perform deeds of generosity we are selective with regard to the receiver or we have discriminating thoughts about the gifts, by attachment, aversion, fear or delusion. Then the perfection of generosity is defiled, it is not pure. The perfection of generosity should be developed towards all beings, without discrimination. If we have discriminating thoughts over gifts and recipients, we should investigate the characteristic of the perfection of generosity. At such moments it is defiled, it is not pure. We should have a refined knowledge of the perfections in daily life. They have to be developed life after life in the cycle of birth and death so that they reach fulfilment. We read with regard to the perfection of morality: "Discriminating thoughts over beings and times are the defilement of the perfection of virtue." Sometimes we can observe morality towards particular persons, to people we respect such as our parents. We may observe morality by showing respect to them in our gestures and speech, but we cannot do the same to other people. Or we may have discriminating thoughts as to the time of observing morality, we observe it only on Uposatha day *1 or a particular day we select to observe the precepts, and then we may believe that we are perfect in morality, although at other days we do not observe morality. That is the defilement of the perfection of virtue or morality. We read further on in the Commentary to the "Basket of conduct" about the defilement of the other perfections as follows: *1 Uposatha day is a day of vigilance, which is the full-moon day, the new-moon day, and the days of the first and the last moon-quarter. Buddhist lay followers usually visit on these days the monasteries and observe five or eight precepts. .. to be continued, connie #87047 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 15-jun-2008, om 22:18 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > If you'd care to give your postal > address off-line to Sukin or myself, we can send you a copy of her > book 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'. -------- N: If you also send it to me, it is our pleasure to send as a free gift some books to you. Nina. > #87048 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:59 am Subject: Re: Another apology szmicio Dear Bhante, Your apologise are really nice :> bye Lukas #87049 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:15 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn Dear Howard, Sometimes it might be that I am more cryptic than I need to be, sometimes it might be that I don't know a better way to say something at the time. Feel free to ask. I reread the thread after your assurance that "I was not purposely sarcastic. I think what I said, strong as it was, was straight out there." but still don't know how you want things like the following example to be read if not, to put it politely, as "a joke"? I believe he taught analysis, yes. Also, hearing was mentioned. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: So, all but the hearing impaired are saved. Halleluyah! Praise God .. er, conditions! ----------------------------------------------- Am I to think that you really believe that I believe that "all but the hearing impaired are saved"? If so, I'm afraid I have to say "we, today, are hearing impaired" - that is, we are no actual voice-hearers. I don't mean to harp on it, but sarcasm happens - on my part - all too frequently and easily. I see it as a failure to keep the precept. Naturally, when I think I read the same in your posts, it bothers me there, too. Are we smoking the peace pipe now? connie #87050 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:09 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn Dear Herman, Howard, > > When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings its result without difficulty. Herman: What is meant by difficult in this context? To me, to be difficult means to be hard to do. Are you referring to actions that are hard to do? And what is the development of the cause? Connie: Which difficulty would we start with? To be born human and have an interest in the Teachings at a time when they are available? It's hard to know what is kusala and what not. It's not easy to give when one hasn't been used to giving. So on and so forth. The cause... Howard asked about that, too: When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the right cause, and it will arise without difficulty. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! What is the right cause for that time to arrive so that enlightenment "easily" arises? What specifically? --------------------------------------------- Yes, really. Conditions might be better, but taken together, we can use the singular Cause. What would hinder its arising at that point? Prior development or accumulation comes to mind. ============================== (sorry, Howard, "Really!" - sarcastic or straight?) I meant: nothing arises from a single cause, but it's normal to speak of a collective as 'one thing', in this case, 'the right cause'. Prior development or accumulation was (as I meant them synonymously) meant to be an example of 'specifics' involved in the arising of enlightenment. Incompletion/imperfection in that 'specific' would not just 'hinder' but 'prevent' the arising of perfect enlightenment. I thought (answering myself) "obstructive kamma", but the point I was trying to get at was that at the time of any arising whatsoever, the conditions for that whatsoever are perfect for just that... it's just 'QED' - 'quite easily done' as my geometry teacher put it. Hope that's more helpful than my earlier attempt. peace, connie #87051 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:20 am Subject: Re: akusala citta - mana szmicio --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > Op 15-jun-2008, om 22:18 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > > If you'd care to give your postal > > address off-line to Sukin or myself, we can send you a copy of her > > book 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'. > -------- > N: If you also send it to me, it is our pleasure to send as a free > gift some books to you. > Nina. it will be a great gift to me :> #87052 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] poster sarahprocter... Hi Herman & Connie, Good quotes and discussion on joy. Look f/w to any further quotes. Any joy now? Kusala or akusala? [A question to us all!] Metta, Sarah --- On Mon, 16/6/08, connie wrote: Connie: Reminds me of MN 39: "In the same way, when these five hindrances are not abandoned in himself, the monk regards it as a debt, a sickness, a prison, slavery, a road through desolate country. But when these five hindrances are abandoned in himself, he regards it as un-indebtedness, good health, release from prison, freedom, a place of security. Seeing that they have been abandoned within him, he becomes glad. Glad, he becomes enraptured. Enraptured, his body grows tranquil. His body tranquil, he is sensitive to pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated. " #87053 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition moellerdieter Hi Ken , you wrote: (D: not really as I mentioned 'if you like' : I do not suppose that you see much distinction between meditation and meditation technique (?) No I don't. However, the word 'meditation' is sometimes used as a translation of 'bhavana' which is a conditioned reality. And so I add the word 'technique' to make clear I am not using 'meditation' to refer to bhavana (or any conditioned reality): I am using it to refer to the conventional practice commonly known as meditation. D: meditation is just a term to translate the samadhi sequence (step 6,7.8) of the 3 fold Noble Path training. The technique is needed to support 'peace of mind' , limiting the influence of the 5 hindrances (niravana) in order to perfect (samma) the tasks. Do you know and agree that the 3fold N.P. training is stressed in the teaching? Ken: I am not familiar with those terms with regard to the Dhamma. I do know the term 'accesss concentration' but that refers to the conditioned dhamma, samadhi, whenever it (samadhi) occurs at a very high level slightly below that of the first jhana. D: these are just terms to refer to the level of concentraion Ken : (D: Recalling and repeated contemplation of the details of 4 references of mindfulness is the kind of samma sati training for which - when consequently practised - the Buddha indicated possible liberation in 7 years, weeks ,days..) Again, our understandings differ. The only training I am aware of from the Dhamma is the momentary arising of the various path-factor cetasikas. Just one such moment in a lifetime would be an indescribably precious thing. To have them consistently for seven years would be . . . . Well, how could anyone even begin to describe how precious that would be? :-) D: I think an almost exclusive intellectual approach to the Noble Path is just hindering that.. Re-reading the Maha Sati Patthana Sutta as practical guide for the development of sati (aiming insight /panna) would be most benefial for understanding. Here again I like to stress the 3fold N.P. training Ken: I'm not sure what you mean by that. The way I see it, Dhamma-study starts and ends with right understanding. If we have the [wrong] understanding that the Dhamma is about conventional 'beings' and conventional 'things to do' (techniques) then, in my humble opinion, we haven't even started yet. There is no point in going on without right understanding. (There can be no progress in the Dhamma without right understanding.) D: for the benefit of ' preparing ' understanding with the hope of 'access' following quotation by Nyanatiloka ( 's dictionary 'Magga') with Metta Dieter quote .. snip 'As it is said in M. 117: "I tell you, o monks, there are 2 kinds of right view: the understanding that it is good to give alms and offerings, that both good and evil actions will bear fruit and will be followed by results.... This, o monks, is a view which, though still subject to the cankers, is meritorious, yields worldly fruits, and brings good results. But whatever there is of wisdom, of penetration, of right view conjoined with the path - the holy path being pursued, this is called the supermundane right view (lokuttara-samma-di??hi), which is not of the world, but which is supermundane and conjoined with the path." In a similar way the remaining links of the path are to be understood. As many of those who have written about the Eightfold Path have misunderstood its true nature, it is therefore appropriate to add here a few elucidating remarks about it, as this path is fundamental for the understanding and practice of the Buddha's .teaching. First of all, the figurative expression 'path' should not be interpreted to mean that one has to advance step by step in the sequence of the enumeration until, after successively passing through all the eight stages, one finally may reach one's destination, Nibbana. If this really were the case, one should have realized, first of all, right view and penetration of the truth, even before one could hope to proceed to the next steps, right thought and right speech; and each preceding stage would be the indispensable foundation and condition for each succeeding stage. In reality, however, the links 3-5 constituting moral training (sila), are the first 3 links to be cultivated, then the links 6-8 constituting mental training (samadhi), and at last right view, etc. constituting wisdom (pañña). It is, however, true that a really unshakable and safe foundation to the path is provided only by right view which, starting from the tiniest germ of faith and knowledge, gradually, step by step, develops into penetrating insight (vipassana) and thus forms the immediate condition for the entrance into the 4 supermundane paths and fruits of holiness, and for the realization of Nibbana. Only with regard to this highest form of supermundane insight, may we indeed say that all the remaining links of the path are nothing but the outcome and the accompaniments of right view. Regarding the mundane (lokiya) eightfold path, however, its links may arise without the first link, right view. Here it must also be emphasized that the links of the path not only do not arise one after the other, as already indicated, but also that they, at least in part, arise simultaneously as inseparably associated mental factors in one and the same state of consciousness. Thus, for instance, under all circumstances at least 4 links are inseparably bound up with any kammically wholesome consciousness, namely 2, 6, 7 and 8, i.e. right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration (M. 117), so that as soon as any one of these links arises, the three others also do so. On the other hand, right view is not necessarily present in every wholesome state of consciousness. uunquote #87054 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (p.s Connie), --- On Mon, 16/6/08, szmicio wrote: L:>I am so happy that I have so good friends, which show me the Dhamma, thank you :> ... S: It's a pleasure to discuss the Dhamma with you :> .... > L:>so mana is a cetasika? > ... >> S: Yes. It's a cetasika which always arises with lobha (attachment) . L:>Just only with lobha? I always thought that if we quarreling we have dosa-mula-citta, and I always thought that mana is the main cause of it. .... S: It's true that mana and lobha condition dosa, but they arise at different moments. So one moment there is the clinging to oneself and conceit, finding oneself so very important, and after this there is likely to be the aversion or distress when we are not treated as we'd like to be, when we don't get our own way. We may blame those we quarrel with for the distress or agitation, but of course, the real cause is the attachment to ourselves and conceit as you suggest. These are accumulated through ignorance and craving, day after day, lifetime after lifetime. .... >S: "....Attachment is the proximate cause of conceit, but it is attachment > which is dissociated from wrong view (di.t.thigata- vippayutta) . As > we have seen, conceit does not arise together with wrong view; it > arises with lobha-muula-citta which is dissociated from wrong view.,," L:>So If i feel mana I have no wrong view in such moment? ... S: Exactly. Again, they arise at different moments. In this case, both arise with lobha (attachment). Wrong view has to be eradicated first. .... L: >What is a wrong view, is it a cetasika too? ... S: Yes, it is (micha) di.t.thi. It may or may not accompany attachment. When there is the taking of a thing or a person to be real, there is wrong view. When there is the taking of what is seen or heard to be lasting, there is wrong view. There are many different kinds of wrong view. They all stem from the wrong view of self (sakkaaya di.t.thi). [Pls see lots more on any of these topics in 'Useful posts' in the files section. Scroll down to 'Conceit', 'Wrong View' etc.] .... >> S: So whenever there is the finding of ourselves important, the 'waving of the banner', the comparing of ourselves with others (even when finding ourselves equal or inferior in some regard), there is maana (conceit) present. L:>but this moments when we feel that somebody is worst then us and we feel dosa. Is it still mana(conceit) ??? .... S: Again, different moments. There are the momenst of smugness or conceit when we consider someone to be less able in any regard, such as less fit, less healthy, less young, less old, less well-dressed, less calm, less knowledgeable etc and then there are the moments when we just feel unhappy, disturbed or distressed about the way someone writes, understands the Dhamma or anything else. Again, they can condition each other. We can feel aversion about someone and then have conceit or vice versa. Only right understanding, panna, can know what the reality is. .... >> S: Maana and pa~n~naa cannot arise together. However, the > characteristic of the maana can be known by the subsequent pa~n~na > arising immediately afterwards. L:>So another citta with panja must arise, but how it knows something what is absent now(the old moment of mana)? ... S: Its characteristic is the object of the subsequent mind-door process. These mind-door processes follow each other very rapidly. So one moment there can be mana and the next moment there can be awareness and understanding of it. ... L: >Sarah, At home, in my daily life my practice is very weak. ... S: First of all, we need to discuss what is meant by 'practice'. Practice, as taught by the Buddha, refers to the development of right understanding. Such practice can only ever occur at this very moment. So if there's right understanding now of aversion or conceit or doubt or seeing or visible object, then this is the path. It's never a question of 'my practice', but a question of understanding dhammas. By your keen questions, I'd say there is plenty of wise consideration and reflection of these dhammas. This is the way that leads to the practice, the direct understanding of those dhammas. .... L:>I sit maybe 2x30 minutes a day, and I can't do anything with my practice. I can't see that or that or have a panja or not,to feel agitation or not so I am just sitting. There can be a few days , when i will feel mental agitation and i cant practice? But what is practice? isn't it just this present moment? ... S: Exactly - just understanding right now. If we do something special, anything special, in order to have more awareness, more insight, more 'practice', there is bound to be agitation and distress because of the hidden clinging to oneself and one's development. There is the wishing to have insight, the attempt to speed it up at such times. When there is even a little right understanding of dhammas, there is contentment and a lack of agitation. This is because it's more and more obvious that understanding develops naturally through hearing and considering, not through trying to make it arise or trying to speed it up. .... L:>People says that I should concentrate on my breath, but I cant. No matter how hard I try , there is just a lot of thinking, a lot of tanha , a lot of so many things. .... S: So the reality at such a time is thinking and tanha. Good to know! In the end, we will receive a lot of different advice, but the Dhamma itself has to be our guide and it is the right understanding now which will know what is Dhamma and what is not Dhamma. ... L:>So should I try to do somethnig or just sit? ... S: I don't think there is any 'should' or 'do' involved at all in the practice of the Dhamma. Whatever you do or don't do, just develop more understanding of namas and rupas at the present moment. I appreciate these discussions with you, Lukas. Metta, Sarah p.s. >>S: Also, the PTS translation of the Vinaya (which Nina referred to) by I.B.Horner, is now available on-line. Connie can gave the link again, if you're interested. ... L: >yes I am very interested. .... S: Calling Connie - could you kindly give that link again. I believe that now the 50 yrs is up since the translation, so the copyright no longer applies which is why it's now on-line. (Corrections welcome). ... ======== #87055 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part I sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- On Sat, 14/6/08, Tep wrote: There was an error in the first message of this thread. Please notice that DN 1 is not Mulapariyaya Sutta, but MN 1 is. ... S: Thanks for correcting it Tep. It was my careless error. I'm appreciating all your careful study and work and look forward to responding. As I'm away without books and with a limited, slow (and expensive) internet connection, apologies in advance if it takes time. I also saw another careless error in one of my messages you quoted, referring to ~naata pari~n~na as the first stage of insight. This is not correct. It is the knowledge applied after the first stages of insight in order for further understanding to develop. (see Vism XX.4 which you quoted). Anyway, back to your messages later. Thanks in advance, Tep. Metta, Sarah ======= #87056 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala sarahprocter... Hi James, --- On Sat, 14/6/08, buddhatrue wrote: > J:>> >Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two with > the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and > heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at > grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, > ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is > red hot. > http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ bodhi/bps- essay_23. html > .... > S: As I said, the 'disgust' and 'fear' referred to here do not > refer to aversion or fear about our akusala as we usually understand such terms. James: It seems to me that you are just repeating yourself. I asked you to explain what "disgust" and "fear" really mean if they don't mean disgust and fear. ... S: All I can say is that hiri and ottappa see the shame in akusala. Akusala is shameful like the ends of the iron rod above. The Buddha understood the shame in smallest faults, in all akusala. Whatever words are used, the Buddha didn't have disgust or fear with unpleasant feeling. ... J:>And, remember, hiri and ottappa may or may not be accompanied by panna. Everyday folks, never hearing of the Dhamma, experience hiri and ottappa- as well as those on the path to enlightenment. ... S: Good point and true. There is hiri and ottappa accompanying every moment of kusala. So at all moments of dana, sila or bhavana, there is hiri and ottappa. I didn't think the other examples you gave of disgust, fear and unpleasant feelings had anything to do with hiri and ottappa and I won't be following your mental experiment:-). Thanks for your consideration and sharing of your understanding. We can just agree to differ here. Metta, Sarah ======== #87057 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (184) upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 6/16/2008 10:17:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Howard, Sometimes it might be that I am more cryptic than I need to be, sometimes it might be that I don't know a better way to say something at the time. Feel free to ask. I reread the thread after your assurance that "I was not purposely sarcastic. I think what I said, strong as it was, was straight out there." but still don't know how you want things like the following example to be read if not, to put it politely, as "a joke"? I believe he taught analysis, yes. Also, hearing was mentioned. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: So, all but the hearing impaired are saved. Halleluyah! Praise God .. er, conditions! ----------------------------------------------- Am I to think that you really believe that I believe that "all but the hearing impaired are saved"? If so, I'm afraid I have to say "we, today, are hearing impaired" - that is, we are no actual voice-hearers. I don't mean to harp on it, but sarcasm happens - on my part - all too frequently and easily. I see it as a failure to keep the precept. Naturally, when I think I read the same in your posts, it bothers me there, too. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: My intention was not sarcasm but humor. I'm sorry it came across badly. ------------------------------------------------- Are we smoking the peace pipe now? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course! :-) --------------------------------------------------- connie ========================== With metta, Howard #87058 From: "nichiconn" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana nichiconn Dear Sarah, Lukas, > .... > S: Calling Connie - could you kindly give that link again. I believe that now the 50 yrs is up since the translation, so the copyright no longer applies which is why it's now on-line. (Corrections welcome). > ... > > ======== > I tried looking them up again the other day when you mentioned it, but was only able to find two of the volumes. I'd be happy to send a cd with pdf's, or email one at a time if that would work for anyone. http://www.archive.org/ search.php?query=I%20B%20Horner%20AND%20mediatype%3Atexts what are called the books of discipline volumes 10 and 14 there should give you the Book of Disc. volumes 1 and 4. peace, connie #87059 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame jonoabb Hi Dieter > D: I found following in 'Philowiki': > Mind refers to the collective aspects of intellect and consciousness which are manifest > in some combination of thought, perception, emotion, will and imagination. > > There are many theories of what the mind is and how it works, dating back to Plato, > Aristotle and other Ancient Greek and Indian philosophers. > > Consciousness is a quality of the mind generally regarded to comprise qualities such > as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the > relationship between oneself and one's environment. It is a subject of much research in > philosophy of mind, psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive science' > > which I think is much in line with your and Howard's comments, the expression > 'quality of mind ' fitting to the Abh. 's 89 kinds of specification in accordance with > their kammic result. I do not see any useful similarity between this quote from Philowiki and the teaching regarding citta/vinnana. > In Ven. Narada's Abh. manual it is said: 'Citta, Ceta, Cittupada , Nama , Mano, > Vinnaya are all used as synonymous terms in Abh. To my understanding, in the Abhidhamma context, nama encompasses both citta and cetasika, whereas citta means citta only (i.e., without including cetasikas, even though the one never arises without the other). > Hence from the Abh. point of view no distinctionis made between mind and consciousness. When the so-called being is divided into its constituent parts, Nama (mind) is used . When its is divided into 5 aggregates (Pancakkhanda) Vinnaya is used. ' As far as I know, nama is not generally given as a synonym for vinnana. The term "nama" represents a class of dhammas when dhammas are classified as nama and rupa. Nama are those dhammas that experience an object (which object may be another nama or may be a rupa); rupa are those dhammas that do not experience an object. Dhammas may also be classified as citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbana. Under this classification, citta and cetasika (and nibbana) are the "nama" of the 2-fold nama and rupa classification. Dhammas may also be classified as rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara and vinnana (the 5 khandhas). Under this classification, - vinnana is the "citta" of the 4-fold citta/cetasika/rupa/nibbana classification, - vedana, sanna and sankhara are the "cetasikas" of that classification. > I remember the specification in acc. with the 5 clinging aggregates ..asking myself > whether the nama rupa reference is limited to Abh or as well to be found in the suttas. > and then, perhaps as matter of convenient speech ..to which the simile of the blind > and the cripple makes sense The simile of the blind man and the cripple makes sense if nama is taken to mean citta and cetasikas, as in the above description. The meaning of nama as in the compound term "namarupa" in DO is limited to that context, as far as I know. > Considering vinnaya aspects from D.O. like being condioned by sankhara (avijja), > the interdependance with (3)nama rupa and its aspects of rebirth continuity, the nama > understanding mind involving consciousness is not yet clear to me.Moreover in the > advanced Jhana states of consciousness , like pure awareness, the aspect of mind > seems to me not to apply.. Not sure what you mean by "advanced Jhana states of consciousness, like pure awareness", so am not able to comment on this. > it is to me like pieces of puzzles which do no yet fit for the picture .. Hoping the picture is becoming a little clearer for you ;-)) Jon #87060 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:56 am Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? jonoabb Hi Tep > What is it that the pa~n~na of the worldling knows? > > The un-instructed worldling only knows the a-dhamma (non-Dhamma). See > MN 1 that I reviewed in Part III of "Error in the Vism". He does not > comprehend the Dhamma. He does not have pa~n~na ! The sutta passage says that the uninstructed worldling perceives earth as earth, and conceives it as "mine", because he has not comprehended it. I do not think this means that panna cannot arise in the uninstructed worldling. It means that panna is not sufficiently developed to have eradicated the wrong view of "mine"; as we know, this only occurs at the sotapanna stage. > When I say pa~n~na I mean understanding (in the sense of knowing > accurately) the Teaching of the four Ariya Saccas. Agreed. The uninstructed worldling has not penetrated the four Ariya Saccas. > The kind of instructed worldling's understanding (not the true > pa~n~na in the strict sutta sense) in ones who have turned to the > Dhamma (like you and me) is supported by unshakable faith (saddha) in > the Buddha and the Teachings on wholesomeness & unwholesomeness, > their advantages/disadvantages and their roots(mula). To my understanding, panna may arise in the worldling who has heard the teaching, but it will be of a lesser degree than the panna of the sekha. Indeed, unless panna arises in the worldling, it could not (suddenly) arise in the sotapanna and be at the level necessary to eradicate wrong view. > With an > unshakable saddha in the Dhamma we avoid akusalas and develop kusala > dhammas. We are ashamed to break the Precepts, etc. To proceed from > this level of understanding to the trainer (sekha) level, we need to > practice abandoning the five hindrances (using kayagatasati and > indriya-samvara) and, when the mind is without the hindrances, > frequently and repeatedly contemplate the Dependent Origination both > forward(origination) and backward(cessation) expositions. ... Many thanks for taking the trouble to set out how you see the development of the path at the mundane level (i.e., by the uninstructed worldling). As I see it, that development must involve a gradual understanding of presently arising dhammas as having the characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta, and this I see as the function of panna. Nice talking to you, Tep. Jon #87061 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 am Subject: Metta, Ch 8, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 8. Cause and result in life Some people may worship brahmas but they do not know where they are, how one can be born as a brahma and what life as a brahma is like. We read in the Kindred Sayings (I, Sagåthå-vagga, Chapter VI, The Brahmå Suttas, §3, Brahmadeva) that people worshipped Brahmå already during the Buddha’s time. The text states: Thus have I heard: the Exalted One was once staying at Såvatthí, in the Jeta Grove, in Anåthapiùèika’s Park. Now on that occasion Brahmadeva, son of a certain brahminee, left the world, going from home into the homeless in the Order of the Exalted One. And the venerable Brahmadeva, remaining alone and separate, earnest, ardent, and strenuous, attained ere long to that supreme goal of the higher life, for the sake of which the clansmen rightly go forth from home into the homeless; that supreme goal did he by himself, even in this present life, come to understand and realize. He came to understand that birth was destroyed, that the holy life was being lived, that his task was done, that for life as we conceive it, there was no hereafter. And the venerable Brahmadeva thus became one of the arahats. Now the venerable Brahmadeva rose early one morning, and dressing himself, took robe and bowl and entered Såvatthí for alms. And going about Såvatthí, house by house, he came to his mother’s dwelling. At that time his mother, the brahminee, was habitually making an oblation to Brahmå. Then it occurred to Brahmå Sahampati: “This mother of the venerable Brahmadeva, the brahminee, makes her perpetual oblation to Brahmå. What if I were now to approach and agitate her?” So as a strong man might stretch forth his bent arm, or bend his arm stretched forth, Brahmå Sahampati vanished from the Brahmå world and appeared at the dwelling of the mother of the venerable Brahmadeva. And standing in the air he addressed her in verses: Far from here, O brahminee, is Brahma’s world, To whom you always serves offerings. And Brahmå does not take food like that. What babble you unwitting of the way, O brahminee, unto the Brahma world. Look at Brahmadeva, your son, A man who will never see another world, A man who past the gods has won his way, An almsman who does nothing call his own, Who only maintains himself, This man has come into your house for alms, Worthy of offerings, versed in the Vedas, With faculties developed and controlled. It is suitable for devas and men to offer to him True brahmin, barring all things evil out, By evil undefiled, grown calm and cool, He moves on his alms round. There is no after, no before for him, He is at peace, no fume of vice is his; He is untroubled, rid of hankering; All force renouncing toward both weak and strong. Let him enjoy the choice food you have served. By all the hosts of evil unassailed, His heart at utter peace, he goes about Like tamed elephant, with vices purged. Almsman most virtuous, and with heart well freed: Let him enjoy the choice food you have served. To him so worthy of the gift do you, In confidence unwavering, offer your gift. Work merit and your future happiness, Now that you see here, O brahminee, A sage by whom the flood is overpassed. To him so worthy of the gift did she, In confidence unwavering offer her gift. Merit she wrought, her future happiness, When (at her door) the brahminee saw A sage by whom the flood was overpassed. ****** Nina. #87062 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana szmicio Dear Connie and Sarah, Is that all? http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=I%20B%20Horner%25 Where should I start read Vinaya? > I tried looking them up again the other day when you mentioned it, > but was only able to find two of the volumes. I'd be happy to send a > cd with pdf's, or email one at a time if that would work for anyone. > > > > http://www.archive.org/ > search.php?query=I%20B%20Horner%20AND%20mediatype%3Atexts > > what are called the books of discipline volumes 10 and 14 there > should give you the Book of Disc. volumes 1 and 4. #87063 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana egberdina Hi Lukas, 2008/6/16 szmicio : > dear Sarah, > At home, in my daily life my practice is very weak. I sit maybe 2x30 > minutes a day, and I can't do anything with my practice. I can't see > that or that or have a panja or not,to feel agitation or not so I am > just sitting. There can be a few days , when i will feel mental > agitation and i cant practice? But what is practice? isn't it just > this present moment? > People says that I should concentrate on my breath, but I cant. > No matter how hard I try , there is just a lot of thinking, a lot of > tanha , a lot of so many things. > > So should I try to do somethnig or just sit? > Imagine the following. A man says to a friend that he is very obese, and suffers because of this, and so twice a day he tries to not eat for 30 minutes. He says he finds this very difficult, because all he does is think about eating. His friend asks him what he eats throughout the day. The man replies that he has 5 eggs with bacon for breakfast, 6 chocalate bars throughout the morning, morning tea involves eating a chocalate cake with cream, lunch is one whole pizza, 5 sausages and 3 bottles of beer, lots of biscuits and cakes throughout the afternoon, and a leg of lamb, with potatoes and vegatables at night, washed down with a bottle of schnapps. The friend suggests a remedy, he will give the man some books, amongst which are "A Survey of Food" and "Food in daily life". The man is very grateful. Question: Do you think that the books will help? And what do you think needs to be added to the following to make it more appealing, palatable, appetising so that it becomes a useful teaching :-)? MN9 Nutriment 9. Saying, "Good, friend," the bhikkhus delighted and rejoiced in the Venerable Sariputta's words. Then they asked him a further question: "But, friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma?" — "There might be, friends. 10. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands nutriment, the origin of nutriment, the cessation of nutriment, and the way leading to the cessation of nutriment, in that way he is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma. 11. "And what is nutriment, what is the origin of nutriment, what is the cessation of nutriment, what is the way leading to the cessation of nutriment? There are these four kinds of nutriment for the maintenance of beings that already have come to be and for the support of those seeking a new existence. What four? They are physical food as nutriment, gross or subtle; contact as the second; mental volition as the third; and consciousness as the fourth. With the arising of craving there is the arising of nutriment. With the cessation of craving there is the cessation of nutriment. The way leading to the cessation of nutriment is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. 12. "When a noble disciple has thus understood nutriment, the origin of nutriment, the cessation of nutriment, and the way leading to the cessation of nutriment, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to greed, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit 'I am,' and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma." Cheers Herman #87064 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:31 pm Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Dear Herman, - >Herman: I appreciate that you are trying to help me answer some questions, but I fear that I would only >end up going around in circles if I followed your advice. T: Like getting sucked into a huge vortex, eh? >Herman: For, where does my understanding of the Tahagata come from, but from those who have studied and translated and categorised and explained the suttas before me. We all are inheritors of certain traditions .... .... Through your series you are in fact making a very good case that a student of the texts must not be led by the tradition, but by the source of the tradition, the original texts. T: I appreciate your clear understanding of the message in the three- part series (about an error in the Vism). >Herman: Which leads to your point on getting Pali versions of suttas. It makes a lot of sense, but for one difficulty. Pali is not my native tongue, and in trying to determine what certain words mean in different contexts, I would again have to rely on the understanding of other people. And these people would have had to rely on others again, and so forth. T: And that goes round and round like a vortex. ;-) But isn't that the same in all learning situations we have had since the Kindergarten days? Everything we have learned and used as the basis for making judgment in everyday living condition, all came from other people who had learned from other people, and so on. But it isn't necessary for you to swirl around in a vortex every time you make a judgment. >Herman: All is not lost, though :-) There is universal agreement as to the basics of what the Buddha taught, no matter what tradition one looks at. It does not cause me to doubt what I already understand about the Buddha's teachings if there is a sutta that says he had feelings or emotions of any kind. T: One sour grape does not lead you to conclude that all grapes in "the basket" are sour; is that what you are saying? If it is, then I agree with you. >Herman: It is not necessary, for me, to see the Buddha as a Superman, before I can realise the truth of what he says about the causes of dukkha. Nor do I have an expectation that the Buddha's teaching must lead to the complete eradication of craving and suffering, before it can be of value. I am happy enough to find , time and time again, that suffering can be lessened by doing as He said, in any tradition. T: In my case, the more I understand the Buddha words through practicing according to the Dhamma, even when the practice is not yet successful every time in lessening lobha/dosa/moha, the more I see him a million times more wonderful than the Superman, the Bat Man, and all the Super Friends combined. Why? It is because I have come to fully believe that "with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening" as He said in Mulapariyaya Sutta[MN 1]. Thank you very much again for another good conversation. Your friend, Tep === #87065 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:04 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition dhammanusarin Hi KenH, - Try to have a relaxed friendly attitude while you are reading this post. Please keep in mind that we are not debating on a national television ! > >T: Allow me to ask a few more questions. I promise not to annoy you with sutta quotes. ;-)) ------- >KenH: I know that was meant as a joke, but it completely misses the point I was making, doesn't it? The suttas are not annoying. >The ones that use conventional language are very hard for beginners to understand, but they are not annoying. T: I don't know if I missed the point, but I am relieved a little bit to know that you are not annoyed by the sutta quotes or by me. Good for you! Yet I wonder IF the conventional language in the suttas is "very hard to understand", then why do people read the Suttanta-pitaka more than the Abhidhamma? Do not ask me to show the statistics. I know it because many Buddhists I know began their Buddhism study with the suttas. Many monks I know teach only from the suttas. BTW Abhidhamma means "higher Dhamma" as you know it. Thus it is a common sense that the higher Dhamma is more difficult to oridinary people than the suttas. ...................... > >T: 1. What does pa~n~na mean to you that is different from the sutta definition, e.g. AN 8.2 : Pañña Sutta? Also, can you give one real-world case that supports your point? ------------------- >KenH: The panna that is described in the Abhidhamma is exactly the same as the panna that is described in the suttas. T: Can you elaborate a bit more with a real-world example, please? If you find the language of the suttas "very hard to understand", then how do you know that the pa~n~na "that is described in the Abhidhamma is exactly the same" as that in the suttas, e.g. AN 8.2 : Pañña Sutta ? ..................... > >T: 2. If the "Abhidhamma-first" approach is really wonderful, how come the Buddha only taught the Dhamma as we see in the conventional- language discourses? ------------------------ >KenH: What makes you think the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma? I think you will find he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught it to everybody. T: No, I did not say that the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma. He taught the Dhamma (as we read in the Suttanta-pitaka) everyday only in the conventional language to the monks and lay people. Why? It is plain and simple: the disciples and lay people also used the same language in their everyday living. The Abhidhamma-pitaka expounds on the theory underlying the dhammas in the Suttas, but the Suttas never once refer to the detailed information (e.g. the 89 cittas) in the Abhidhamma. Why? One logical explanation is : the Abhidhamma is more difficult to teach disciples who are not arahant, let alone the lay men and women. Where do you find that "he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught it to everybody", and who were the "everybody"? Again, please be accurate in your reply. ........................ >KenH: According to what I have read, many of the people who were lucky enough to hear a discourse directly from the Buddha were unsure of its precise meaning. This sometimes included those to whom a discourse was specifically addressed. The standard procedure for such people was to then go to their teacher (often an arahant in those days) and ask him/her to explain the teaching they had received in a way that was easier to understand. (That is: to explain it in Abhidhamma terms.) T: You might hear it wrong. I am sorry ot say that, but think about the implications of what you just said. First it implies that the Buddha was not as good a teacher as the teacher of those monks who got confused. This is obviously wrong. Secondly, it implies that the Abhidhamma terms are "easier to understand" than the Buddha's words in the conventional language. Again, it is logically and obviously wrong. Since the Buddha discovered the Dhamma Theory of the Abhidhamma himself, why did he not teach the Four Noble Truths in the Sacca Vibhanga Sutta [MN 141], for example, directly using the "Abhidhamma terms" from the beginning? I am looking forward to read you clear explanation soon. Thank you very much. Tep === #87066 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, - It is good to know that you are almost done with the busy schedule. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- On Sat, 14/6/08, Tep wrote: > There was an error in the first message of this thread. Please notice that DN 1 is not Mulapariyaya Sutta, but MN 1 is. > ... > S: Thanks for correcting it Tep. It was my careless error. > > I'm appreciating all your careful study and work and look forward to responding. As I'm away without books and with a limited, slow (and expensive) internet connection, apologies in advance if it takes time. > > I also saw another careless error in one of my messages you quoted, referring to ~naata pari~n~na as the first stage of insight. This is not correct. It is the knowledge applied after the first stages of insight in order for further understanding to develop. (see Vism XX.4 which you quoted). > > Anyway, back to your messages later. > > Thanks in advance, Tep. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > T: Please take your time because I am in no hurry. The 3-part presentation involves some details that require a slow reading anyway. BTW please do not worry about one or two errors in your messages, since I have found more errors in mine ! Regards, Tep === #87067 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:31 pm Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? dhammanusarin Hi Jon, - Your last sentence shows me that you see the ending of our discussion. >Jon: > Nice talking to you, Tep. > T: And I gladly agree ! Thanks. Tep === #87068 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/16 kenhowardau : > Hi Tep, > > > What makes you think the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma? I think you > will find he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught > it to everybody. > Nah, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma to his mum, who was later reborn as Ven Buddhagosa. This explains the latter's affinity for the Abhidhamma. But mothers being what they are, he came up with some major improvements. And therefore, today, it is not the higher teachings for those striving earnestly at the foot of a tree that is being studied, but the Atthasalini & Sammohavinodani in daily life. :-) Cheers Herman #87069 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Herman and Tep, I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. I think I've mentioned that every other time I've answered this question (four thousand at last count) but somehow it slipped my mind. :-) Ken H > > > > What makes you think the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma? I think you > > will find he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught > > it to everybody. > > > > Nah, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma to his mum, who was later reborn as > Ven Buddhagosa. This explains the latter's affinity for the > Abhidhamma. But mothers being what they are, he came up with some > major improvements. And therefore, today, it is not the higher > teachings for those striving earnestly at the foot of a tree that is > being studied, but the Atthasalini & Sammohavinodani in daily life. > :-) #87070 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] poster egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/16 connie : > Herman: Seriously, there's a feeling I get, when discursive thought is absent. > I call that joy. > > > Connie: And there's "discursive thought" again. What is that -- vitakka, vipakka? I've already ventured my "no real aim to it". I equate discursive thought with vocal intention. I don't honestly know what it should be in Pali, I can only go by what others say on the linguistics of matter, and relate it back to what is experienced in which circumstances. Did you mean vipakka or vicara? Cheers Herman #87071 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Dieter, We have been talking about panna and its presence (or absence) in various stages of the Noble Eightfold Path. I have insisted it was present right from the first, merely intellectual, stages of path progress (pariyatti) right up to the end (pativedha). You have quoted Nyanatiloka where he writes: "Regarding the mundane (lokiya) eightfold path, however, its links may arise without the first link, right view." (end quote) (!) I must admit that is a useful quote for your argument. :-) I have never seen anything like it before. All I can say is it is utter rubbish. Nyanatiloka is confusing mundane wholesome consciousness with some kind of Mundane Eightfold Path!* I feel very sure there is no mention of any such path in the Theravadin texts. Mundane wholesome consciousness (without panna) is by no means unique to a Buddha's teaching. It exists before, during and after a sasana. In no way does it form part of either the Noble Eightfold Path or of Satipatthana (also known as patipatti or the Mundane Path (which may be either sixfold or sevenfold)). I am sorry that you have been misled by this strange statement from Nyanatiloka. I would like to assure you it is not true, but (understandably) you won't take my word for that. :-) Please pursue the matter further with someone more knowledgeable. Ken H PS: * Nyanatiloka partly makes up for his wrong statement in the paragraph that follows it: "Here it must also be emphasized that the links of the path not only do not arise one after the other, as already indicated, but also that they, at least in part, arise simultaneously as inseparably associated mental factors in one and the same state of consciousness. Thus, for instance, under all circumstances at least 4 links are inseparably bound up with any kammically wholesome consciousness, namely 2, 6, 7 and 8, i.e. right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration (M. 117), so that as soon as any one of these links arises, the three others also do so. On the other hand, right view is not necessarily present in every wholesome state of consciousness." (end quote) Even so, I see no justification whatsoever for the original [wrong] statement. KH #87072 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition buddhatrue Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Nah, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma to his mum, who was later reborn as > Ven Buddhagosa. This explains the latter's affinity for the > Abhidhamma. LOL! This is very funny. I'm a little miffed I never thought of it! ;- )) Metta, James #87073 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:00 am Subject: to Han: sickness. nilovg Dear Han, I found a text that you may find interesting: why sickness is not always mentioned in the exposition of dukkha. Tiika to Visuddhimagga XVI, 31: In other words, sickness is not an aspect of dukkha that is for all and in every case. Moreover, it is included in pain, mentioned further on among the aspects of dukkha. Nina. #87074 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:22 pm Subject: The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar - VI * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! <...> ________________________________ Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Ñanamoli Thera & Bhikkhu Bodhi THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE LION'S ROAR - VI Majjhima Nikâya 12 - Maha-sihanada Sutta2 Four Kinds of GenerationContinued from previous instalment Commentary: This instalment covers how a Samma-Sambuddha is able to see and understand the four ways beings come into being/are born. 32. "Sariputta, there are these four kinds of generation. What are the four? Egg-born generation, womb-born generation, moisture-born generation and spontaneous generation. Explanation: The Lord Buddha describes to Ven. Sâriputta the four ways in which beings come into being/are born; viz. by hatching from an egg, from the womb, from moisture/liquidity and spontaneously (in an instant). 33. "What is egg-born generation? There are these beings born by breaking out of the shell of an egg; this is called egg-born generation. What is womb-born generation? There are these beings born by breaking out from the caul; this is called womb-born generation. What is moisture-born generation? There are these beings born in a rotten fish, in a rotten corpse, in rotten dough, in a cesspit, or in a sewer; this is called moisture-born generation. What is spontaneous generation? There are gods and denizens of hell and certain human beings and some beings in the lower worlds; this is called spontaneous generation. These are the four kinds of generation.3 Explanation: The Lord Buddha explains the four different ways that being are born: beings born by breaking out of an egg are called the egg born generation; beings born by breaking out of a caul are called the womb born generation, beings born in rotten fish, in a rotten corpse, in rotten dough, in a cesspit or in a sewer are called the moisture-born generation; divine beings, beings of hell, some human beings and some beings in lower worlds are born spontaneously and these beings are called the spontaneous generation.3 31. "Sâriputta, when I know and see thus, should anyone say of me: 'The recluse Gotama does not have any superhuman states, any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. The recluse Gotama (Lord Buddha's name) teaches a Dhamma (merely) hammered out by reasoning, following his own line of inquiry as it occurs to him' — unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell.5 Just as a bhikkhu (monk) possessed of virtue, concentration and wisdom would here and now enjoy final knowledge, so it will happen in this case, I say, that unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell. Explanation: The Lord Buddha explains to Ven. Sâriputta that when he knows and sees such things, if anyone were to wrongly say that the Lord Buddha did not have any superhuman powers, higher knowledge that a high/noble one can have and only teaches the Dhamma from reasoning, following a line of investigation and if that person does not abandon this opinion/view, then as if s/he were carried off and put there s/he would go to hell after death; in the same way a monk who posses virtue/morality (sîla), concentration (samâdhi) and wisdom (paññâ) would be assured of final knowledge/realization (Nibbâna) right here and now. Source: This sutta (discourse) can be found in full here <...> 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 and an alternate translation of this sutta can be found here http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/012-ma\ hasihanada-sutta-e1.html 3. Also refer to The Thirty-one Planes of Existence here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html <.....> #87075 From: han tun Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:32 am Subject: Re: to Han: sickness hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: I found a text that you may find interesting: why sickness is not always mentioned in the exposition of dukkha. Tiika to Visuddhimagga XVI, 31: In other words, sickness is not an aspect of dukkha that is for all and in every case. Moreover, it is included in pain, mentioned further on among the aspects of dukkha. -------------------- Han: Thank you very much for your kind explanation. I also knew some of the reasons why it was not included in dukkha sacca. I had mentioned it in my message 83103. I was only appealing to the Budhha to classify byaadhi as a dukkha sacca. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/83103 [A Burmese Sayadaw said that byaadhi is not included by the Buddha in dukkha sacca because it is not an absolute (ekanta) occurrence in beings. The devas never get sick, brahmas never get sick, and even in humans a person like Venerable Baakula never gets sick. But O Lord, I am not a deva, I am not a brahma, and I am not a Baakula. Please classify byaadhi as a dukkha sacca.] Respectfully, Han #87076 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: I'm Sorry egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/16 kenhowardau : > Dear Venerable Pannabahulo and Howard, > > > There is no need to wait until then, though, is there? Right now is > the best time for insight. So, is there right understanding of a > reality that is arising now? Visible object, for example, . . . :-) > Actually, there's no need to do anything, ever. But that is the nature of kamma, isn't it, that we act, we do stuff, creating without any necessity or good reason the next situation in which again we do something without it being necessary. And with regard to the reality of the present moment, what arose with the opening of my emails was this post of yours. Hardly surprising, is it? Did you intend to send only a visible object? Cheers Herman #87077 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Herman, ========== > To begin, ignorance arises with *all* unwholesome consciousness, this > means that with the arising each time of 'craving', ignorance > accompanies it performing the function of obscuring. So yes it seems > that our understanding of craving too must be quite different. ;-) Herman: OK, so ignorance is a "something" that makes whatever arises appear to be different to what it really is? Suk: I wouldn’t put it exactly this way, for something to appear different to what it really is, likely involves several mental factors. We also have perversion of consciousness, perception and view to consider. I think ignorance simply blinds, obscures, though this would then make it the “root” of the problem, I guess. ========== > So according to the Abhidhamma, when craving, aversion, conceit, > jealousy, wrong view, miserliness etc., arises, there is perception of > permanence, pleasure, self and beauty, if not also 'belief' in the same. > In the suttas, ignorance is described in terms of "not knowing" the > 4NTs. In other words, there is no understanding of experiences as being > nama and rupa and their being impermanent, suffering and non-self. Herman: If that is how one should understand it, what do you make of the following? "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" (A. 111, 101). "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" (A. 111, 102). It does not seem to me to be the case that ignorance plays any role in seeing satisfaction in the world. Suk: Sorry I could not trace the Sutta having no idea what A.111.. referred to. However from what you quoted, this is what I’m guessing: The Buddha was making reference to his life prior to Enlightenment. First, as a prince, experiencing great sense pleasures and then having the wisdom to see through it. Or perhaps this is reference to the various attainments of Jhana practiced under his teachers and finding these to be ‘not the goal’. Second, when during his search he ended up practicing austerity, and later wisely seeing through this as well. Third, when he found the Middle Way / experiencing Nibbana. I would infer from this that he was “ignorant” about the Path up until the time, and that it was exactly this ignorance that caused him to seek answer in both self-indulgence and self torture...? ============ > S: Well, now you know that I can't agree with the above. In the absence > of dana, sila and bhavana, a baby has ignorance all the time. Herman: The way I see it, dana and sila are meaningless in the absence of a concept of beings, both other and self. You are in fact saying that the baby needs to develop self-view in order to not be ignorant. Are you saying that wrong view is a pre-requisite for right view? Suk: Yes Dana and Sila both these require the concept of “beings”. However concept of beings does not equate with ‘self view’. The Buddha reacted to concepts including that of beings. And wrong view arises also with ‘seeing’, ‘visible object’, ‘feeling’ etc. well before a ‘being’ is conceptualized. Far from being a pre-requisite for right view, wrong view is the dhamma which in fact reduces the chance for right view to arise in the future. I’m not sure about this, but I think that quite early on, a baby does conceive of a ‘being’, otherwise of course he wouldn’t later be thinking “mother”. And I guess that at this stage, there is possibility of ‘metta’ arising, what do you think? ============= > some kusala cittas could arise, so long as he hasn't heard the Dhamma, > there is no way that he would ever be mindful of present moment realities. Herman: Ahhhh, now you're talking. Mindfulness. Not your explanation of what it is, or how it arises, but the fact of mindfulness. I agree that the baby lacks the ability to be mindful, But in order for mindfulness to become possible, the baby needs to develop awareness of itself. Suk: :-) You mean that all these years you did not take the mention of ‘patipatti’ or ‘satipatthana’ to be ‘mindfulness’ of the present moment? And do you agree with my above statement about the necessity of hearing the Dhamma being pre-requisite for the kind of mindfulness? But of course, our understanding of mindfulness is quite different, isn’t it? ============= Herman: Well, the point is simply that the baby knows every sensation that is occuring, and doesn't label them, doesn't proliferate, doesn't conceive of sirens or funerals or persons. The baby is unmitigated, unadulterated dsg heaven :-) Suk: As far as experience through the five sense doors which is vipakka is concerned, I guess baby or adult the frequency must be more or less the same. The baby has not acquired language and the ability to label experiences; hence his object of attachment would not include many of the concepts adults have. And perhaps you might say that he has advantage in that he does not form elaborate explanations which serves to justify ‘views’ held as do adults and which thereby are reinforced. But proliferation / papanca are not only about ditthi, but also tanha and mana, besides this is not just reference to elaborate thoughts, but actually point to every instance of these three dhammas arising. A baby obviously has tanha and he has mana, and a baby can ‘cry’ for a long time, therefore he does proliferate a lot. In other words, a baby may have no wrong view, but neither does he have the right view needed to deal with ignorance and those other two papancas. And this makes him *not* the DSG heaven. Here on the DSG what is stressed is the fact of this moment what ever it be, has arisen by conditions, hence every time that there is any understanding even intellectually of this, nothing better could be asked for. Certainly, no projected ideal state would follow from the kind of right understanding, hence any temptation to follow a wrong practice. ;-) ============== Herman: I highlighted mindfulness earlier on in your post. One of the startling features of mindfulness is the realisation that no action (kamma) is ever necessary, forced or caused. There is no condition, in a mindful state, which is causing me to do anything. I always do something, but whatever I do, it is not conditioned, it is unconditioned. Suk: The present moment has already fallen away, what is, is. Between wrong view and right view for example, which ever was the ‘reality’ of the present moment, this would have been accumulated and added to the tendency for the same. Both of these are ‘causes’ which means that the ‘mindfulness’ that you are referring to would condition not only vipakka, but also adds to the possibility of the same arising in the future. That in fact it has arisen now, points to the fact of it having arisen in the past and this is evidence of ‘conditionality’. Conditioned too are the moments preceding the mindfulness and the one which follows. Indeed there is *no* moment which is not conditioned. ============ Herman: We have an obvious problem here, Sukin. You seem to deny action, because everything that happens is down to conditions, as far as you're concerned. Suk: The conditions I assert refer to those between paramattha dhammas. These perform functions and have characteristics individual and general. Fleeting though they are, the citta accompanied by certain mental factors can condition verbal and bodily actions. Therefore I do not deny action, including that some are useful while others are not. What I do deny are views that fail to take into account such facts and instead believe in the need for certain conventional activities to be followed and which then gives ‘intention’ an overriding role it does not have. The result is an insistence on a view of conditionality lying outside of paramattha dhammas and instead be in the realm of concepts. Sitting in a particular pose in order to develop mindfulness by anchoring on breath is one example, and also your own ideas regarding ‘social influence’ and the need thereby to be physically removed from that. With the kind of ‘conceptual conditionality’, it is understandable why the position taken by some of us here is seen as “inaction”. If what you “do” lies more or less in the Middle, sure our rejection of it *will* appear to be the extreme of “denial”…. ============= Herman: But you acknowledge that you just don't know what those conditions are. But I'm saying that taking the position that everything is down to conditions, is an act, and that there are no conditions which are sufficient to explain you taking that position, if you are mindful. I deny that conditions can explain the reality of any action taken mindfully. Suk: I don’t know the details of conditions involved, I don’t even really know “one” condition directly. What I know is mostly with suttamaya and cintamaya panna. However even at this level, I am confident enough to know that you or anyone else won’t be able to persuade me to change my mind about this, that mindfulness and every other moment gone before and which follows are *conditioned* realities. ============ > Conditions are that I feel very sleepy and must go now. Isn't going to > sleep a good example of anatta and conditionality? :-)) Herman: No, there is nothing making you go to bed. Still, you go, and that is kamma, not anatta. You cannot have your anatta and your kamma, Sukin, sorry :-) Suk: It looks like you need to reevaluate your understanding of both kamma and anatta. But I hope someone else will help you with that. ;-) Metta, Sukin #87078 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:08 am Subject: Mettea, Ch 8, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Should one make an offering to an arahat or to Brahmå? When one has right understanding one will know that it is better to make an offering to an arahat who has eradicated all defilements. He has accomplished the task which has to be done and there is nothing more to be done by him since all defilements have been completely eradicated. Although the son of the brahminee had attained arahatship, the brahminee still paid respect to Brahmå and she made continuously offerings of food to him. The brahma planes are far away from the human plane, the distance to those planes is immeasurable. Brahmas cannot eat food offered by humans. The brahminee did not know how the brahma world could be reached, but she offered food to Brahmå and in her ignorance she mumbled words to him over and over again. The Såratthappakåsiní, the Commentary to the Kindred Sayings, gives an elaboration of the story about the Brahminee: When the mother of Brahmadeva had seen her son approaching her house, she went outside to welcome him. She invited him to come inside and to sit on a seat she had prepared. It was her custom to offer rice cakes to Brahmå and also on that day she performed sacrificial worship. Her whole house was decorated with fresh green leaves and puffed rice, with precious stones and flowers. She had put up different kinds of flags and banners and she had laid out water vessels. She had lighted candles contained in candle holders which were decorated with garlands and many fragrant things. People went around in procession. The brahminee herself had got up very early in the morning. After she had bathed herself with fragrant water taken from sixteen pots, she put on beautiful cloths and precious jewellery. She invited her son, the arahat, to come inside, but she had no intention to offer him even a ladle of rice. She only wanted to attend to Mahå Brahmå, to make sacrificial worship to him. She filled a golden tray with rice, prepared with ghee, honey and sugar. She carried the tray to the backyard which she had decorated with fresh green leaves. She had put a lump of rice on each of the four corners of the tray and took one lump at a time in her hand while the ghee was dripping on her arms. She knelt down on the ground and recited an invitation to Mahå Brahmå to partake of the food. In the meantime Brahmå Sahampati inhaled the fragrance of the síla of the arahat which rose to all deva planes and was diffused even as far as the brahma planes. The odours of the human world do not reach the brahma planes, it is only the fragrance of the excellent qualities of arahats which can be diffused as far as that. It occurred to Sahampati that he should admonish the brahminee and explain to her what would be the right thing for her to do. He said to her: “You have not even given a ladle of rice to your son after he sat down, although he is most worthy of offerings. Instead you have only thought of offering food to Mahå Brahmå. The situation is the same as when someone who has scales for weighing discards them and just uses his hands, or someone who has a drum does not make use of it but beats on his stomach instead, or someone who has a fire does not make use of it but uses a firefly instead. ” Sahampati wanted to induce her to change her mind, to offer food to her son the arahat instead of offering it to Mahå Brahmå. He said to himself: “I will cause her wrong view to disappear and save her from an unhappy plane. I will convert her to the Buddha’s teachings so that she will accumulate an immeasurable treasure, namely kusala kamma which will produce as result rebirth in a heavenly plane.” The distance from here to the brahma planes is difficult to fathom. If a stone which has the size of a tall building would travel from the lowest brahma plane as fast as 48.000 yojanas (one yojana being 16 km) a day, it would take four months before it would reach the earth. The lowest brahma plane is as far as that, and the higher planes are still further away. Sahampati said: “Very far indeed is the world of Brahmå, to whom you, Brahminee, are making the offering of food. The real way to attain to the world of Brahmå are the kusala jhånacittas of the four stages of jhåna. These give as results the four types of vipåka jhånacittas which arise in the brahma planes. You do not know the way to attain the world of Brahmå, you are only mumbling some prayers. Those who are in brahma planes keep alive by jhåna rapture and not by taking rice or drinking boiled milk. You should not trouble yourself with things which are not the real condition for the attainment to the world of Brahmå.” When Sahampati had spoken thus and respectfully took leave of the Brahminee, he pointed to the arahat and spoke again: “Brahminee, your son Brahmadeva has eradicated all defilements, he is the highest among devas, the highest among brahmas. He is no more disturbed by defilements. He is an almsman who has the habit of asking, who does not provide a livelihood for someone else. The great Brahmadeva who entered your house for alms is the person who is most worthy to receive an offering of food.” This is the story related by the Commentary. _______ Nina. #87079 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: I'm Sorry kenhowardau Hi Herman, > > And with regard to the reality of the present moment, what arose with > the opening of my emails was this post of yours. Hardly surprising, is > it? Did you intend to send only a visible object? > You obviously don't like the Dhamma that is in the texts; why don't you write your own? You could write a sutta called The World: "What, ultimately, is the world, good Herman?" "There is the eye, there is eye consciousness, and there are emails . . ." It doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe you should leave things the way they are. Ken H #87080 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:40 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Sukin and all (p.s to Sarah) > Here on the DSG what is stressed is the fact of > this moment what ever it be, has arisen by conditions, hence every time > that there is any understanding even intellectually of this, nothing > better could be asked for. This can't be right! Yes, this moment has arisen by conditions, but to think that "nothing better could be asked for" when defilements have arisen and had their way surely be tantamount to the worst kind of wrong view, because being content with wrong deeds (as you are doing here if the moment involves transgression) just because there is intellectual understanding that they are conditioned is surely tantamount to saying that the results of wrong deeds don't matter and that the Buddha's promise that it is possible to avoid evil and do good is a false promise. If you reflect on this and still feel what you wrote above is true, that's fine, maybe I misunderstood you. (But I doubt it, because the above sounds like the very poor response AS gave to the person who was worried about commiting serious transgressions...) Honestly, you folks are nice people I'm sure but I *do not* find this sort of thing taught in the suttanta. If one were to live by the above, it would be a disaster and people would suffer for it. (Ooops...dhammas would suffer...) Metta, Phil p.s thanks for your long response to the "cold Dhamma" post, Sarah. I can't get into it any further because I will just be repeating myself and saying uncharitable, hurtful things, which I *will* avoid because avoiding harsh and hurtful speech is definitely "something better to be asked for" and I will aspire to it and practice it rather than sitting in intellectual bliss at my grand insight into the conditionality of my harsh speech. Not for me, baby! Onwards into wholesome behaviour in body, speech and mind. Yes, reflection on the conditionality of one's defilements, the powerful pull they have. This afternoon I was looking at porn again online. Conditioned in a powerful way. It will happen again whether I aspire not to or not. But I will aspire not to. And practice in that direction. That's the message I get from the Buddha. To stop doing the things that hurt ourselves and others. Man, it seems so obvious that that's where we start! Sorry, I will keep shooting off these posts now and then rather than getting into proper, adultlike discussion. Maybe someday! :) #87081 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/17 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman and Tep, > > I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of > the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. I think I've > mentioned that every other time I've answered this question (four > thousand at last count) but somehow it slipped my mind. :-) Do you realise that much of what you take to be Abhidhamma is not to be found in the Abhidhamma at all, and even less so in the Suttas, but only in the Abhidhamma commentaries of Ven Buddhagosa? Are you a follower of the teachings of Ven Buddhagosa by choice? Cheers Herman #87082 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:19 am Subject: What is found in Buddhagosa but not in Abhidhamma itself? philofillet Hi Herman and all > Do you realise that much of what you take to be Abhidhamma is not to > be found in the Abhidhamma at all, and even less so in the Suttas, but > only in the Abhidhamma commentaries of Ven Buddhagosa? Are you a > follower of the teachings of Ven Buddhagosa by choice? Yes, this should be elucidated. I guess it's familiar for most people reading here and I've read here and there about it but have forgotten. What kind of things are there again? The 17 moments of citta process is one, I think.... or not? Maybe not. Please refresh our memory, Herman or anyone. I assume that this is not a particularly contentious point, that it's agreed that there are new things in Buddhagosa not found in the tipitaka. Thanks. Honestly, just asking for clarification, not to make a point. Metta, Phil #87083 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:28 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again > p.s thanks for your long response to the "cold Dhamma" post, > Sarah. I can't get into it any further because I will just be > repeating myself and saying uncharitable, hurtful things, which I > *will* avoid because avoiding harsh and hurtful speech is > definitely "something better to be asked for" and I will aspire to > it and practice it Thinking about this as I cooked. Yes, not saying hurtful things is avoiding harmful behaviour, but purposefully not responding to people's posts is also hurtful. From now on I will not write any post containing any opinion or statement without making an effort to respond to responses. So I will not write anymore opinions since I don't have time to discuss, but will only ask questions, as I just did. Starting now, so won't be able to respond to your post, Sarah, or Sukin's if he responds to what I wrote. But it will be the last time for a good little while that I don't respond to people responding to my loudmouth opinions. BTW, I appreciated Azita's comment to James the other day, though it might have been a little cryptic until she clarified. We have to be aware of the potential consequences of things we do, say and think. That's in the wonderful MN sutta where the Buddha tells Rahula to reflect on what he does through body, speech and mind before, during and after he does it. For me, avoiding harmful behaviour such as wrong speech is much, much more importnat than developing intellectual understanding of deep and subtle Dhamma points. That might change someday....well, it will have to change if there is to ever be a real liberation. But first things first. No hells, thank you. Metta, Phil #87084 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, > > --- On Sat, 14/6/08, buddhatrue wrote: > > J:>> >Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two > with > > the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and > > heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at > > grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, > > ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is > > red hot. > > http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ bodhi/bps- essay_23. > html > > .... > > S: As I said, the 'disgust' and 'fear' referred to here do not > > refer to aversion or fear about our akusala as we usually > understand such terms. > > James: It seems to me that you are just repeating yourself. I asked > you to explain what "disgust" and "fear" really mean if they don't > mean disgust and fear. > ... > S: All I can say is that hiri and ottappa see the shame in akusala. Akusala is shameful like the ends of the iron rod above. > > The Buddha understood the shame in smallest faults, in all akusala. Whatever words are used, the Buddha didn't have disgust or fear with unpleasant feeling. James: I am not referring to the Buddha. I don't believe that the Buddha or other arahants would ever experience hiri and ottappa. An arahant doesn't have the impetus to feel moral dread and shame because all mental activities are pure. Do you believe arahants experience hiri and ottappa? I don't. > ... > J:>And, remember, hiri and ottappa may or may not be accompanied by > panna. Everyday folks, never hearing of the Dhamma, experience hiri > and ottappa- as well as those on the path to enlightenment. > ... > S: Good point and true. There is hiri and ottappa accompanying every moment of kusala. So at all moments of dana, sila or bhavana, there is hiri and ottappa. James: Is this what the Abhidhamma says? I don't think that hiri and ottappa arise at every moment of kusala. Sarah, where are you getting your information? I am just trying to get an understanding of hiri and ottappa from the suttas. Your understanding of the two qualities seems to be completely different. > > I didn't think the other examples you gave of disgust, fear and unpleasant feelings had anything to do with hiri and ottappa and I won't be following your mental experiment:-). James: You sound offended. Sorry if I offended you in anyway. I thought my example was a clear example of hiri and ottappa, but we seem to be on different pages in regards to this issue. > > Thanks for your consideration and sharing of your understanding. We can just agree to differ here. James: Yeah, I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree because you aren't giving any sources for your interpretation. If you see hiri and ottappa arising with every moment of kusala then they completely lose their meaning and their effectiveness. It seems to me that anyone who follows this line of thought could suddenly find themselves committing extremely evil acts and having no means to stop themselves. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Metta, James ps. This is a central issue to Buddhism so agreeing to disagree is not really acceptable in my eyes. This is even more important than the meditation issue. #87085 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility dhammanusarin Dear KenH & Herman, - The following conversation vividly shows a big difference in the way you two believe in the old-time Buddhist story. We should review the Kalama Sutta often. ................... Hi Herman and Tep, I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. I think I've mentioned that every other time I've answered this question (four thousand at last count) but somehow it slipped my mind. :-) Ken H > > > > What makes you think the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma? I think > > you > > will find he taught it to devas and to Sariputta, who then taught > > it to everybody. > > > > Nah, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma to his mum, who was later reborn > as Ven Buddhagosa. This explains the latter's affinity for the > Abhidhamma. But mothers being what they are, he came up with some > major improvements. And therefore, today, it is not the higher > teachings for those striving earnestly at the foot of a tree that is > being studied, but the Atthasalini & Sammohavinodani in daily life. > :-) ................... Dear Ken, I think I know why you've failed four thousand times so far, and I know you will continue to fail again, unless you become more effective and more credible. Tep === #87086 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: I'm Sorry egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/17 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > >> >> And with regard to the reality of the present moment, what arose with >> the opening of my emails was this post of yours. Hardly surprising, is >> it? Did you intend to send only a visible object? > You obviously don't like the Dhamma that is in the texts; why don't you > write your own? You could write a sutta called The World: > "What, ultimately, is the world, good Herman?" "There is the eye, there > is eye consciousness, and there are emails . . ." > > It doesn't sound right, does it? Maybe you should leave things the way > they are. What doesn't sound right is that you should teach me that the email you intended is not an email you typed is not an email you sent is not an email I read. It doesn't sound right that you deny what you do, even while you do it. What gives? Do you deny kamma? I like your idea of writing my own sutta. How about this one: "What, ultimately, is the world, good Herman?" "What is ultimately, good Lord?" "The world denying itself, good Herman!" Delighted, Herman was mindful of whatever he did and didn't do. Cheers Herman #87087 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:00 am Subject: Perfections Corner (186) nichiconn Dear Friends, the epilogue continued: "Discriminating thoughts of delight in sense pleasures and existence, and of discontent with their pacification, are the defilement of the perfection of renunciation. Discriminating thoughts of "I" and "mine" are the defilement of the perfection of wisdom..." Even when we think in that way of pa~n~naa, it is already defiled, we have attachment to the thought of "my pa~n~naa". We read further on about the defilement of the perfections: "Discriminating thoughts leaning to listlessness and restlessness, (are defilements) of the perfection of energy; discriminating thoughts of oneself and others, (are defilements) of the perfection of patience; discriminating thoughts of avowing to have seen what was not seen, etc., (are defilements) of the perfection of truthfulness; discriminating thoughts perceiving flaws in the requisites of enlightenment and virtues in their opposites, (are defilements) of the perfection of determination; discriminating thoughts confusing what is harmful with what is beneficial, (are defilements) of the perfection of loving-kindness; and discriminating thoughts over the desirable and undesirable, (are defilements) of the perfection of equanimity. Thus the defilements should be understood." At times we can have equanimity with regard to the undesirable but not with regard to the desirable. The more we understand the Dhamma in detail, the more will we be inclined to practise the Dhamma. Formerly we may have thought that we could not practise the perfections, that they were beyond our reach. However, if we see the benefit of each of the perfections, and if we gradually develop them, they will eventually become accomplished. We can verify for ourselves that listening to the Dhamma and studying it is of the utmost benefit. It will enable us to apply the Dhamma in our daily lives, to develop satipa.t.thaana together with all the perfections. .. the end. The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment www.zolag.co.uk Copyright © Sujin Boriharnwanaket connie #87088 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Herman & Tep) - In a message dated 6/17/2008 12:24:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Herman and Tep, I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. I think I've mentioned that every other time I've answered this question (four thousand at last count) but somehow it slipped my mind. :-) Ken H ================================= I have confidence that all that the Buddha actually taught was perfect Dhamma, and that it is not a compliment to him to say that he taught higher dhamma in just some of the suttas. Moreover, 'Abhidhamma' with an uppercase 'A' refers specifically to the 7-book baske,and it does NOT occur within the suttas. The best that one can say is that the Buddha's Dhamma, besides being found in the sutta pitaka, can also be found in the other two baskets. It is the *Dhamma* in its fullness that is the pinnacle, and it is no compliment to the Buddha to treat just Abhidhamma as the pinnacle that the rest only reaches in part. That Abhidhammic triumphalism is something I find perverse. With metta, Howard #87089 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Phil, Whether you respond or not: ============= > Here on the DSG what is stressed is the fact of > this moment what ever it be, has arisen by conditions, hence every time > that there is any understanding even intellectually of this, nothing > better could be asked for. Phil: This can't be right! Sukin: You mean to say that a moment of Right Understanding of dhammas which in fact reflects a correct understanding of the Buddha’s Teachings is inferior to some ‘self’ driven practice rooted in self-concern and claiming it to be what the Buddha taught? But of course you only misunderstood my statement. ;-) ============= Phil: Yes, this moment has arisen by conditions, but to think that "nothing better could be asked for" when defilements have arisen and had their way surely be tantamount to the worst kind of wrong view, because being content with wrong deeds Sukin: I was limiting myself to the arising of Right View which includes not being concerned about the past or future. Besides that would be a moment of kusala of far greater value than Sila of any level, especially given that it is a dhamma which arises only within the Buddha sasana. This does not imply as I’ve said before, that akusala is tolerated, let alone encouraged. It seems to me that your concern about Sila is perverted by self view, so much so that expressions of right view as I have made above, is not only downplayed, but used to then put forward your own wrong understanding of the Dhamma even more strongly. But you’re going on and on about the need for Sila only impresses those who are attached to ‘self’ like you are. Sorry. =============== Phil: (as you are doing here if the moment involves transgression) just because there is intellectual understanding that they are conditioned is surely tantamount to saying that the results of wrong deeds don't matter and that the Buddha's promise that it is possible to avoid evil and do good is a false promise. Sukin: What the Buddha promised is that Right View will lead to all good being developed, including the eradication of the kilesas and this I believe to be so, most especially when I’m professing the need to keep developing Right Intellectual understanding. But do you believe this as well Phil? From what you have been writing, it doesn’t seem like it!! =============== Phil: If you reflect on this and still feel what you wrote above is true, that's fine, maybe I misunderstood you. (But I doubt it, because the above sounds like the very poor response AS gave to the person who was worried about commiting serious transgressions...) Sukin: Indeed you have misunderstood. However this is not a matter lack of clarity and need hence for more explanation, but about “view”. With regard to this I have to say that I don’t feel so optimistic about you changing your mind just yet. ============= Phil: Honestly, you folks are nice people I'm sure but I *do not* find this sort of thing taught in the suttanta. If one were to live by the above, it would be a disaster and people would suffer for it. Sukin: Your imagination is going where it likes, perhaps it is projected into the future. But seriously, as of today, have you seen anywhere on or out of the internet, any group of people talking with greater sincerity and understanding about the value of kusala and the harm of akusala. Mind you, you must be able to discriminate between talk about “I do good” where the real focus of attention is on the “I”, from talk about “good” separate from any self concern. ============= Phil: (Ooops...dhammas would suffer...) Sukin: This actually shows that you *never* did understand any of what A. Sujin has said. ============= Phil: p.s thanks for your long response to the "cold Dhamma" post, Sarah. I can't get into it any further because I will just be repeating myself and saying uncharitable, hurtful things, which I *will* avoid because avoiding harsh and hurtful speech is definitely "something better to be asked for" Sukin: Strange isn’t it and see how far your idealism has taken you? You dismiss the value of understanding the present moment, preferring instead to stick with your ideals. In any case you are not talking here about Sila which is abstention from akusala, but rather the ‘avoidance of a situation’. And I’m sorry to say, “self view” is *never* good. ============== Phil: and I will aspire to it and practice it rather than sitting in intellectual bliss at my grand insight into the conditionality of my harsh speech. Not for me, baby! Onwards into wholesome behaviour in body, speech and mind. Yes, reflection on the conditionality of one's defilements, the powerful pull they have. Sukin: A good script spun by ‘self view’ to perpetuate itself! ============== Phil: This afternoon I was looking at porn again online. Conditioned in a powerful way. It will happen again whether I aspire not to or not. But I will aspire not to. And practice in that direction. That's the message I get from the Buddha. To stop doing the things that hurt ourselves and others. Man, it seems so obvious that that's where we start! Sukin: One thing, leaving aside the fact that the development of right understanding brings about gradually, more kusala of all kinds; an interest in Dhamma itself can grow to become priority over everything else. But this must be *right* Dhamma, otherwise there is no saying which is worse, indulgence in porn, or mental masturbation involving idealistic thoughts conditioned by *wrong* Dhamma. I know this will put you off and would reduce the chance of you ever wanting to discuss ‘the beginner of Dhamma’ with me. I think you are wrong about “where we start”. Are you willing to discuss this? ============= Phil: Sorry, I will keep shooting off these posts now and then rather than getting into proper, adultlike discussion. Maybe someday! :) Sukin: Like this time, in the future there is no control. Whether or not we see change in our behavior to any extent, don’t you think that it comes truly only with the development of right understanding? That any other way will only be one kind of suppression or the other and that as long as the tendencies remain; there is no guarantee what will arise when? Sukin #87090 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > Given that this relationship between preceding and succeeding cittas > has come to be conventionally designated, I assume that this > relationship can become known. Yes, I agree that the conditions that hold between dhammas can be directly known. This knowledge is an aspect of the development of direct knowledge of dhammas themselves. > This relationship is a knowable reality. It depends what you mean here. Conditions holding between dhammas are knowable, but there is no entity to be known apart from the individual dhammas that are so related. > I assume from your next paragraph, in which you deny the > possibility of factors "external" to a stream, ... Not quite. I'm saying that as there is no stream in the ultimate sense, there can be no internal or external in relation to a stream. Of course, it's still possible to talk about (conventionally) a stream and to designate things as internal and external in relation to it, but we may have to identify how we are conceptualising things if that line of discussion is to proceed. > ... that the knowing of > this very real relationship between succeeding and preceding cittas > can be part and parcel of this very "stream". In other words, you are > saying that it is possible for a stream to know itself, and refer to > itself, if only partly. In purely conventional terms, this could be said. > > Hoping this clarifies. > > Well, I hope that I have clarified for you that if "stream of > consciousness" is an approved designation for a knowable set of > relationships, then the designations "I", "me" or "self" are to be > preferred because they 1) refer to exactly the same reality and 2) > require far less typing. Happy to agree. After all, that's the approach taken by the Buddha in the discourses ;-)) Jon #87091 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility sukinderpal Dear Tep, Tep: > > The following conversation vividly shows a big difference in the way > you two believe in the old-time Buddhist story. We should review the > Kalama Sutta often. > > Dear Ken, I think I know why you've failed four thousand times so > far, and I know you will continue to fail again, unless you become > more effective and more credible. > Sukin: By the above are you saying that you the story is not true? Metta, Sukin #87092 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 jonoabb Hi Herman > On reading your post, the thought arose that I could read all the > suttas of a representative body of Buddhist teachings, like the 152 > suttas of the MN, and index them as to whether the audience was > householders, and whether the message was a recommendation from the > Buddha that the householders life was a good context in which > understanding would develop. You would of course get a low ratio of positives on that question; but I don't think it'd be a particularly useful question to ask. The Buddha frequently praised the *monk's life, properly lived*, but not the *monk's life* per se. The distinction is important (see the suttas on the perils of being a monk with bad sila). So it is not a case of one lifestyle being necessarily more suitable than another for the development of insight. And while you're browsing through MN, see the sutta about the layperson who attained stream-entry on listening to the Buddha, and then left to attend to his regular business (no suggestion by the Buddha that he should do other than that). (But you may not find this sutta on the ati website.) > I then realised that I already knew, and didn't need to be convinced > of what the outcome of such a statistical analysis would be. I also > realised that I would be going to all that effort in vain, if my hope > was that some people would realise that these teachings of the Buddha > were not directed at people with their snouts in the trough of > sensuality and fully intent on keeping them there (Do you like the > turn of phrase ? :-)) Love the turn of phrase, but disagree with the sentiment ;-)). The development of insight is for all, including those with strong attachments to worldly pleasures. Of course, such attachments are not a help to the development of insight, but neither are they a hindrance, except of course when manifesting. We are all "people with their snouts in the trough of sensuality" and for the most part we are "fully intent on keeping them there", with the moments of detachment from the delights within the trough being relatively few. Jon #87093 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:17 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > BTW, I appreciated Azita's comment to James the other day, though > it might have been a little cryptic until she clarified. We have to > be aware of the potential consequences of things we do, say and > think. That's in the wonderful MN sutta where the Buddha tells > Rahula to reflect on what he does through body, speech and mind > before, during and after he does it. > > For me, avoiding harmful behaviour such as wrong speech is much, > much more importnat than developing intellectual understanding of > deep and subtle Dhamma points. That might change someday....well, it > will have to change if there is to ever be a real liberation. But > first things first. No hells, thank you. James: You mention me in this post so I am going to respond. I don't think that you are having the right frame of mind about Right Speech. Right Speech isn't about always saying nice things all the time. Take this quote from a sutta: As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, would the Tathagata say words that are unendearing & disagreeable to others?" "Prince, there is no categorical yes-or-no answer to that."... [1] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them. [2] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them. [3] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. [4] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them. [5] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them. [6] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html#criteria So, we see here that the Buddha didn't always say words that were endearing and agreeable, he sometimes said words that were unendearing and disagreeable- if it was the proper time for saying them and it would be beneficial. So, what is the proper time for saying such words? In every instance throughout the suttas when the Buddha uses harsh speech toward someone, it was because that person had an inflated ego (thought he/she was better than others). The Buddha would use harsh speech in such an instance because those with inflated egos will only respond to harsh speech. They have to be knocked down a peg or two or they won't see how they are wrong. This particular sutta was in reference to Devadatta. Devadatta was getting full of himself and asked the Buddha if he could take over the Sangha. The Buddha not only said no, but referred to Devadatta as a "glob of spit". Why didn't the Buddha just say no in a nice and sweet way? After all, Devadatta got angry from this confrontation and later tried to kill the Buddha. Couldn't that have been avoided if the Buddha had just said nice and sweet words to Devadatta? No, because he had an inflated ego. You cannot tell the truth to someone with an inflated ego in a nice and sweet way. It just doesn't work! I'm sorry to say, K. Sujin and the followers of KS obviously have huge, inflated egos. They think they are "special" and that they alone follow the "true Dhamma". They talk down to anyone who disagrees and don't even entertain for one second that they could be wrong. If you want to speak the truth to them, it is impossible to do so in a way which is pleasing and pleasant to them. There is no negative kamma-vipaka for speaking the truth- even if it upsets other people. Don't worry; you won't be reborn in hell for speaking the truth. Metta, James #87094 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:21 am Subject: poster nichiconn Dear Herman, Herman: I equate discursive thought with vocal intention. I don't honestly know what it should be in Pali, I can only go by what others say on the linguistics of matter, and relate it back to what is experienced in which circumstances. Did you mean vipakka or vicara? Connie: I meant to type "vikappa" but see it ended up "vipakka". Now I find I'm amused thinking that's pretty much what happens all the time. We think we know what our intentions are but then there's vipakka and "that wasn't what I meant". peace, connie #87095 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended. nilovg Dear Han and Tep, Han, thank you for giving the sutta and the Pali. Op 15-jun-2008, om 11:35 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I do not know whether you have earlier referred to SN 22.106 which > clearly indicates that the person that has fully understood is an > arahant. > > SN 22.106 Pari~n~neyya Sutta: To Be Fully Understood > (translation by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi) > At Saavatthi > “Bhikkhus, I will teach you things that should be fully understood, > full understanding, and the person that has fully understood. > Listen to that ….. > > “And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? > Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. > Feeling ….. Perception ….. Volitional formations ….. Consciousness > is something that should be fully understood. > > “And what, bhikkhus, is full understanding? > The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction > of delusion: this is called full understanding. > > “And who, bhikkhus, is the person that has fully understood? > It should be said: the arahant, the venerable one of such a name > and clan. This is called the person that has fully > understood.” ( pari~n~naataavii puggaloti.) > -------------- N: As I read: And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. Feeling ….. Perception ….. Volitional formations ….. Consciousness is something that should be fully understood. These are the five khandhas, or nama and rupa. How does one become an arahat? That is along way but one can begin now, by being aware of the nama and rupa appearing at this moment. I find it clear that this is a long process of developing understanding stage by stage. We live in the ocean of concepts of persons, possessions, things we want to get for ourselves. We believe that we see persons and things, but what is seen, experienced through eyesnese only? Visible object. Seeing is conditioned by eyesense and visible object, no self who sees. All these realities have to be known thoroughly, over and over again. There has to be ~nata pari~n~na and tiira.na pari~n~na, investigating with awareness and understanding, and then becoming more detached, giving up, pahaana pari~n~na, leading on to the complete giving up of all defilements. I find it clear that this long process is explained by way of the stages of insight and the three pari~n~nas. The sutta above tells us: what are the things (dhammas) that should be fully understood? This shows us a development, eventually leading to arahatship. Nina. #87096 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition dhammanusarin Dear Howard (KenH, Herman, Sukin), - I concur with your following right view, Howard : ================= I have confidence that all that the Buddha actually taught was perfect Dhamma, and that it is not a compliment to him to say that he taught higher dhamma in just some of the suttas. Moreover, 'Abhidhamma' with an uppercase 'A' refers specifically to the 7-book baske,and it does NOT occur within the suttas. The best that one can say is that the Buddha's Dhamma, besides being found in the sutta pitaka, can also be found in the other two baskets. It is the *Dhamma* in its fullness that is the pinnacle, and it is no compliment to the Buddha to treat just Abhidhamma as the pinnacle that the rest only reaches in part. That Abhidhammic triumphalism is something I find perverse. With metta, Howard ================== In other words, the underlying Dhamma in the Tipitaka is genuine and consistent. Every good Buddhist has the responsibility to find out for himself/herself what is the Dhamma and what is not, then make a real effort to verify the Truths through application in his/her life. Tep === #87097 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - In response to my earlier message to our good friend Kenh, [The following conversation vividly shows a big difference in the way you two believe in the old-time Buddhist story. We should review the Kalama Sutta often. Dear Ken, I think I know why you've failed four thousand times so far, and I know you will continue to fail again, unless you become more effective and more credible.] you asked : > Sukin: By the above are you saying that you the story is not true? > Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained. Tep === #87098 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Fri, 13/6/08, Alex wrote: A:>What did Phil do? Drugs? ... S: You'd have to search the archives or ask Phil. .... A:> Well, Sarakani failed in training (disrobed) and was given to drink. Eventually he became a sotapanna. .... S: Yes. This is the point - if there are the right conditions, right understanding can develop anytime. Any dhammas, even extreme akusala, can be (and must be) seen for what it is. .... A:> Some people became Arahants even though they comitted suicide (Citta, Vakkhali) due to being unable to tolerate the pain. ... S: Akusala, followed by stages of insight. .... A: >What is important is to recover and move on! Don't give up! ... S: Yes, well said. By development more wisdom, there will be less akusala. Accumulations have to really be seen and known for what they are. .... >>S: The sotapanna (or the one well on the way to becoming a sotapanna) will not perform such transgressions because of the keen understanding of akusala arising at the present moment. > .... A:Sarakani? ... S: Good question. The point still applies. In his case, as I recall, as he attained the stages of insight and became a sotapanna, the effects of the alcohol left his body. Check the commentary:) .... >> S: The point is, as I mentioned in another post, the feeling upset and sorry is totally useless. >>> A: >Asking for forgiveness is important and making a determination not to do it again may require factors such as: feeling upset and sorry. ... S: We need to distinguish between the wholesome states, such as wholesome resolves, seeing the shame in such deeds, wisdom and wise reflection vs the unwholesome distress, self-pity, upset and so on. These unwholesome states don't help. The most precious kusala is right understanding of the present realities. ... A: Phil don't give up! ... S: I appreciate your kind wishes to everyone here, Alex. Metta, Sarah ======= #87099 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:57 am Subject: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended. dhammanusarin Dear Nina (and Han, Herman, KenH, Howard), - Below is your interpretation of SN 22.106, Pari~n~neyya Sutta (To Be Fully Understood), that is heavily leaning on the words of Ven. Bhuddhaghosa in the Visuddhimagga plus Khun Sujin's interpretations of the Dhamma. So it is, without any doubt, pretty complicated and IMHO far from the original words of the Pari~n~neyya Sutta ! N: As I read: And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. Feeling .. Perception .. Volitional formations .. Consciousness is something that should be fully understood. These are the five khandhas, or nama and rupa. How does one become an arahat? That is along way but one can begin now, by being aware of the nama and rupa appearing at this moment. I find it clear that this is a long process of developing understanding stage by stage. We live in the ocean of concepts of persons, possessions, things we want to get for ourselves. We believe that we see persons and things, but what is seen, experienced through eyesnese only? Visible object. Seeing is conditioned by eyesense and visible object, no self who sees. All these realities have to be known thoroughly, over and over again. There has to be ~nata pari~n~na and tiira.na pari~n~na, investigating with awareness and understanding, and then becoming more detached, giving up, pahaana pari~n~na, leading on to the complete giving up of all defilements. I find it clear that this long process is explained by way of the stages of insight and the three pari~n~nas. The sutta above tells us: what are the things (dhammas) that should be fully understood? This shows us a development, eventually leading to arahatship. Nina. T: Have you ever listened to economists giving their individual interpretations of the world economy on a national television? Each economist paints his mental picture that is tainted with his/her belief of what the future may look like. The question is : how do non-economists know which one of them is correct, or none of them is correct? In the same token, how do I know whose interpretations of the Dhamma is right or wrong when all commentators are entitled to their own individual views? I think the answer is : Forget about what they say. Study the original Buddha's words in the suttas and earnestly apply the Teachings (with the best of our ability) in our lives, until we see and know the Dhamma ourselves (yathabhutam pajanati). Tep === #87100 From: "colette" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: poster ksheri3 Good Morning Herman, I'LL DRINK TO THAT! Soooo, what gave you a clue concerning one of my techniques? > > H (#86927): If a practice you are engaging in does not lead to joy, cease doing what you are doing. > > > > C: There's that "joy" word again. Surely, the joy the texts talk about isn't the same as that in sayings like "eat, drink and be merry" or "ignorance is bliss". Not saying you mean it's something associated with ordinary old sense pleasure, which is surely what most of my being "happy in my walk" is, but what do you mean? > > > > There's a feeling I get ........(when I look to the west > And my spirit is crying for leaving - Led Zeppelin) > > Seriously, there's a feeling I get, when discursive thought is absent. > I call that joy. > colette: I'll drink to that too. Hey, are you trying to get me drunk with power? That's something I've always been envious of you scholars doing, how easily you apply such a huge vocabulary, in this case the word "discursive" is a complete word with it's own thoughts and direct meanings. You take it, here, out of the field of academia where textbooks were written for a single purpose, getting the point across, and that's the only purpose for the text book where everything comes out nice and easy and rosey for those that prefer seeing life through the lenses, through the obscuration, of Rose Colored Glasses. In life 99% of anything doesn't come out nice and easy, so why should the study of Buddhism be something that life is not when the only point for Buddhism is to help people live? Sure my ideas are radical, sure my methodology is bizare to say the least, BUT IT WORKS! A lot of people cannot accept something working that is not under the guidance of an instruction manual or magazine such as Popular Mechanics, et al. The joy is the simple satisfaction of actually knowing that you or I or anybody is participating in this. The rigidity and ignorance of conformity is such a negative quality but monks in a prison or sububranites in a prison (pick your poison which one you choose since they are both imprisoned by their own free will) where it must satisfy a publishers book and gratify the publisher and the author of the book to have any applicability and meaning, are exactly like that. Have a good day buddy. toodles, colette #87101 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Phil and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > --- On Fri, 13/6/08, Alex wrote: > A:>What did Phil do? Drugs? > ... > S: You'd have to search the archives or ask Phil. > .... > > A:> Well, Sarakani failed in training (disrobed) and was given to drink. > Eventually he became a sotapanna. > .... > S: Yes. This is the point - if there are the right conditions, right understanding can develop anytime. Any dhammas, even extreme akusala, can be (and must be) seen for what it is. > .... > There is yet another point. Even if situation appears hopeless, with the correct study and practice, eventually it can still realize the stages of sainthood. > S: Yes, well said. By development more wisdom, there will be less akusala. Accumulations have to really be seen and known for what they are. > .... Yes, wisdom must be developed. But this wisdom MUST be ultimately one's own, rather than packaged wisdom of someone else. Sometimes it is not just the end result, but the path, is which matters. > > A:Sarakani? > ... > S: Good question. The point still applies. In his case, as I recall, as he attained the stages of insight and became a sotapanna, the effects of the alcohol left his body. Check the commentary:) > .... So in the extreme cases of Sarakani, and especially Angulimala - there is always possibility to go up. Best wishes, Alex #87102 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:51 am Subject: Re: What is found in Buddhagosa but not in Abhidhamma itself? truth_aerator Hi Phil, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > Hi Herman and all > > > Do you realise that much of what you take to be Abhidhamma is not to > > be found in the Abhidhamma at all, and even less so in the Suttas, but > > only in the Abhidhamma commentaries of Ven Buddhagosa? >>> That is correct: > What kind of things are there again? The 17 moments of citta process is one, I think.... or not? Maybe not. Please refresh our memory, > Herman or anyone. >>>> Sabhava concept IS NOT found in the 4 Nikayas. The first time sabhava is used is in few later books of KN. And even there the sabhava is refuted. I can provide an excerpt from Patis . As I understand, Canonical Abh doesn't even mention the word. In the commentaries though, the term finally starts to appear and mean more and more of reified entity. Furthermore in some Abh books (Dhs) the momentariness isn't mentioned in the sense we take it now. And here is another thing. In the suttas term Dhamma is more closer to the meaning of "teaching" or "ethical" qualities, rather than atomic units of existence. In fact in earliest satipatthana the term Dhamma means 5 Hindrances + 7 Awakening factors and its cause is attention. Only later, when Abh came out did the term dhamma began to mean more of and "element or particle" rather than ethical quality. Some people may be happy to know that it appears that MahaSatipatthana sutta may be later than the Vibhanga book of Abh. But of course this Abh book is later than some other suttas. Again, the biggest change between Suttas & Commentarial Abh is the subtle shift from "tranquility" to "insight". Earliest satipatthana wasn't vipassana, it was closer to "samatha" and in fact it may have been a training to get to Samatha in the first place. Best wishes, Alex #87103 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition moellerdieter Hi Ken , you wrote: We have been talking about panna and its presence (or absence) in various stages of the Noble Eightfold Path. I have insisted it was present right from the first, merely intellectual, stages of path progress (pariyatti) right up to the end (pativedha). D: Just to get the framework , I understand that we talk about your aspiration ' ''We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - ' What your question indicates is the described training vs merely intellectual approach, isn't it? I pointed out to you that Sati Patthana as the 7th link of the 8fold Noble Path has been taught by the Buddha (Maha Satipatthana Sutta) as a guide , being part of the samadhi sequence of the 3fold N.Path training aiming development of wisdom /panna, liberation.. Ken: You have quoted Nyanatiloka where he writes: "Regarding the mundane (lokiya) eightfold path, however, its links may arise without the first link, right view." (end quote) (!) I must admit that is a useful quote for your argument. :-) I have never seen anything like it before. D: I note , that you picked up one sentence , disregarding the many others supporting my argument, in particular reference to the Noble Path training Ken: All I can say is it is utter rubbish. Nyanatiloka is confusing mundane wholesome consciousness with some kind of Mundane Eightfold Path!* D: I wonder what James would say about that in respect to right speech .. and you don't make up for it by your 'PS: * Nyanatiloka partly makes up for his wrong statement in the paragraph that follows it:"Here it must also be emphasized that the links of the path not only ..snip .. Even so, I see no justification whatsoever for the original [wrong] statement.' Ken: I feel very sure there is no mention of any such path in the Theravadin texts. Mundane wholesome consciousness (without panna) is by no means unique to a Buddha's teaching. It exists before, during and after a sasana. In no way does it form part of either the Noble Eightfold Path or of Satipatthana (also known as patipatti or the Mundane Path (which may be either sixfold or sevenfold)). D: not mention? how about M.N. 117 Right View , specifying 2 kinds of right understanding ( even if the mundane part isn't unique in respect to other religions , it belongs to the Buddha Dhamma) snip .. "And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with fermentations [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. "And what is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. "And what is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities -- right view, right effort, & right mindfulness -- run & circle around right view. unquote Ken: I am sorry that you have been misled by this strange statement from Nyanatiloka. I would like to assure you it is not true, but (understandably) you won't take my word for that. :-) Please pursue the matter further with someone more knowledgeable. D: could it be that I feel the same way , ie.. you have been mislead by your school.. ? with Metta Dieter #87104 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:25 am Subject: Re: Jhana Meditation. Again. truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi again Alex > > Thanks for the 2 sutta quotes (MN52, MN64) and the series of questions > that follow. > > Before answering the questions, I'd like to confirm the issue being > discussed. Was I correct in my earlier post when I stated it as: > whether or not jhana is a necessary prerequisite to the development of insight (or to the attainment of enlightenment). > It is necessery for Anagami stage and full Awakening. In fact if we take some phrases literally, a stream-enterer possess the N8P which includes 4 Jhanas. But Jhana must be cultivated. Its not a little-child passive stage. SOmetimes active steps to remove hindrances must be present. > On the assumption that it is that question, let me comment on MN52 > first. The key passage is the part that says: > > > He reflects on this and > > discerns, 'This first jhana is fabricated & intended. Now whatever is > > fabricated & intended is inconstant & subject to cessation.' Staying > > right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. > > This I see as a description of developed insight with jhana as object. > The reflecting in question is not itself jhana citta, that is to say, > the reflection does not occur while in jhana. Is this how you read it? > > Looking forward to your comments on this point and our further discussion. > > Jon > Without removing (at least temporary) the 5 hindrances, you can't develop supramundane insight to any serious degree. In fact consciously removing the 5 hindrances themselves at will is an insight-in-action of a certain level. The discussion of "does insight happen" while or after Jhana I have answered above. Also the suttas themselves appear to say that even greater insight (especially into the citta) can happen WHILE one in Jhana, up to the base of Nothingness. Of course one has either to come out of Jhana or at most be in 1st Jhana to be able to discurcively think about it. Best wishes, Alex #87105 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:02 am Subject: Re: I'm Sorry truth_aerator Dear Ven. P , Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Had the interview been with A. Sujin (or with one of her students) > the Australian audience - which knows nothing about Dhamma - > could have heard for the first time the Buddha's ultimate remedy for > defilements. In other words, they could have been given an insight > into conditioned reality. (!) What a wonderful, unique, event that > would have been! >>> Is she an Arahant, is she an Ariya? Are any of her students Arahants? Anagamis? Once-Returners, Stream enterers? The insight (on strong enough level) is inseparable with Jhana. Those who dismiss jhana, dismiss a method for insight. Ordinary states of consciousness are too "dim" to see the 4NT strong enough for higher (or perhaps any) levels of Ariyahood. Look, MOST (99%) if not ALL neuroscientists believe in Anatta. They see it from the science, in books and on an emperic level, they also see anicca, and reflecting people see dukkha to some degree. Why aren't they stream enterers or higher? (Or are they?) What holds them back? Why didn't the Buddha gave a pile of books for his students to become Arahants? Because it wasn't needed and could be harmful! Please don't say that you, or AS knows better than the Buddha himself. Best wishes, Alex #87106 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:30 am Subject: Re: I'm Sorry - Don't be. truth_aerator Venerable Pannabahulo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > Dear All, > > Looking back,I now realise that the way I presented my criticisms of > Ajan Sujin's teaching this week were harsh. >>> Is she an Arahant? How did her method work for her? For her students? This is important question. If something works, then it works. If it doesn't than we need to know why and how. Is the "pile of books" an approach that Buddha would take? If that'd be the case all scholars would be Arahants by now. Please don't buy the excuse that "conditions are different today". Remember that Dhamma is Akaliko and timeless?! Even if the conditions have changed, then we need the Buddha to tell us what else to do. Or are you so sure that someone can be as good as Buddha himself? In that case its not Buddhism. Not to degrade anyone, it is just that original teaching that was proven to work should be followed. Don't fix what ain't broken, unless one is Buddha himself. Maybe this is one of the reasons why the realizations started to drop after the Buddha has passed away. People, out of good intentions, started to explain the Buddha's teaching and in that process they have added their adhamma into it. Again, this doesn't have to be conscious decision. I am sure that many people genuinely want to help. It is just that unless someone is an Arahant, his message may not be 100% effective. In fact Ven. Sariputta an Arahant himself, made mistakes when teaching. IF VEN. SARIPUTTA was not infallible regarding the training (and he himself sometimes couldn't tell if his direct student has become an Arahant) - Then what chance does AS has? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.7.02.than.html Of course if she is an Arahant, then we should pay attention to what she says. Also remember the Ananda story? He was the most learned of ALL disciples. Yet in DN16 he was on the LOWEST stage of Sainthood. Only when the Buddha has passed away and Ananda didn't learn new suttas or had to help the Buddha - did he managed to achieve Arahatship. Also he HAD TO become an Arahat to be admitted to the 1st council... This is another indication that Arahatship is the ideal level for the disciple of the Buddha to teach Buddhism. Anyhow, the best thing you can do is to read the BUDDHA's teaching itself (Suttas in the 4 Nikayas) + current monastic discipline (Vinaya). If studying pile of books worked, then the Buddha would have said that, unambiguous and often Best wishes, Alex #87108 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:50 am Subject: Re: I'm Sorry dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - Your question is interesting. Alex: "Look, MOST (99%) if not ALL neuroscientists believe in Anatta. They see it from the science, in books and on an emperic level, they also see anicca, and reflecting people see dukkha to some degree. Why aren't they stream enterers or higher? (Or are they?) What holds them back?" ................ T: I think the lack of disenchantemnt (nibbida) in the Khandhas holds them back. Anattalakkhana Sutta: Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' Tep === #87109 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:07 pm Subject: Re: I'm Sorry truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Dear Alex, - > > Your question is interesting. > > Alex: "Look, MOST (99%) if not ALL neuroscientists believe in Anatta. They see it from the science, in books and on an emperic level, they also see anicca, and reflecting people see dukkha to some degree. > > Why aren't they stream enterers or higher? (Or are they?) What holds > them back?" > ................ > > T: I think the lack of disenchantemnt (nibbida) in the Khandhas holds them back. > > Anattalakkhana Sutta: > > Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is > fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully > released.' > He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task > done. There is nothing further for this world.' > > > Tep > === > I agree that disenchantment and dispassion are needed. However, shouldn't the learning of anatta and anicca by itself, produce the disenchantment & dispassion? Why or why not? IMHO, I believe that in the case of the scientists, they either a) fail to fully appreciate their discovery and apply to themselves b) Present Hindrances. Look, many scientists can explain Anatta better than most (if not all) monks. Yet, something is missing... The concept of no-self isn't foreign to WESTERN science or philosophy... But the practical steps on how to really realize that, that is missing. Best wishes, Alex #87111 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition truth_aerator Hi Ken, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi KenH, > > 2008/6/17 kenhowardau : > > Hi Herman and Tep, > > I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. >>> The catch is, AFTER Sariputta and others have achieved Arahatship, where they taught what you call "Abhidhamma". There are plenty of suttas where one's insight leading to Arahatship can be a sentence or two long. PERIOD. By reading 100x of them and not becoming an Ariya or Arahat - should be a sign. It is not the quantity but QUALITY that matters. One person may read 7 book shelves of Dhamma and not become a Sotapanna. Another may hear a phrase and REALLY put it close to the heart and put it into practice. Guess which one will become Awakened and which won't? After all, the point of the study is to be able to let go of the fetters, NOT to store up lots of personally useless information. I say useless is that even if you really understand only a line of Buddha's teaching - then you should be a stream enterer or higher. If you aren't an Arahant or a stream enterer DUE (not despite of) all you've read, then its useless. Some suttas contain a dozen or more ways towards Arahatship... So we have plenty of info and no excuses. I find it funny how people (including me) try to sound smart and learned, talk about these and those aspects of Dhamma, yet aren't Arahants or Ariyas (at the very least)... Counting other's cows isn't good... Again, if you aren't an Arahant yet, but have read quite a bit of the suttas, then the amount of knowledge ISN'T the reason - actually it may be an impediment - for myself included - to lack of Awakening. Sometimes "more isn't better" . After all, Buddha Dhamma is about Cessation, nibbida, viraga, nirodha. ... "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.023.than.html Best wishes, Alex #87112 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:00 pm Subject: Re: I'm Sorry ... Nibbida~nana ... dhammanusarin Hi Alex, - We have been discussing the benefit of "seeing anatta" through book studies and on the empirical level that leads to seeing dukkha "to some degree" in some people. The key question is : Why aren't they stream enterers or higher? (Or are they?) What holds them back? And I say: not having disenchantment in the Khandhas (quoting Anattalakkhana Sutta). >Alex: I agree that disenchantment and dispassion are needed. However, shouldn't the learning of anatta and anicca by itself, produce the disenchantment & dispassion? >Why or why not? T: Nibbida~nana (knowledge of disenchantment/disgust) is not "produced" by mere learning of the dhamma theory or reading some suttas a million-and-one times or listening to a respected Dhamma teacher 360 days every year for 20 years. Why? Because this nibbida~nana arises in an 'ariya savaka' who is on the lokuttara magga. How? Mahasi Sayadaw, a true meditation master who was a virtuous monk, explained as follows. Seeing thus the misery in conditioned things (formations), his mind finds no delight in those miserable things but is entirely disgusted with them. At times, his mind becomes, as it were, discontented and listless. Even so he does not give up the practice of insight, but spends his time continuously engaging in it. He therefore should know that this state of mind is not dissatisfaction with meditation, but is precisely the "knowledge of disgust" that has the aspect of being disgusted with the formations. Even if he directs his thought to the happiest sort of life and existence, or to the most pleasant and desirable objects, his mind will not take delight in them, will find no satisfaction in them. On the contrary, his mind will incline and lean and tend only towards Nibbana. Therefore the following thought will arise in him between moments of noticing: "The ceasing of all formations that are dissolving from moment to moment â€" that alone is happiness." [The Progress of Insight] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html#ch6.8 >Alex: >IMHO, I believe that in the case of the scientists, they either a) fail to fully appreciate their discovery and apply to themselves b) Present Hindrances. >Look, many scientists can explain Anatta better than most (if not all) monks. Yet, something is missing... The concept of no-self isn't foreign to WESTERN science or philosophy... >But the practical steps on how to really realize that, that is missing. T: "The Progress of Insight" gives the practical steps to realize Nibbida~nana (knowledge of disgust). Check it out yourself! Nibbida~nana is the fourth ~nana in the Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Course of Practice (patipada-ñanadassana-visuddhi). A pretty high level ! Tep === #87113 From: han tun Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:14 pm Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & hantun1 Dear Nina (Tep), Thank you very much for your clarification. I have no intention to say Ven. Bhuddhaghosa was right or wrong, in this case or any other case, because, since young we were instructed by our elders not to criticize venerable monks (or any other person for that matter). But I cannot find the three types of pari~n~naa in the suttas or in A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, or in Dhammasanga.nii. If I have overlooked, I will be grateful to be corrected by showing me where this was stated in the suttas or in the seven Abhidhamma books. In MN I Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the Buddha taught the levels of understanding as follows, just be conjugating the stem word pari~n~naa (without classifying them as ~nata pari~n~na, tiira.na pari~n~na, and pahaana pari~n~na) (1) Puthujjana has not fully understood it (apari~n~naatam) (2) Sekha may fully understoos it (pari~n~neyyam) (3) Arahant has fully understood it (pari~n~naatam) (4) Tathaagata has understood it to the end (pari~n~naatantam) Respectfully, Han #87114 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:34 pm Subject: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III nichiconn Thank you, Tep. What I've been asking myself is whether we can start of speaking in terms of full understanding right off the bat or whether it's like with people, first some awareness, a little recognition & passing acquaintance in growing familiarity... etc ... viola, "Friendship". Gradual development. Some say the whole Teaching is for Ariyans. Some alarmingly shout "Fatalist!!". Yet another: << tikkhattu.m: Akkulo pakkulo ti >> [= three times (he called out): "Confusion, great confusion"]. I'm taking your cue now and repeat: "Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained." Like that's going to help - telling myself "should". Can we edit that? and that last paragraph no longer appears ... but here is Masefield - Udaana Commentary: p.107 << Even insight can be mundane, being that consisting of that which has been heard, that consisting of reasoning, and that consisting of cultivation (*Cp Nett 60 and Vism 439), which are with aasavas, whereas the supermundane is that associated with the paths and that associated with their fruitions. >> So I turn to The Guide's ch.16, which starts off with a question and it's answering verse: "The Blessed One one idea teaches / By means of manifold descriptions: / This mood can thus be known to be / The Mode that does Convey Descriptions " ;- there, (since Nett 60 starts in the middle of something in 59 (cf. S. iii, 190), I starts off reading "Dispense with form, Raadha, shatter it, put it out of play, by means of understanding, practise the way to exhaustion of craving." Then there's nothing I really feel like typing, mostly about S v. 424 - [so just a few phrases: understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard; I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not-finally-known; understanding-consisting-in-cogitation; understanding-consisting-in-keeping-in-being] - but jump to S.v.263: ... and we're where Netti 61 starts, so I stop here. peace, connie #87115 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:55 pm Subject: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III nichiconn ps. [87114] to save any Dinosaurs or Other Optimists and All from having to repeat it - Pariyatti > Patipatti > Pativedha the three rounds of knowing these four Truths: understanding them but not yet penetrating them (sacca ~naa.na), the practice in order to begin to directly understand them (kicca ~naa.na), and the direct realisation of them (kata ~naa.na). .. peace, connie #87116 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (184) egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/17 connie : > Dear Herman, Howard, > >> >> When enlightenment is attained, this is the result of the development of right > understanding. The development of the cause leading to such a result is > difficult, but if right understanding has been sufficiently developed, it brings > its result without difficulty. > > I meant: nothing arises from a single cause, but it's normal to speak of a collective as 'one thing', in this case, 'the right cause'. Prior development or accumulation was (as I meant them synonymously) meant to be an example of 'specifics' involved in the arising of enlightenment. Incompletion/imperfection in that 'specific' would not just 'hinder' but 'prevent' the arising of perfect enlightenment. I thought (answering myself) "obstructive kamma", but the point I was trying to get at was that at the time of any arising whatsoever, the conditions for that whatsoever are perfect for just that... it's just 'QED' - 'quite easily done' as my geometry teacher put it. > I think I get it. For anyone who ever won the lottery, it was quite easily done. No more effort required than to buy a ticket. Or perhaps a winning ticket was given to one, in which case no effort was required at all. But for anyone "trying" to win the lottery it is very, very hard indeed. As it pertains to enlightenment, would your view therefore be that it will either happen quite easily, but more likely not at all, and this is simply how it is, the luck (conditions) of the draw? Action can play no role? Which leads me to the question, can someone be enlightened against their will, or chance upon nibbana? Cheers Herman #87117 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:46 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III dhammanusarin Dear Connie, - A rule-of-thumb to test someone's true understanding of a subject matter is by how s/he is able to summarize it in a few sentences. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > ps. [87114] > > to save any Dinosaurs or Other Optimists and All from having to repeat it - > > Pariyatti > Patipatti > Pativedha > > the three rounds of knowing these four Truths: > understanding them but not yet penetrating them (sacca ~naa.na), the practice in order to begin to directly understand them (kicca ~naa.na), and the direct realisation of them (kata ~naa.na). > > .. peace, > connie > .............. Thank you, Connie. Tep === #87118 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] poster egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/18 connie : > Dear Herman, > > Herman: I equate discursive thought with vocal intention. I don't honestly know what it should be in Pali, I can only go by what others say on the linguistics of matter, and relate it back to what is experienced in which circumstances. Did you mean vipakka or vicara? > > Connie: I meant to type "vikappa" but see it ended up "vipakka". Now I find I'm amused thinking that's pretty much what happens all the time. We think we know what our intentions are but then there's vipakka and "that wasn't what I meant". > IMO, intention stands in no necessary relationship with action. We are not bound to carry out whatever intention arises. That's mindfulness for you. Nothing we do (action) is vipakka. Cheers Herman #87119 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> H: > I have confidence that all that the Buddha actually taught was perfect Dhamma, and that it is not a compliment to him to say that he taught higher dhamma in just some of the suttas. ------- And your point is . . ? I have said to Tep (and to others on countless occasions) that there is only one Dhamma. In the suttas we can hear the Dhamma being taught in conventional language: in the Abhidhamma-pitaka, and in some of the suttas, we can hear the Dhamma being taught in a language that is unique to the Dhamma. ---------------------- H: > Moreover, 'Abhidhamma' with an uppercase 'A' refers specifically to the 7-book baske,and it does NOT occur within the suttas. --------------------- I haven't heard that before. Maybe it's right, I don't know. But the fact remains there are two teaching methods in the Tipitaka. And, I would stress, it is best if we can hear the Abhidhamma method from the outset. Otherwise there will be little (if any) chance of understanding the conventional-language method. This fact is demonstrated in Buddhist groups everywhere. Every day on DSG, for example, we see people insisting the Dhamma is a conventional teaching. This appalling mistake (and appalling slander) would *never* be made by someone who took the Abhidhamma seriously. -------------------------------- H: > The best that one can say is that the Buddha's Dhamma, besides being found in the sutta pitaka, can also be found in the other two baskets. It is the *Dhamma* in its fullness that is the pinnacle, and it is no compliment to the Buddha to treat just Abhidhamma as the pinnacle that the rest only reaches in part. That Abhidhammic triumphalism is something I find perverse. -------------------------------- Good luck to you! Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Ken (and Herman & Tep) - > > In a message dated 6/17/2008 12:24:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > Hi Herman and Tep, > > I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of > the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. #87120 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:35 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III dhammanusarin Dear Connie, - I like your no-argument approach to Dhamma discussion. It sounds like you are thinking out loud ... >Connie: What I've been asking myself is whether we can start of speaking in terms of full understanding right off the bat or whether it's like with people, first some awareness, a little recognition & passing acquaintance in growing familiarity... etc ... viola, "Friendship". Gradual development. T: Why not? Learning and accumulation of skills are all gradual. Even the process of making a sand castle on the beach is a "gradual development". The concept is sound. >Connie: Some say the whole Teaching is for Ariyans. Some alarmingly shout "Fatalist!!". Yet another: << tikkhattu.m: Akkulo pakkulo ti >> [= three times (he called out): "Confusion, great confusion"]. I'm taking your cue now and repeat: "Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained." Like that's going to help - telling myself "should". Can we edit that? and that last paragraph no longer appears ... T: For the equanimity principle to work it requires the most matured disposition. The non-extreme(middle-way) perspective also helps. Sure, please edit it anyway you like. How do you like the post now after the last paragraph is gone? >Connie: ... Then there's nothing I really feel like typing, mostly about S v. 424- [so just a few phrases: understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard; I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not-finally-known; understanding-consisting-in-cogitation; understanding-consisting-in-keeping-in-being] T: What 'message' do you see underlying the above passage? Is the "understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard" same as direct knowing? And, does the 'I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not-finally- known' mark the entry to the Stream? Thanks. Tep === #87121 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:47 pm Subject: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & dhammanusarin Dear Han (and Nina, Connie, Herman), - It is very nice of you to give us your thought. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Nina (Tep), > > Thank you very much for your clarification. > > I have no intention to say Ven. Bhuddhaghosa was right or wrong, in this case or any other case, because, since young we were instructed by our elders not to criticize venerable monks (or any other person for that matter). But I cannot find the three types of pari~n~naa in the suttas or in A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, or in Dhammasanga.nii. If I have overlooked, I will be grateful to be corrected by showing me where this was stated in the suttas or in the seven Abhidhamma books. > > In MN I Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the Buddha taught the levels of understanding as follows, just be conjugating the stem word pari~n~naa (without classifying them as ~nata pari~n~na, tiira.na pari~n~na, and pahaana pari~n~na) > > (1) Puthujjana has not fully understood it (apari~n~naatam) > (2) Sekha may fully understoos it (pari~n~neyyam) > (3) Arahant has fully understood it (pari~n~naatam) > (4) Tathaagata has understood it to the end (pari~n~naatantam) > > Respectfully, > Han > ........................... T: I agree with the attitude of no-fault-finding that you have; it is a great attitude. Without any (wrong) intention to put the blame on the Venerable, I also agree with your unbiased finding : "But I cannot find the three types of pari~n~naa in the suttas or in A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, or in Dhammasanga.nii. ... ... In MN I Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the Buddha taught the levels of understanding as follows, just be conjugating the stem word pari~n~naa (without classifying them as ~nata pari~n~na, tiira.na pari~n~na, and pahaana pari~n~na)." That is fair enough for me. Tep === #87122 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility sukinderpal Dear Tep, > > > Sukin: By the above are you saying that you the story is not true? > > > > Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained. > Good to know that you do not disbelief the story. Just wanted to check. :-) Metta, Sukin > > #87123 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:36 pm Subject: Poson Poya Day: Arahat Mahinda Thera comes! bhikkhu0 How to be a Real True Buddhist through Observance? Poya is the full-moon of Poson (June), which is specially noteworthy to the Sri Lankan Buddhists as the day on which Emperor Asoka 's son, the Arahat Mahinda , officially introduced Buddhism to the island in the 3rd century B.C. Accordingly, in addition to the normal ritualistic observances undertaken on a Poya day, on Poson day devotees flock to Mihintale & AnurÄ?dhapura , the ancient holy capital city of the country, for it was there that Arahat Mahinda converted the then ruler, King Devanampiya Tissa, and his court to Buddhism, thereby setting in motion a series of events that finally made Sri Lanka the stronghold home of Theravada Buddhism. Arahat Mahinda arrives and tests the king's intelligence. Mihintale, Sri Lanka. Mahinda Thera's cave there. Essays about the significance of Poson Poya Days in Theravada Buddhism: An Arahat meets a King. The cultural dimension of Poson. The birth of a new civilization. The induction of the Triple Gem to Sri Lanka. On such Uposatha Observance days: Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, with clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first three times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees and head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms in front of the heart, one recite these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I will hereby respect these Three Jewels the rest of my life! I accept to respect & undertake these 5 training rules: I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts, I am thus protected by these 5 precepts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! This is the very start on the path towards NibbÄ?na -the Deathless Element- This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Bliss, initiated by Morality , developed further by Dhamma-Study and fulfilled by training of Meditation ... Today indeed is Pooya or Uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... If any wish an official recognition by the Bhikkhu-Sangha, they may simply forward the lines starting with "I..." signed with name, date, town & country to me or join here . A public list of this new Saddhamma-Sangha is here! The New Noble Community of Disciples: The Saddhamma Sangha: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Saddhamma_Sangha.htm Join Here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Sangha_Entry.htm May your journey hereby be eased, light, swift and sweet. Never give up!!! Bhikkhu Samahita: what.buddha.said@... For Details on Uposatha Observance Days http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net #87124 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - > > > Sukin: By the above are you saying that you the story is not true? > > > > Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained. > > .................. > Sukin: Good to know that you do not disbelief the story. > Just wanted to check. :-) > T: Now you are talking like KenH ! I have to repeat to him what I just said all the time. So let me ask you instead: When you do not know whether what you've heard is true or not true, will you believe it, or disbelieve it, or neither? Tep === #87125 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (184) egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/16 connie : > Dear Howard, > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, indeed. We SHOULD apply that energy. But precisely in what manner? > --------------------------------------------------- > Connie: > Precisely that which would avoid "the intricate entanglements of wrong dispositions." But really, no SHOULD - what arises is already in application. > I'm sorry if you have already dealt with the following elsewhere, but you seem to be equating intention with action here. I'd like to put it to you that intention has no consequences in the world, only action does. I'd also like to put it to you that SHOULD does play a role in why some intentions are converted to action, and others aren't. I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. ================================= > > > we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are > appearing right now or not yet. > -------------------------------------------------- Ah, I see here that you are not aversive to SHOULD after all. > --------------------------------------------- > Connie: > It does. Unconditionally as in 'given this, arises that', yes. Study and thought would be of assistance, yes. > Because the conditions are there, but again, no should. > I believe he taught analysis, yes. Also, hearing was mentioned. > What is wise reflection or consideration? > ===================== But here SHOULD is a no-no again. > > > > However, we should have patience and energy to persevere with the > development of understanding. Ahh, SHOULD is OK again. > > I like this, from Buddhist Legends 02 (pdf), p.9: <<"Monk, if you can guard one thing, it will not be necessary for you to guard the rest." "What is that, Reverend Sir?" "Can you guard your thoughts?" "I can, Reverend Sir." "Well then, guard your thoughts alone.">> > It seems the last line is rather SHOULDish, don't you think? That's quite a rollercoaster ride of SHOULDing and no-SHOULDing you've taken me on, connie. Should I infer something from this, that perhaps you are not sure about the matter? Cheers Herman #87126 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Dieter, ---------- KH: > > We have been talking about panna and its presence (or absence) in various stages of the Noble Eightfold Path. <. . .> D: > Just to get the framework , I understand that we talk about your aspiration ' ''We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - ' ---------- Oh yes, I remember now, that was where we started. ---------------- D: > What your question indicates is the described training vs merely intellectual approach, isn't it? ---------------- No, I had nothing like that in mind. As I see it, right understanding is essentially the path. To put it another way, the path taught by the Buddha was a path of right understanding. So, by my reckoning. the "training" you are referring to would have to be right understanding (vipassana bhavana). More specifically, it would be satipatthana (right understanding of conditioned reality). I don't know what you might mean by "a merely intellectual approach." That sounds to me like something a university student might have if he took a 'Buddhist studies' course just to pass an exam. I can see how that kind of approach would be useless. It would not be understanding; it would be mere memorisation. ------------------------- D: > I pointed out to you that Sati Patthana as the 7th link of the 8fold Noble Path has been taught by the Buddha (Maha Satipatthana Sutta) as a guide , being part of the samadhi sequence of the 3fold N.Path training aiming development of wisdom /panna, liberation.. -------------------------- We are using different terminology, so it is no wonder that I missed this point the first time around. As far as I am aware, satipatthana is a moment of right understanding (in which a conditioned dhamma is directly seen to be the way the Buddha described it to be). When you are talking about the "seventh link in the ariyan eightfold path" you are talking about samma-sati, which is the cetasika, sati, in its supramundane form (in a moment of enlightenment). That is not satipatthana. ------------------ KH: > > You have quoted Nyanatiloka where he writes: "Regarding the mundane (lokiya) eightfold path, however, its links may arise without the first link, right view." (end quote) (!) I must admit that is a useful quote for your argument. :-) I have never seen anything like it before. > > D: > I note , that you picked up one sentence , disregarding the many others supporting my argument, in particular reference to the Noble Path training ------------------- Ah yes, well, that was when we were talking at cross purposes (as I have just been explaining). I hope it is cleared up now. That sentence was the only one in the entire quote that contradicted my understanding. It said that the mundane right path can be "without panna." In other words, that sentence was equating ordinary, everyday, wholesome consciousness with the unique, profound, Middle Way. -------------------- > > Ken: All I can say is it is utter rubbish. Nyanatiloka is confusing mundane wholesome consciousness with some kind of Mundane Eightfold Path!* > D: I wonder what James would say about that in respect to right speech .. and you don't make up for it by your 'PS: <. . .> ---------------------- I hope James is suitably amused to see he has become an authority on right speech. :-) --------------------------------- <. . .> > > Ken: Mundane wholesome consciousness (without panna) is by no means unique to a Buddha's teaching. It exists before, during and after a sasana. In no way does it form part of either the Noble Eightfold Path or of Satipatthana (also known as patipatti or the Mundane Path (which may be either sixfold or sevenfold)). > > D: > not mention? how about M.N. 117 Right View , specifying 2 kinds of right understanding ( even if the mundane part isn't unique in respect to other religions , it belongs to the Buddha Dhamma) --------------------------------- We seem to have gone off the track again. You will see that I was talking about wholesome consciousness *without* panna (without right view) You seem to think I was talking about wholesome consciousness *with* panna. (It was a good sidetrack, but I will resist it for now.) ----------------- KH: > > I am sorry that you have been misled by this strange statement from Nyanatiloka. I would like to assure you it is not true, but (understandably) you won't take my word for that. :-) Please pursue the matter further with someone more knowledgeable. D: could it be that I feel the same way , ie.. you have been mislead by your school.. ? ------------------------ I am sure it could be. And I still think this is *the* vital starting point in Dhamma study. 'Is satipatthana a meditation technique, or is it the conditioned dhamma known as panna (when it arises to know another conditioned dhamma)?' Ken H #87127 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] India Trip 2009 egberdina Hi mattroke, 2008/6/10 mattroke : > If you are planning to go to India in February 2009, then please > confirm today that you will be going. > > Tickets have to be booked on Thai International, and that needs to be > done immediately. A deposit of 20,000 baht will have to be paid as soon > as possible. > > There are over 100 people waiting to go, so if you do not confirm > today, your place will be given to someone else. > > Please confirm by sending an email to ivan@... > Just so I get it straight, are you organising a trip so that folks can perform rites and rituals in a place other than where they normally perform them? I am surprised my spam filter didn't detect you, or the moderators. Have some nice rituals, won't you. Herman #87128 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 1:00 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended. nilovg Dear Tep and Han, Op 17-jun-2008, om 17:57 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > I think the answer is : Forget about what they say. Study the > original Buddha's words in the suttas and earnestly apply the > Teachings (with the best of our ability) in our lives, until we see > and know the Dhamma ourselves (yathabhutam pajanati). --------- N: You are absolutely right. We should not take a theoretical approach, but develop understanding now. I like to study the suttas. But we should not think that we understand already the Dhamma by reading and studying terms enumerated in the suttas like pari~n~na. What should be known? I read: < And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. Feeling .. Perception .. Volitional formations .. Consciousness is something that should be fully understood.> A dhamma can only be fully understood when awareness of it arises, and the object of awareness is only what appears now through one of the six doorways. Nothing else. Such as seeing, it is vi~n~naa.na kkhandha and that is a name. We do not have to think of names but there can be awareness and direct understanding of characteristics. In the sutta that was quoted we read about the arahat who eradicated all lobha, dosa and moha and this shows us that understanding leads to detachment. The whole of the teachings point to detachment. We cling to all objects, we cling to self. By understanding the five khandhas, nama and rupa, clinging to self will decrease. First the wrong view of self has to be eradicated before the other defilements can be eradicated. Han rightly pointed out that the three pari~n~nas as such are not mentioned in the suttas. But to me this does not matter, I think we need not be stuck with words. Many details are not mentioned in the suttas. And as to terms not used in the suttas, I find it safe to look at the Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries where there are further clarifications of terms. I think of the meaning of the three pari~n~nas: development of understanding is step by step. This is also shown by the stages of insight and these stages we find in the Path of Discrimination. Now I would like to say a few words about the Saccavibhangasutta that you, Tep, referred to in a post to Ken: The Buddha spoke about dukkha in daily life that all people could understand. He spoke about grief, "the inner pain of one visited by some kind of calamity or other, smitten by some kind of ill or other. it is the crying, the wailing..." The Buddha spoke words that touched the hearts of the listeners. Gently he was leading them on to the understanding of nama and rupa: He then enumerated the five khandhas. This is Dhamma in daily life we find in the Sacca Vibhanga Sutta. We can call it Abhidhamma but it should be noted that all of it concerns daily life. Abhidhamma is not theory, it is not separate from the practice in daily life. It points to the paramattha dhammas, that is, realities, appearing right now. Nina. #87129 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 1:09 am Subject: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? dhammanusarin Hi Nina, Sarah, Alex, Phil, KenH, Howard - The conversations such as the following make me wondering why DSG members' understandings of the Abhidhamma are so much different. Ken H (in #87035): I think a problem often arises when people try to learn the Dhamma from the conventional-language discourses first, and from the Abhidhamma second. It is infinitely more advisable to do it the other way around (IMHO). When we get the idea that samma-samadhi, for example, is not a conditioned dhamma, but a conventional practice (that can be carried out by the wise and the ignorant alike) then we have a problem. Tep (in #87065): The Abhidhamma-pitaka expounds the theory underlying the dhammas in the Suttas, but the Suttas never once refer to the detailed information (e.g. the 89 cittas) in the Abhidhamma. Why? One logical explanation is : the Abhidhamma is more difficult to teach disciples who are not arahant, let alone the lay men and women. Ken H (in #87069) : I should have mentioned that the Budhha taught Abhidhamma in some of the suttas as well as to the devas and Sariputta. I think I've mentioned that every other time I've answered this question (four thousand at last count) but somehow it slipped my mind. :-) Herman (in #87081) : Do you realise that much of what you take to be Abhidhamma is not to be found in the Abhidhamma at all, and even less so in the Suttas, but only in the Abhidhamma commentaries of Ven Buddhagosa? Phil (in #87082): What kind of things are there again? The 17 moments of citta process is one, I think.... or not? Maybe not. Please refresh our memory, Herman or anyone. I assume that this is not a particularly contentious point, that it's agreed that there are new things in Buddhagosa not found in the tipitaka. Alex(in #87102): And here is another thing. In the suttas term Dhamma is more closer to the meaning of "teaching" or "ethical" qualities, rather than atomic units of existence. In fact in earliest satipatthana the term Dhamma means 5 Hindrances + 7 Awakening factors and its cause is attention. Only later, when Abh came out did the term dhamma began to mean more of and "element or particle" rather than ethical quality. Howard (in #87088): I have confidence that all that the Buddha actually taught was perfect Dhamma, and that it is not a compliment to him to say that he taught higher dhamma in just some of the suttas. Moreover, 'Abhidhamma' with an uppercase 'A' refers specifically to the 7-book baske, and it does NOT occur within the suttas. The best that one can say is that the Buddha's Dhamma, besides being found in the sutta pitaka, can also be found in the other two baskets. --------------------------------------- T: So I decided to get an authoritative description of the Abhdhamma myself in order to reconcile some of the differences as seen above. I have found a satisfying explanation from the Introduction to "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" by U Rewata Dhamma and Bhikkhu Bodhi. The following three key ideas should be helpful . 1. "At the heart of the Abhidhamma philosophy is the Abhidhamma Pitaka, one of the divisions of the Pali canon recognized by Theravada Buddhism as the authoritative recension of the Buddha's teachings. This canon was compiled at the three great Buddhist councils held in India in the early centuries following the Buddha's demise ..." T: "Authoritative recension" of the Dhamma is a careful revision/editing of the text by the authorities of the time; therefore, although the seven books of the Abhidhamma are a rewriting of the Suttanta-pitaka, the teachings in both pitakas must be the same without any question. 2. "Whereas the Suttas and Vinaya serve an obvious practical purpose, namely, to proclaim a clear-cut message of deliverance and to lay down a method of personal training, the Abhidhamma Pitaka presents the appearance of an abstract and highly technical systemization of the doctrine." T: Being an abstract and highly technical systemization of the doctrine, the Abhidhamma Pitaka obviously is not the "practical manual" for practicing Buddhists. 3. "Unlike the Suttas, these are not records of discourses and discussions occurring in real-life settings; they are, rather, full- blown treatises in which the principles of the doctrine have been methodically organized, minutely defined, and meticulously tabulated and classified." T: So they are not the Buddha's words, but rather a derivation from His words. However, in the full-blown treatise sense the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the greatest source for scholars to gain a deeper understanding of the Teachings down to minute details. What is your thought? Tep === #87130 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 2:29 am Subject: Metta, Ch 8, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, In order to be reborn as a brahma in a brahma plane there must be the right condition. One should develop samatha to the stage of jhåna, which can be rúpa-jhåna or arúpa-jhåna. This is the way to rúpa- brahma planes and arúpa-brahma planes. The result of kusala jhånacitta is rebirth in a brahma plane where one will live until the jhåna kusala kamma has been exhausted and one will pass away from that plane. Beings in brahma planes do not need to eat and they do not need to breathe in order to stay alive. Beings in the rúpa-brahma planes have very subtle rúpas and these do not have to be sustained by morsels of food such as is taken by human beings, and they do not have to experience suffering due to breathing. As regards beings in the arúpa-brahma planes, they do not have any rúpa. As the Commentary states, Brahmadeva had eradicated all defilements, he was the highest among devas. The arahat who is not disturbed by defilements does not have to provide a livelihood for someone else. When one hears this one thinks of the bhikkhus who do not have a family and who do not have a profession by which they have to provide a livelihood for others. However, there is a deeper meaning to these words. The meaning is that for the arahat there are no more conditions for rebirth, for the arising of khandhas in a future life. So long as one still has defilements, there will be a new life after this one, conditioned by these defilements. When at the end of life the dying- consciousness has fallen away there will be rebirth, there will be nåma khandhas and rúpa khandhas succeeding the khandhas which are arising and falling away in this life, which we take for “I” or “mine”, for “my personality”. Our present life conditions the life of a future being, of someone else, namely the khandhas arising in the future which are conditioned by the khandhas in this life. In this sense it is said that we maintain or sustain the life of someone else. The Brahmadeva Sutta can answer the questions about spirits and brahmas who are venerated in Thailand, questions about whether they exist and whether they can help us. ******** Nina. #87131 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 2:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Sukin > Sukin: I was limiting myself to the arising of Right View which includes > not being concerned about the past or future. Besides that would be a > moment of kusala of far greater value than Sila of any level, especially > given that it is a dhamma which arises only within the Buddha sasana. > This does not imply as I've said before, that akusala is tolerated, let > alone encouraged. It seems to me that your concern about Sila is > perverted by self view, so much so that expressions of right view as I > have made above, is not only downplayed, but used to then put forward > your own wrong understanding of the Dhamma even more strongly. But > you're going on and on about the need for Sila only impresses those who > are attached to `self?Elike you are. Sorry. > Ph: Well, Sukin, if you think you are not attached to self, that's a bit unwise, I think. We're all attached to self whether we are keen on anatta or not. "Detachment from the beginning" is delusionary and contrary to the Buddha's gradual training, I think, though pleasant to reflect on. It is self that drives you to post here as well, don't you think? (Don't answer that, just reflect, if there are conditions for it.) Liberation from self is something to be gained, not decided on by thinking about it and discussing it, or listening to someone talking about it. You've been patient with me, Sukin, thanks. You *might* find I will be less irritating for awhile. But I had such a good, diligent feeling day today as a result of posting what I did about striving towards wholesomeness that I will not leave here. Reading posts by people who underappreciate the need for diligent striving conditions it in..."me." Metta, Phil #87132 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again Sukin. As is often the case, I thought about what I posted while cooking, and now come back to add a couple more thoughts more in concord with what you wrote. > It seems to me that your concern about Sila is > > perverted by self view, so much so that expressions of right view > as I > > have made above, is not only downplayed, but used to then put > forward > > your own wrong understanding of the Dhamma even more strongly. But > > you're going on and on about the need for Sila only impresses > those who > > are attached to `self?Elike you are. Sorry. > > > > Ph: Well, Sukin, if you think you are not attached to self, > that's a bit unwise, I think. We're all attached to self whether we > are keen on anatta or not. Ph: Yes, perhps what you say "those who are attached to self like you are" can be changed just a bit to say "those who are not overly concerned about being attached to self" or something like that. We are all attached to self, but yes, some of us would acknowledge that the Buddha did not stress detachment from the beginning. You know, aside from a failed attempt to get back into Abhidhamma through the CMA (and I had better try again because everything I learned is disappearing, like a foreign language one never uses) I have been in AN all the time. I know you don't spend a lot of time in AN, but if you did you would see where the differing view of Dhamma comes from. There are so many suttas dealing with concern with destinations after death, on having one's good deeds as a shelter when approaching death, with simple, straightforward admonitions about one's ethical behaviour. These suttas have no meaning unless an ego, at least, is involved. Concern about one's destination after death are nonsensical without someone being concerned. So the Buddha teaches us to approach the Dhamma first in this rather self-involved way, because he knows that is the only way. Most people come to the Dhamma because of fear (whether they admit it or not) and that is necessarily self-involved. Then, as conditions improve, the air clears if you will, thanks to the wholesomeness developed through the Buddha's gradual training, concentration deepens, understanding deepens. I know you don't see it this way and probably never will, but it is correct, I really believe. But never mind. Just to say yes, you're right, I guess am more attached to self than you are in that I am not concerned about it for now. (Ah, but maybe I am *less* attached for that reason because I see the attachment, and play with it, whereas those keen on anatta and "only dhammas" might have less insight into the attachment because of all the musing on detachment....possibly? Again, something to reflect on if you'd like, but no point replying. ) Did see a very good sutta in AN urging monks to strike out and defeat identity view, however. It is the first I have seen urging us to strive to eliminate identity view in the determined way we are urged to crack down on lust, for example, but there are probably others. Most of the suttas I see dealing with wrong view deal with the basic wrong view I always go on about. You know the one, not believing that there are results of deeds etc. Metta, Phil #87133 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Alex > > A:>What did Phil do? Drugs? > > ... > > S: You'd have to search the archives or ask Phil. Ph: A lot more than drugs! But you'll have to wait for my tell-all memoirs...haha. Seriously, very bad akusala kamma patha that will be with me to the grave...and beyond. But there is time to strive to weaken the impact of it, to add water so that the salt of the kamma is less potent, or however that simile goes. In any case, there is samvega, which is good. Every breath is a moment in which to reflect on the Dhamma, that is the way we are to practice, in the space of a breath, lest we die before the next breath comes. Of course, this will not always or even oftn happen, but a great ideal to strive for! :) BTW, thanks for the feedback re Buddhagosa and Abhidhamma. Metta Phil #87134 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:36 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend egberdina Hi Han, 2008/6/18 han tun : > Dear Nina (Tep), > > Thank you very much for your clarification. > > I have no intention to say Ven. Bhuddhaghosa was right or wrong, in this case or any other case, because, since young we were instructed by our elders not to criticize venerable monks (or any other person for that matter). What we were taught as youngsters, by those who were taught the same when they were youngsters, does not excuse us for what we do now. But whatever you do now, or fail to do, is not without consequence. Your compliant attitude, if it is representative of the population of Myanmar, goes a long way to explaining what takes place in that country. It need not be that way. Cheers Herman #87135 From: han tun Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:43 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended hantun1 Dear Nina (Tep), > Nina: Han rightly pointed out that the three pari~n~nas as such are not mentioned in the suttas. But to me this does not matter, I think we need not be stuck with words. Many details are not mentioned in the suttas. And as to terms not used in the suttas, I find it safe to look at the Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries where there are further clarifications of terms. I think of the meaning of the three pari~n~nas: development of understanding is step by step. This is also shown by the stages of insight and these stages we find in the Path of Discrimination. -------------------- Han: (1) I am not sure whether we need not be stuck with words. But if you say so, I am not going to argue with you. (2) I agree with you the usefulness of the Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries. (3) As regards the meaning of the three pari~n~nas, it really does not matter whether it is classified as (~nata pari~n~na, tiira.na pari~n~na, and pahaana pari~n~na) or not, because, as far as pari~n~naa is concerned, I am following the Buddha’s words mentioned in MN 1 (apari~n~naatam, pari~n~neyyam, pari~n~naatam, pari~n~naatantam) Thank you very much for your patience with me. Respectfully, Han #87136 From: han tun Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:55 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended hantun1 Dear Herman, > > Han: I have no intention to say Ven. Bhuddhaghosa was right or wrong, in this case or any other case, because, since young we were instructed by our elders not to criticize venerable monks (or any other person for that matter). > Herman: What we were taught as youngsters, by those who were taught the same when they were youngsters, does not excuse us for what we do now. But whatever you do now, or fail to do, is not without consequence. Han: I know that whatever I do now, or fail to do, is not without consequence. And I am prepared to face that consequences. Please do not worry about me. -------------------- > Herman: Your compliant attitude, if it is representative of the population of Myanmar, goes a long way to explaining what takes place in that country. It need not be that way. Han: You can criticize me as much as you like. But please do not bring in my people and my country. Respectfully, Han #87137 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is found in Buddhagosa but not in Abhidhamma itself? egberdina Hi Phil, 2008/6/17 Phil : > > Hi Herman and all > > >> Do you realise that much of what you take to be Abhidhamma is not to >> be found in the Abhidhamma at all, and even less so in the Suttas, but >> only in the Abhidhamma commentaries of Ven Buddhagosa? Are you a >> follower of the teachings of Ven Buddhagosa by choice? > > Yes, this should be elucidated. I guess it's familiar for most people > reading here and I've read here and there about it but have forgotten. > > What kind of things are there again? The 17 moments of citta process > is one, I think.... or not? Maybe not. Please refresh our memory, > Herman or anyone. I assume that this is not a particularly contentious > point, that it's agreed that there are new things in Buddhagosa not > found in the tipitaka. > > Thanks. Honestly, just asking for clarification, not to make a point. I have pasted this from a post of mine a while back. BB is the author.... Just imagine trying to eliminate the following from everything you have ever osmosed about Buddhism from well meaning folks at dsg. It's impossible, right? People who quote Buddhagosa as though he is the Buddha should say so, IMO. "......we might briefly note a few of the Abhidhammic conceptions that are characteristic of the Commentaries but either unknown or recessive in the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself. One is the detailed account of the cognitive process (cittavithi). While this conception seems to be tacitly recognized in the canonical books, it now comes to be drawn out for use as an explanatory tool in its own right. The functions of the cittas, the different types of consciousness, are specified, and in time the cittas themselves come to be designated by way of their functions. The term khana, "moment," replaces the canonical samaya, "occasion," as the basic unit for delimiting the occurrence of events, and the duration of a material phenomenon is determined to be seventeen moments of mental phenomena. The division of a moment into three sub-moments — arising, presence, and dissolution — also seems to be new to the Commentaries. The organization of material phenomena into groups (kalapa), though implied by the distinction between the primary elements of matter and derived matter, is first spelled out in the Commentaries, as is the specification of the heart-base (hadayavatthu) as the material basis for mind element and mind-consciousness element. The Commentaries introduce many (though not all) of the categories for classifying kamma, and work out the detailed correlations between kamma and its results. They also close off the total number of mental factors (cetasika). The phrase in the Dhammasangani, "or whatever other (unmentioned) conditionally arisen immaterial phenomena there are on that occasion," apparently envisages an open-ended universe of mental factors, which the Commentaries delimit by specifying the "or-whatever states" (yevapanaka dhamma). Again, the Commentaries consummate the dhamma theory by supplying the formal definition of dhammas as "things which bear their own intrinsic nature" (attano sabhavam dharenti ti dhamma). The task of defining specific dhammas is finally rounded off by the extensive employment of the fourfold defining device of characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause, a device derived from a pair of old exegetical texts, the Petakopadesa and the Nettipakarana." Cheers Herman #87138 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:15 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehende egberdina Hi Han, 2008/6/18 han tun : > Dear Herman, > >> > Han: I have no intention to say Ven. Bhuddhaghosa was right or wrong, in this case or any other case, because, since young we were instructed by our elders not to criticize venerable monks (or any other person for that matter). > >> Herman: What we were taught as youngsters, by those who were taught the same when they were youngsters, does not excuse us for what we do now. But whatever you do now, or fail to do, is not without consequence. > > Han: I know that whatever I do now, or fail to do, is not without consequence. And I am prepared to face that consequences. Please do not worry about me. I was quite concerned about the attitude you assumed on receiving news of your eye condition. It was just like the above attitude to venerable monks, if a doctor says something, it must be true. > > -------------------- > >> Herman: Your compliant attitude, if it is representative of the population of Myanmar, goes a long way to explaining what takes place in that country. It need not be that way. > > Han: You can criticize me as much as you like. But please do not bring in my people and my country. I'm sorry that I have been unclear. I am not critical of you, but I can understand why you think it, if you cannot allow yourself to ciriticise anyone. Can you clarify why I should not talk to you about the long-suffering people of Myanmar? Cheers Herman #87139 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is found in Buddhagosa but not in Abhidhamma itself? dhammanusarin Dear Herman, - I am not clear about what the author (BB) is saying in the quote that you posted earlier. Would you be kind enough to share your thought with me? > Herman: > I have pasted this from a post of mine a while back. BB is the author.... Thanks again. Your friend, Tep === #87140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:24 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehended nilovg Dear Han, Op 18-jun-2008, om 14:43 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I am not sure whether we need not be stuck with words. ------- N: Thank you for answering. Perhaps I did not make myself clear. I mean going over words again and again, without relating them to daily life. There is a danger of being stuck with theory and that is not the aim of the Dhamma. I am glad you say: <(3) As regards the meaning of the three pari~n~nas, it really does not matter whether it is classified as (~nata pari~n~na, tiira.na pari~n~na, and pahaana pari~n~na) or not, because, as far as pari~n~naa is concerned, I am following the Buddha’s words mentioned in MN 1 (apari~n~naatam, pari~n~neyyam, pari~n~naatam, pari~n~naatantam) > Nina. #87141 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:28 am Subject: Re: to Han. [dsg] Re: Error in the Vism. Part III Comprehend & Comprehende sarahprocter... Hi Herman, Apologies for butting in here briefly, --- On Wed, 18/6/08, Herman Hofman wrote: H:>I was quite concerned about the attitude you assumed on receiving news of your eye condition. It was just like the above attitude to venerable monks, if a doctor says something, it must be true. ... S: If I may so, you completely misunderstand Han. Just because someone prefers not to argue/disagree with doctors or monks does not mean that they agree with all that is said. We all have to check for ourselves, to understand our own kusala and akusala. Yes, there are also cultural differences in what is considered appropriate or respectful behaviour. I can both understand and appreciate Han's approach. ... > Han: You can criticize me as much as you like. But please do not bring in my people and my country. H:>I'm sorry that I have been unclear. I am not critical of you, but I can understand why you think it, if you cannot allow yourself to ciriticise anyone. .... S: Yes, it sounded to me as though you were critical of Han's attitude or 'compliance' (as you saw it). As we all agree, whatever approach or attitude we have has its own consequences (which I'm well aware of, by butting in here... ... H: >Can you clarify why I should not talk to you about the long-suffering people of Myanmar? .... S: For one thing, Han has asked you not to. For me that would be sufficient. It's a kindness and consideration to do so. Btw, I appreciate the B.Bodhi quote on the Abhidhamma which you've given a couple of times. Some of us are criticised for blindly accepting Buddhaghosa's commentaries as an 'authority' on Abhidhamma. Do you, instead, accept B.Bodhi's comments and consideration as a greater 'authority' on Abhidhamma instead? Curious:-) Metta, Sarah p.s Your post to me and Lukas on diets, Survey and nutriment was very witty:-) I'm also enjoying your humourous exhange with Ken H. ========= #87142 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:34 am Subject: Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn As it pertains to enlightenment, would your view therefore be that it will either happen quite easily, but more likely not at all, and this is simply how it is, the luck (conditions) of the draw? Action can play no role? Which leads me to the question, can someone be enlightened against their will, or chance upon nibbana? Dear Herman, All according to conditions. peace, connie #87143 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:39 am Subject: Re: poster nichiconn IMO, intention stands in no necessary relationship with action. We are not bound to carry out whatever intention arises. That's mindfulness for you. Nothing we do (action) is vipakka. Dear Herman, Agreed: kamma is not vipakka. peace, connie #87144 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Standpoints - A little crisis I am having sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Thu, 12/6/08, Alex wrote: A:> I have a little crisis going on. In some verses Buddha has said that he has no view points, no ditthi-s, etc. ... S: This is referring to WRONG views only. ... ---------- A:> A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but without grasping at it." http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ mn/mn.074. than.html ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= === >these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ dn/dn.09. 0.than.html# t-10 ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ==== <...> A:> Questions: Aren't definative teachings regarding: multiple life Kamma, 31 planes of existences and Final Nibbana, are sort of a standopoint? ... S: No, there are the right view, the wisdom of a Buddha shared with us. .... S: I've cut out all the comments relating to jokes and satire of the Buddha which make no sense to me. ... A:> Coming back to the speech issue: ------------ --------- -- these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ dn/dn.09. 0.than.html# t-10 ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= S: In other words, as we always discuss, we refer to emails, computers and people. For the wise, the same applies, but without any misconception. ... <...> A:> I can't seem to get my mind around final cessation of ALL consciousness of an Arahant going into Pari Nibbana. Some form of conscious unestablished consciousness, outside of 5 aggregates as Buddha has said - sure. Or I can picture Arahant becoming a some sort of egoless Bodhisattva coming back (but not personally, since no ego is there) forever?? ... S: The problem is the clinging to the idea of self, of beings. ... A:> I remember reading somewhere that Buddha gave like 82K or 84K suttas, ... S: Excuse me - 84K of Dhamma-Vinaya, 84K of Tipitaka as recited at the First Council. [See 'Useful Posts' under 'Vinaya commentary - Bahiranidana' for a series I wrote on this topic] .... A: >For crying out loud, he never ever denied Atman. ... S: That's the point I made above - i.e the problem of clinging to an idea of self which rose-tints any part of the Tipitaka being read. Thanks for sharing the crisis. There's only one solution, of course, understanding namas and rupas and leaving aside all the nonsense you're reading about the Buddha's satire, how he really meant there was an atman etc. Best wishes, Metta, Sarah ======== #87145 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:54 am Subject: Perfections Corner (184) nichiconn That's quite a rollercoaster ride of SHOULDing and no-SHOULDing you've taken me on, connie. Should I infer something from this, that perhaps you are not sure about the matter? Dear Herman, If you do infer anything and want to call it should, ok. Everything is as it should be - all according to conditions. peace, connie #87146 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:05 am Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III nichiconn Dear Tep, and that last paragraph no longer appears ... T: For the equanimity principle to work it requires the most matured disposition. The non-extreme(middle-way) perspective also helps. Sure, please edit it anyway you like. How do you like the post now after the last paragraph is gone? C: What you took for last, I saw as next... but fine/ok. In the one you kept, my concern was about the word should, which i didn't want to be called on to defend. >Connie: ... Then there's nothing I really feel like typing, mostly about S v. 424- [so just a few phrases: understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard; I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not-finally-known; understanding-consisting-in-cogitation; understanding-consisting-in-keeping-in-being] T: What 'message' do you see underlying the above passage? C: S v. 424? There are different "kinds" of (ways to describe) "understanding(s)". That was my interest. T: Is the "understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard" same as direct knowing? And, does the 'I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not-finally- known' mark the entry to the Stream? C: Is this another of your strategies or do you really not know? It is better for me if you just say what you want said. peace, connie #87147 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 sarahprocter... Hi Antony & all, --- On Thu, 12/6/08, Antony Woods wrote: A:> Regarding emergency sirens (which in recent weeks have happily helped me remember my dana to the Rural Fire Service which was in order to practice as if my head is on fire) I have some more thoughts to share: >When there is a tragedy, usually on the TV but even if it is hearing the siren when outdoors, people often think that they are being compassionate by watching it, when often the most compassionate thing you can do is to turn off the TV or note the siren as hearing so as to return to the work at hand. >Great topic! .... S: I agree it's a good topic to discuss further. The point we were discussing when we met was how easily we hear a sound and are immediately lost in a world of stories and ideas, conjuring up all sorts of images and forgetting all about the understanding of realities now. Of course, there was no suggestion that we shouldn't move out of the way of emergency vehicles or not assist those in distress if we have the opportunity! However, thinking and thinking about the visible objects or sounds, imagining various gruesome scenarios, is not metta or compassion. Metta and compassion involve the friendliness and care when we are with people or when we have the chance to assist. I know you have a lot of confidence in the value of the bhrama-viharas. My comment at the time was also a reminder of the greatest kusala, the insight into the true nature of realities as impermanent, dukkha and anatta. This can only come about through understanding these realities, such as sound or visible object, when they appear at the present moment. I was just reminded of the Velama Sutta, and this is taken from an earlier message of mine (#69833) and a discussion on daana: >>S:.... Velama Sutta where it says (PTS transl.): "For, though brahman Velama gave that very rich gift, greater would have been the fruit thereof, had he fed one person of right view (di.t.thisampanna"m. Comy.: 'dassanasampanna"m sotaapanna"m) Lily de Silva's summary ... continues: "It is more meritorious to feed one once-returner than a hundred stream enterers. Next in order come non-returners, arahants, Paccekabuddhas and Sammasambuddhas. Feeding the Buddha and the Sangha is more meritorious than feeding the Buddha alone. It is even more meritorious to construct a monastery for the general use of the Sangha of the four quarters of all times. Taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha is better still. Abiding by the Five Precepts is even more valuable. But better still is the cultivation of metta, loving-kindness, and best of all, the insight into impermanence, which leads to Nibbana."<< Metta, Sarah ======= #87148 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:11 am Subject: Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? dhammanusarin Dear Herman, - Please pardon my mistake for not including your name in the list; you were on my mind all the time while I was writing this message, though. It is a case where attention and concentration and memory can arise with a weak mindfulness. Without keen mindfulness there is no keen awareness (sampajanna). I will be more than happy to read your valuable comments on this subject. Thanks. Tep === #87149 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:35 am Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III dhammanusarin Dear Connie, - Thank you for the feedback that helps me understand your thinking better. Maybe you are not aware that your messages often are not easy for me to understand fully. I think that reflects your higher intelligence ( high-flying eagle over a poor sparrow) rather than a lack of skill for writing clearly. :-) >T: Is the "understanding-consisting-in-what-is-heard" same as direct knowing? And, does the 'I-shall-come-to-know-finally-the-as-yet-not- finally-known' mark the entry to the Stream? C: Is this another of your strategies or do you really not know? It is better for me if you just say what you want said. T: My own answer to the two questions is "yes and yes". What I really do not know is what your reply might be. There is also an important implication in regard to (ariya) pa~n~na. So far no-one here agree with anything I have written about pa~n~na ! But it is fine with me. Tep === #87150 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:54 am Subject: Respecting the conventional teaching. philofillet Hi Ken and all >This fact is > demonstrated in Buddhist groups everywhere. Every day on DSG, for > example, we see people insisting the Dhamma is a conventional > teaching. This appalling mistake (and appalling slander) would > *never* be made by someone who took the Abhidhamma seriously. Are you denying that there are two kinds of truth taught in the Dhamma, the conventional (I forget the Pali - starts with S...samyutta or something like that) and the paramattha? If you do deny this, good luck, as you said to Howard. If you don't deny it, and admit your error, be a wee bit more careful throwing around the "a" word. (not the "A" word.) Or maybe you're saying there are people who deny the paramattha. I doubt there are, not here. Or maybe you think the conventional teaching is simply for the purpose of making the paramattha easier to communicate, a kind of shorthand. For example, a sutta telling a person to reflect "I will grow old and die" does *not* mean "I will grow old and die", those words are just conventional shorthand for the dhammas involved. That is probably the way you see it, isn't it? Really, a shame, I think,that you have been deprived of a full appreciation of the Dhamma because of your premature encounter with the deep paramattha teachings. The conventional teaching has a depth and fullness that stands on its own and shouldn't be belittled by those who truly care about the Buddha's teaching. Nor should the paramattha, which is obviously where the ultimate liberation lies. By the way, I thought of a very good example of the way the Buddha's teaching of morality, even in the conventional form, goes way beyond that of other codes of morality. The sutta in AN that says that when we abstain from evil deeds, we provide protection to immeasurable beings, and that protection thereby returns to us. This is a conventional teaching (good luck reducing it to a single moment dhamma) but it goes infinitely further and deeper than the kind of morality taught in other religions. I would like to make a study of this sort of thing, someday, if I ever have time. Anyways Ken, please have more respect for the conventional teaching. It is not just shorthand for your beloved dhammas. Metta, Phil #87151 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part I sarahprocter... Dear Tep & all, Looking at your series in order. First, #86967, where you refer to past messages of Nina's and mine on the topic. You refer to the Vism definitions, Nina's explanations and then some of my messages in which I've quoted at length from B.Bodhi's summaries of the commentaries to suttas such as the Mulapariyaya Sutta, the Pahana/Parinna Sutta etc. You write: --- On Sat, 14/6/08, Tep wrote: .... >Tep: I find too much individual extension/opinion added on to the the original concept a disadvantage; doubts creep up in my mind as I keep wondering what the Buddha and Arahant Sariputta said about these full understandings. ............ ......... S: Please note, that it was the commentary details of the Mulapariyaya Sutta, referring to the 3 pari~n~nas, that you were referring to here. In other words, I'm just making the point (which you don't disagree with) that the Vism and suttas + commentaries agree.. You also kindly quoted an earlier exchange, where I believe it is made clear that sometimes pari~n~na in the suttas is used as a 'virtual'synonym of pahaana (abandonment of defilements, i.e realisation of nibbana) and other times all 3 pari~n~nas are implied, along with the stages of insight: **** Sarah (#50747): > Tep: I want to remark that the Buddha's definition for parinna is the greatest : > > "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of > aversion, ending of delusion. [1] This is called comprehension. " >[SN XXII.23 Parinna, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu] > > [Footnote] > [1] Comprehension here means the arahant's full-knowing (see MN > 117). ... .... > Tep: So it is clear that full understanding (parinna) is not for > those non-Arahants among us to claim to possess. :-) >S: This is referring to the third parinna, pahana parinna (full understanding as abandoning). >BB gives this note to his translation: "The explanation of pari~n~na, full understanding, in terms of the destruction of lust (raagakkhaya) etc, initially seems puzzling, but see MN1 66-67, where pari~n~na is used as a virtual synonym for pahaana. Spk specifies pari~n~na here as accantapari~ n~na, ultimate abaondonment, which it glosses as samatikkama, transcendence, and identifies with Nibbaana. Apparently accantapari~ n~na is distinct from the usual three kinds of pari~n~na, on which see the following note. >S:The following note he gives refers to the following sutta, SN24:3 'Directly Knowing' which refers to 'directly knowing and fully understanding form' etc. >Note: "Anabhijaan. m, etc, are present participles, glosses anabhijaananto, etc. Spk: By 'directly knowing' (abhijaana.m) , the full understanding of the known (~naatapari~ n~na) is indicated; by 'full understanding' (parijaana.m) , full understanding by scrutinization (tiira.napari~ n~naa); by 'beoming dispassionate' and 'abandoning' , the full understanding as abandonment (pahaanapari~ n~naa)." >S: So it is clear we need to read the suttas carefully, to appreciate that understanding has to develop and there can never be full understanding by abandoning (pahana parinna) if the earlier stages of insight, beginning with the insight into namas and rupas directly (~naatapari~ n~naa) hasn't been realised first. >As the note I gave yestereday made clear, pahana parinna can either refer to ariyan wisdom or to the full abandoning at the stage or arahantship only as in the sutta you quoted. ============ ========= ======= **** Metta, Sarah ======== #87152 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Error in the Vism; Part II: Vism and Patism. sarahprocter... Dear Tep, Here you are thoroughly considering and studying whether there is any difference in meaning between what is said in the Visuddhimagga and what is said in the Patisambhidamagga on the 3 pari~n~nas. For others, let me repeat again that these pari~n~nas refer to the application of the knowledge realised at the various stages of insight until enlightenment is realised. For convenience, I'll be adding the following numbers into your quotes: 1) ~naata pari~n~na 2)tiira.na pari~n~na 3)pahaana pari~n~na --- On Sun, 15/6/08, Tep wrote: T:> Vism XX, 3: Here is the exposition: there are three kinds of mundane full understanding, that is, full-understanding of the known, full understanding as investigation, and full-understanding as abandoning, with reference to which it was said: 1)'Understanding that is direct-knowledge is knowledge in the sense of being known. 2)Understanding that is full understanding is knowledge in the sense of investigating. 3)Understanding that is abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up' [Ps.i.87] >T: Ps.i.87 stands for Patisambhidamagga, Treatise i : on Knowledge, paragraph 87. But the paragraph number 87 does not match with my Patism book. .... S: It would be the reference to the Pali (perhaps Sinhala Pali script). .... >T: I also find more detail about full-understanding( pari~n~na) in Patism i, 265 (hard-bound copy, PTS Publication, 2002). Patism i, 265. ... ... [T: I am skipping the part on training in the higher virtue] ... ... He trains by adverting to these three kinds of training, he trains by knowing them, by seeing them, by reviewing them, by steadying [cognizance] upon them, by resolving with faith upon them, by exerting energy upon them, by establishing mindfulness upon them, by concentrating cognizance upon them, 1)by understanding them with understanding, 2)by directly knowing what is to be directly known, by fully understanding what is to be fully understood, 3)by abandoning what is to be abandoned, by realizing what is to be realized, he trains by developing what should be developed. etc. .... S: My numbering above is guess-work. Do you have the Pali for it? It would also be useful to see the Pali for the reference the Vism gives. So far, it doesn't seem so different. .... T:> Vism XX,4 : 1)Herein, the plane of full-understanding as the known extends from the delimitation of formations up to the discernment of conditions; for in this interval the penetration of the specific characteristics of states predominates. .... S: The application of the understanding following the first stage of insight up to the second. It is the clear understanding of particular namas and rupas, such as seeing and visible object. .... T: >2)The plane of full-understanding as investigation extends from comprehension by groups up to contemplation of rise and fall; for in this interval the penetration of the general characteristics predominates. .... S: The application of the understanding following the third stage of insight up to the fourth stae of insight. It is the clear understanding of the ti-lakkhana of those dhammas already understood, such as the impermanence of seeing and visible object. ... T:> 3)The plane of full-understanding as abandoning extends from contemplation of dissolution onwards; for from these onwards the seven contemplations that affect the abandoning of the perception of permanence, etc., predominate ... ... S: The application of the understanding following the higher stages of insight, leading to enlightenment and the abandoning of wrong views and other gross defilements. .... T:> Vism XXII, 106-108: (a) Full-understanding is threefold, that is (i) full-understanding as the known, (ii) full-understanding as investigating( judging), and (ii) full-understanding as abandoning (see Ch. XX, 3). (i) Herein, full-understanding as the knownis summarized thus: 'Understanding that is direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of the known' (Ps.i.87). It is briefly stated thus: 'Whatever states are directly known are known' (Ps.i.87). It is given in detail in the way beginning: 'Bhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known ...' (Ps.i.5) Its particular plane is the direct knowing of mentality- materiality with its conditions. (ii) Full-understanding as investigating (judging) is summarized thus: 'Understanding that is full-understanding is knowledge in the sense of investigation( judging)' (Ps.i.87). It is briefly stated thus: 'Whatever states are understood are investigated( judged)' (Ps.i.87). It is given in detail in the way beginning: 'Bhikkhus, all is to be understood. And what is all that is to be understood? The eye is to be fully understood ...' (Ps.i.22). Its particular plane starts with comprehension by groups, and occurring as investigation of impermanence, suffering, and not-self, it extends as far as conformity (cf. Ch. XX, 4). (iii) Full-understanding as abanding is summarized thus: 'Understanding that is abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up' (Ps.i.87). It is stated in detail thus: 'Whatever states are abandoned are given up' (Ps.i.87). It occurs in the way beginning: 'Through the contemplation of impermanence he abandons the perception of permanence (Cf. Ps.i.87). Its plane extends from the contemplation of dissolution to path knowledge. This is what is intended here. ..... >T: Ven. Buddhaghosa heavily refered to the Patisambhidamagga. But it should be carefully noticed that the Arahant Sariputta or the Buddha did not wrap the other two knowledges with "fully understanding what is to be fully understood" (tiranatta~nana) and call it 'pari~n~na' like the venerable did. .... S: Whether 2) is referred to as tiranatta-nana or tirana pari~n~na makes no difference. Let's not get hung up on differences in terminology in different texts, but try to understand what exactly is meant. .... T:> The evidence is seen in Patism i, 413-415 : 413. 1)How is it that (XX) understanding as direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of what-is-known? 2)That (XXI) understanding as full understanding is knowledge in the sense of judging (investigating) ? 3)That (XXII) abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up? That (XXIII) understanding as developing is knowledge in the sense of single function? That (XIV) understanding as realizing is knowledge in the sense of sounding(phassana) ? [T: the Roman numerals denote the particular kinds of the 73 knowledges (~nanas) in Patism Treatise i, On Knowledge.] 414. 1)Whatever ideas(dhammas) are directly known are known. 2)Whatever ideas are fully understood are judged(investigated ). 3)Whatever ideas are abandoned are given up. What ever ideas are developed have a single function(rasa, taste). Whatever ideas are realized are sounded. 415, Knowledge is in the sense of that being known and understanding is in the sense of the act of understanding that. Hence it was said : 1)'understanding as direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of what-is-know; 2)understanding as full understanding is knowledge in the sense of judging (investigating) ; 3)understanding as abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up; understanding as developing is knowledge in the sense of single function; understanding as realizing is knowledge in the sense of sounding'. ............ ......... ......... ... .... S: I put in the numbers to help me comprehend the passages. There may be errors, but especially with the last Psm passages, I think it's clear that the references are to just the same 3 pari~n~nas as given in the Vism quotes. So far, I really can't see the problem. I apologise to others for such a long post. Metta, Sarah ====== #87153 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Error in the Vism. Part III: Comprehend & Comprehended. sarahprocter... Dear Tep & all, --- On Sun, 15/6/08, Tep wrote: T:>Patism i, 414 lists four kinds of understanding, only one of which is the full understanding : Whatever ideas(dhammas) are directly known are known. Whatever ideas are fully understood are judged(investigated ). Whatever ideas are abandoned are given up. What ever ideas are developed have a single function(rasa, taste). Whatever ideas are realized are sounded(phassita) . .... S: Again, the first three of these refer to the 3 pari~n~nas in the Vism and commentaries. ... T:> In conclusion: direct knowing and comprehending (fully understanding) the dhammas are in the sekha who is on the Path (Stream). When the dhammas are fully understood, the monk becomes an arahant. This is what the Buddha and Arahant Sariputta taught, not the three-fold full understanding in the Vism. What is your thought? Any disagreement, slightly different opinion, or complete agreement are all welcome ! .... S: I agree that the sekha, from the sotapanna up, directly knows and comprehends dhammas. This entering of the stream leads to arahantship without fail. There cannot be this direct knowledge and abandoning of defilements without the earlier stages of insight and repeated understanding following such insights which has to grow and develop through directly understanding the particular namas and rupas and the general characteristics of them. In other words there cannot be the pari~n~na of abandoning (pahaana) without the pari~n~nas of knowing (~naata) and investigating (tiira.na). The terms may be different in various texts, but the meaning, the path of insight is the same as I understand it. Thank you again for a very interesting series. Metta, Sarah p.s no time to check these messages, apologies for typos. ========= #87154 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:00 am Subject: Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? truth_aerator Hello Tep, Nina, Sarah, Alex, Phil, KenH, Howard, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Hi Nina, Sarah, Alex, Phil, KenH, Howard - > > The conversations such as the following make me wondering why DSG > members' understandings of the Abhidhamma are so much different. >>>> Even though I can speak about myself only, none of us here are Arahants (or Anagamis) endowed with quadriple discriminative knowledge. > T: So they are not the Buddha's words, but rather a derivation from His words. However, in the full-blown treatise sense the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the greatest source for scholars to gain a deeper understanding of the Teachings down to minute details. > > What is your thought? > > > Tep > === > The derivation part is bothersome. How do we know that the monks who derived Buddha's words, have not unintentionally misrepresented him? Who could equal to Buddha, Ven Sariputta and Ven. MahaMogallana? By the 1st council if I understand correctly the two best Arahants were Ven. Ananda and Ven. MahaKassapa. Is that correct? Remember, Ananda in his Theragatha verses implied that the newer Arahats were not as good as the past ones. The billion dollar question: How much theoretical (book) knowledge is enough (for Stream and beyond), and how much is too much? Those who have followed my posts know how much I ask the above. Before we get rid of ditthi s, anything we read may be just another view (that could be subjectively warped). I have suspicion that most westerners and especially people today suffer from mental disease of having to "figure everything out". Reading is almost 100% close to restlessness, one of the hindrances - if not kama and other hindrances as well. The issue with Abh and such isn't only about "is it correct?". The more important issue: Is it required or even helpful to study for STREAM ENTRY? The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of THEORY one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the branches. Look, some if not most Arahants, KNEW MUCH LESS THEORY THAN WE. hmmm... IMHO, Best wishes, Alex #87155 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/18/2008 1:01:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of THEORY one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the branches. =============================== This reminds me of Ajahn Buddhadasa who gave his "summary" along the lines of "Grasp at nothing as me or mine." Of course, the trick is in the lead-up to that! I remember a number of years back when Nancy Reagan, the wife of the U. S. President, said with regard to avoiding the rampant drug problem among American youth "Just say 'no'!" The amusing part of that, of course, is the "Just"! LOL! With metta, Howard #87156 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:51 am Subject: What is thinking? szmicio Hi all, What is thinking? How this thinking arise? Who or what thinks? What is vitakkha? What is vicara? This thinking arise so easily, and when it arise there can't be panja, there cant't be sati. Just blindness. Should we know it? or should we make something to concentrate? if there is a thinking , is there micha-ditthi too? This blindness lasts for 1 minut, 2 or 30 or more? And If it appear I want this clear moments of understanding. bye Lukas #87157 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Error in the Vism; Part II: Vism and Patism. nilovg Dear Sarah, I am glad to see that also in the Patisambidhamagga the three pari~n`nas are included. Thank you, this post is very good. I noticed concern in some people that the processes of citta are only in commentaries. But as we quoted before, they are in the Patisambidhamagga under behaviour, cariya, as you also know. Nina. Op 18-jun-2008, om 18:27 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > S: I put in the numbers to help me comprehend the passages. There > may be errors, but especially with the last Psm passages, I think > it's clear that the references are to just the same 3 pari~n~nas as > given in the Vism quotes. So far, I really can't see the problem. > > I apologise to others for such a long post. #87158 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? truth_aerator Hi Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 6/18/2008 1:01:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of THEORY > one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a > paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. > Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the branches. > > > =============================== > This reminds me of Ajahn Buddhadasa who gave his "summary" along the lines of "Grasp at nothing as me or mine." Of course, the trick is in the lead-up to that! I remember a number of years back when Nancy Reagan, the wife of the U. S. President, said with regard to avoiding the rampant drug problem among American youth "Just say 'no'!" The amusing part of that, of course, is > the "Just"! LOL! > > With metta, > Howard > Yes Howard, I understand that it is tough to "Just say NO"... But... that could be, in the long run, easier path. Can you learn more about the actual taste of a dish from reading the menu? Some prefer to eat the menu too... :) You possibly know it even better than me that written word can be easily misunderstood. By reading about swimming, you will not learn in a pragmatical way on how to swim. You know, I've heard about one method of teaching where you simply drop a person into the water and let them figure it out. "Ananda, it's not proper for a disciple to follow after the Teacher to hear discourses, verses, or catechisms. Why is that? For a long time, Ananda, have you listened to the teachings, retained them, discussed them, accumulated them, examined them with your mind, and penetrated them well in terms of your views. But as for talk that is scrupulous, conducive to release of awareness, and leads exclusively to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calm, direct knowledge, self-awakening, & Unbinding — i.e., talk on modesty, contentment, seclusion, non-entanglement, arousing persistence, virtue, concentration, discernment, release, and the knowledge & vision of release: It's for the sake of hearing talk of this sort that it is proper for a disciple to follow after the Teacher as if yoked to him. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.122.than.html ========= Anathapandika a Lay stream enterer --> 'Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently co-arisen, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not mine, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.093.than.html ======= Herein, monks, a monk destroys the cankers and enters into and abides in the emancipation of the mind and wisdom, knowing and realizing this state for himself, even in this present life. This I declare of his quick-wittedness. When questioned on More-Dhamma and on More- Discipline, he fails and cannot answer the questions. This I declare his lack of grace. AN book of 9s iv, 399, ic, III, 23 "And how is a monk learned? His evil, unskillful qualities that are defiled, that lead to further becoming, create trouble, ripen in stress, and lead to future birth, aging, & death have streamed away. This is how a monk is learned. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html#t-10 "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.023.than.html ================= The thing about too much studying is that it may make difficulties later on as you'll have to let it all go. The more baggage (even if it is the right one) the harder it is. Remember Dighanakaka Sutta? Now at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting2 behind the Blessed One, fanning him. The thought occurred to him, "Indeed, it seems that the Blessed One speaks to us of the abandoning of each of these mental qualities through direct knowledge.3 Indeed, it seems that the One Well-gone speaks to us of the relinquishing of each of these mental qualities through direct knowledge."4 As Ven. Sariputta was reflecting thus, his mind was released from fermentations through not- clinging. ." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html Also from the same sutta: "A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but without grasping at it." ----- IMHO the Buddha totally refutes the notion of special and "absolute manner of talking". In the suttas there is NO division into "conceptual" and "absolute". Even the division in 72 Dhammas is as absolute as "a person" . If it was as ultimate and so and so, then why were there so much arguments over "Is there 72, 75, 100 Dhammas or what?" ... Do the Dhammas exist tritemporally or only in the present? Sabhava, parabhava or no essential nature in Dhammas? Empty of selfessence (sabhava) or empty of another (parabhava)? Is everything real or illusionary? Matter or Mind first? Do other people exist or not... Etc Etc... ================================================================== AN Book text ii, iv, xix, 186 Vi (186) Approach If a monk understands the meaning and the text of Dhamma- even if it be but a stanza of four lines-and be set on living in accordance with the dhamma, he may be called "one widely learnt, who knows Dhamma by heart.". -------------------------------------------------------------- Best wishes, Alex #87159 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:29 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III truth_aerator Dear Tep, Connie and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > > Dear Connie, - > > A rule-of-thumb to test someone's true understanding of a subject > matter is by how s/he is able to summarize it in a few sentences. > > AND be able to behave with less greed, anger and delusion. Not to mention be able to reach Jhana (which requires to let go of the hindrances and unwholesome mental states). If one truly truly understands anatta and other things, then one won't act in an egotistic way and will have a much easier time attaining to wholesome states of mind - Jhana. Best wishes, Alex #87160 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition moellerdieter Hi Ken, you wrote: '( D: What your question indicates is the described training vs merely intellectual approach, isn't it?) No, I had nothing like that in mind. As I see it, right understanding is essentially the path. To put it another way, the path taught by the Buddha was a path of right understanding. So, by my reckoning. the "training" you are referring to would have to be right understanding (vipassana bhavana). More specifically, it would be satipatthana (right understanding of conditioned reality). D: Right understanding is the forerunner of the different aspects of the 8fold Noble Path. Because of right understanding/view ,there is right thought and so there is right speech and so there is right action and so there is right livehood etc. , i.e. the Noble Path leading to the cessation of suffering opens for the Noble Ones.. but of course there is the need of aproaching '..developing by training these aspects ,e.g. by contemplation of the 4 foundations of mindfulness Is satipatthana defined by' right understanding of conditioned reality ' based on an Abh. source or your conclusion? I think that the common understanding of satipatthana is correctly expressed by Nayantiloka: " the 4 'foundations of mindfulness', lit. 'awarenesses of mindfulness' (sati-upaá¹¹?na), are: contemplation of body, feeling, mind and mind-objects. - For sati, s. prec.A detailed treatment of this subject, so important for the practice of Buddhist mental culture, is given in the 2 Satipaá¹¹?na Suttas (D. 22; M. 10), which at the start as well as the conclusion, proclaim the weighty words: "The only way that leads to the attainment of purity, to the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, to the end of pain and grief, to the entering of the right path, and to the realization of NibbÄ?na is the 4 foundations of mindfulness." After these introductory words, and upon the question which these 4 are, it is said that the monk dwells in contemplation of the body, the feelings, the mind, and the mind-objects, "ardent, clearly conscious and mindful, after putting away worldly greed and grief." unquote Ken : I don't know what you might mean by "a merely intellectual approach." That sounds to me like something a university student might have if he took a 'Buddhist studies' course just to pass an exam. I can see how that kind of approach would be useless. It would not be understanding; it would be mere memorisation. D: No, not mere memorisation ...understanding what is meant is one thing (vs) to experience it another..( isn't that pariyatti and paripatti (and so pativedha) ? I recently read a statement ( not remembering by whom ) like: 'I am only interested in the intellectual understanding of the Dhamma... ' which I take to a 'a merely intellectual approach' ... I am not interested to talk, discuss at this level Ken : (D:> I pointed out to you that Sati Patthana as the 7th link of the 8fold Noble Path has been taught by the Buddha (Maha Satipatthana Sutta) as a guide , being part of the samadhi sequence of the 3fold N.Path training aiming development of wisdom /panna, liberation..) -------------------------- We are using different terminology, so it is no wonder that I missed this point the first time around. As far as I am aware, satipatthana is a moment of right understanding (in which a conditioned dhamma is directly seen to be the way the Buddha described it to be). When you are talking about the "seventh link in the ariyan eightfold path" you are talking about samma-sati, which is the cetasika, sati, in its supramundane form (in a moment of enlightenment). That is not satipatthana. D: see above.. I don' t understand your terminlogy ..any canonical quotation to support your understanding of satipatthana? Ken:Ah yes, well, that was when we were talking at cross purposes (as I have just been explaining). I hope it is cleared up now. That sentence was the only one in the entire quote that contradicted my understanding. It said that the mundane right path can be "without panna." In other words, that sentence was equating ordinary, everyday, wholesome consciousness with the unique, profound, Middle Way. D: do you think , that one sentence , you may have misunderstood , justifies to state that' ' All I can say is it is utter rubbish. Nyanatiloka is confusing mundane wholesome consciousness with some kind of Mundane Eightfold Path!*' ? Of course there is something like a mundane Eightfold Path , how can the (Holy) 8fold Noble Path be approached otherwise ..? it is piecework of training (Sila, Samadhi , Panna ) until the Path opens with right understanding to be the forerunner , which I like to stress again.. Ken (D: I wonder what James would say about that in respect to right speech .. and you don't make up for it by your 'PS: <. . .> I hope James is suitably amused to see he has become an authority on right speech. :-) D: I hope James may forgive me that hint but perhaps sharing my opinion of abusive speech --------------------------------- Ken: (D: > not mention? how about M.N. 117 Right View , specifying 2 kinds of right understanding ( even if the mundane part isn't unique in respect to other religions , it belongs to the Buddha Dhamma)--------------------------------- We seem to have gone off the track again. D: no .. I responded to 'I feel very sure there is no mention of any such path in the Theravadin texts. ' Ken: You will see that I was talking about wholesome consciousness *without* panna (without right view) You seem to think I was talking about wholesome consciousness *with* panna. (It was a good sidetrack, but I will resist it for now.) D: I suupose we need a common definition for panna (among the multiple ..) Ken: (D: could it be that I feel the same way , ie.. you have been mislead by your school.. ?) ------------------------ I am sure it could be. And I still think this is *the* vital starting point in Dhamma study. 'Is satipatthana a meditation technique, or is it the conditioned dhamma known as panna (when it arises to know another conditioned dhamma)?' D: I think we should try to re-phrase the question .. remember please what has been said e.g. about technique.. with Metta Dieter #87161 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? moellerdieter Hi Howard (Alex), 'This reminds me of Ajahn Buddhadasa who gave his "summary" along the lines of "Grasp at nothing as me or mine." Of course, the trick is in the lead-up to that! I remember a number of years back when Nancy Reagan, the wife of the U. S. President, said with regard to avoiding the rampant drug problem among American youth "Just say 'no'!" The amusing part of that, of course, is the "Just"! LOL! indeeed ..and so the summary of the Buddha Dhamma described in a similar way ( as suffering in brief means 5 Khanda attachment) : just get detached! ;-) with Metta Dieter #87162 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/18/2008 3:21:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 6/18/2008 1:01:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of THEORY > one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a > paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. > Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the branches. > > > =============================== > This reminds me of Ajahn Buddhadasa who gave his "summary" along the lines of "Grasp at nothing as me or mine." Of course, the trick is in the lead-up to that! I remember a number of years back when Nancy Reagan, the wife of the U. S. President, said with regard to avoiding the rampant drug problem among American youth "Just say 'no'!" The amusing part of that, of course, is > the "Just"! LOL! > > With metta, > Howard > Yes Howard, I understand that it is tough to "Just say NO"... But... that could be, in the long run, easier path. Can you learn more about the actual taste of a dish from reading the menu? Some prefer to eat the menu too... :) ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: You may have misread me on this, Alex. I actually more agree with you than disagree. My point was not that lots of study is required, but, far more generally, that lots of preparatory cultivation is required before it is possible to "just relinquish." I DO think that a degree of Dhamma study is needed, though it should be study of what is essential - the leaves in the Buddha's hand, which include the practical details of practice handed down from generation to generation. But that study alone, in my estimation, will *never* do the job unless acted upon, seriously and consistently. ----------------------------------------------------- You possibly know it even better than me that written word can be easily misunderstood. By reading about swimming, you will not learn in a pragmatical way on how to swim. You know, I've heard about one method of teaching where you simply drop a person into the water and let them figure it out. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: That works on occasion. However, it also has an enormous side-benefit for mortuaries. ;-) The middle way, of course, between the approaches of study & study & study but stay out of the water (in which case no swimming gets done), on the one hand, and take no instruction at all and then jump into the water and then sink or swim (but most surely just sink), on the other hand, is to get into water, shallow at first, with a good swimmer who is a fine instructor, and train under him/her, maybe with some reading materials & films to study in addition at other times. ---------------------------------------------------- ================================================================== AN Book text ii, iv, xix, 186 Vi (186) Approach If a monk understands the meaning and the text of Dhamma- even if it be but a stanza of four lines-and be set on living in accordance with the dhamma, he may be called "one widely learnt, who knows Dhamma by heart.". --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: A well-chosen quote, I'd say! :-) ------------------------------------------------------- Best wishes, Alex ============================= With metta, Howard #87163 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? dhammanusarin Dear Alex and Howard (Herman and Han), - Like Howard I also am gladdened by your Dhamma quote, Alex : AN Book text ii, iv, xix, 186 Vi (186) Approach If a monk understands the meaning and the text of Dhamma- even if it be but a stanza of four lines-and be set on living in accordance with the dhamma, he may be called "one widely learnt, who knows Dhamma by heart.". Howard: A well-chosen quote, I'd say! :-) ------------------------------------------------------- I know one such stanza. Dhammapada Verse 183: Sabbapaapassa akara.nam Kusalassa upasampadaa Sacitta pariyodapanam Etam buddhaana saasanam. Not to do evil, to cultivate merit, to purify one's mind - This is the Teaching of the Buddhas. -------------------- Regards, Tep === #87164 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:29 pm Subject: Re: What is thinking? dhammanusarin Hi Lukas, - Your thought is good, and your questions are even better. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Hi all, > What is thinking? How this thinking arise? Who or what thinks? > What is vitakkha? > What is vicara? > > This thinking arise so easily, and when it arise there can't be panja, > there cant't be sati. Just blindness. Should we know it? or should we > make something to concentrate? > > if there is a thinking , is there micha-ditthi too? > > This blindness lasts for 1 minut, 2 or 30 or more? And If it appear I > want this clear moments of understanding. > > bye > Lukas > ...................... T: Please allow me to suggest that you read the following quotes to get started. 1. (Itivuttaka, 110, BPS, John Ireland transl) “Whether walking or standing, Sitting or lying down Whoever thinks such thoughts That are evil and worldly â€" He is following a wrong path, Infatuated with delusive things. Such a bhikkhu cannot reach Enlightenment which is supreme. Whether walking or standing, Sitting or lying down, Whoever overcomes these thoughts- Such a bhikkhu is able to reach Enlightenment which is supreme.â€? ***** 2. MN 2: "When, indeed, bhikkhus, evil unskillful thoughts due to reflection on an adventitious object are eliminated, when they disappear, and the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and concentrated just within (his subject of meditation), through his reflection on an object connected with skill, through his pondering on the disadvantages of unskillful thoughts, his endeavoring to be without attentiveness and reflection as regards those thoughts or through his restraining, subduing, and beating down of the evil mind by the good mind with clenched teeth and tongue pressing on the palate, that bhikkhu is called a master of the paths along which thoughts travel. The thought he wants to think, that, he thinks; the thought he does not want to think, that, he does not think. He has cut down craving, removed the fetter, rightly mastered pride, and made an end of suffering." Our wise DSG friends will of course give you at least one more suggestion. Tep === #87165 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:14 pm Subject: Re: Beginner's Abhidhamma: What is the Abhidhamma ? dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Lukas), - The inexhaustive flux of your thought energy is always admirable. When will you ever stop thinking? ;-) ............................................ [Alex wrote:] Hello Tep, Nina, Sarah, Alex, Phil, KenH, Howard, Herman and all, Even though I can speak about myself only, none of us here are Arahants (or Anagamis) endowed with quadriple discriminative knowledge. The derivation part is bothersome. How do we know that the monks who derived Buddha's words, have not unintentionally misrepresented him? Who could equal to Buddha, Ven Sariputta and Ven. MahaMogallana? By the 1st council if I understand correctly the two best Arahants were Ven. Ananda and Ven. MahaKassapa. Is that correct? Remember, Ananda in his Theragatha verses implied that the newer Arahats were not as good as the past ones. The billion dollar question: How much theoretical (book) knowledge is enough (for Stream and beyond), and how much is too much? Those who have followed my posts know how much I ask the above. Before we get rid of ditthi s, anything we read may be just another view (that could be subjectively warped). I have suspicion that most westerners and especially people today suffer from mental disease of having to "figure everything out". Reading is almost 100% close to restlessness, one of the hindrances - if not kama and other hindrances as well. The issue with Abh and such isn't only about "is it correct?". The more important issue: Is it required or even helpful to study for STREAM ENTRY? The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of THEORY one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the branches. Look, some if not most Arahants, KNEW MUCH LESS THEORY THAN WE. hmmm... IMHO, Best wishes, Alex ================ T: I am going to reply only to the parts that I have a thought. :-) Concerning 'ditthi' (assuming that in general it means a wrong view), one can gradually make it right by means of mindfulness and effort as described in MN 117. The trick is : a wrong view does not become right until both the sati and viriya dhammas finally turn into samma- sati and samma-vayama. Figuring things out in the right way makes great scientists and great engineers who improve our living conditions. Earnest contemplation on the Dhamma is a kind of "figuring things (dhammas) out" too, I guess. But there is a point in the practice (patipada) when the figuring things out has to stop -- that is when vitakka & vicara subside. Even kusala vitakkas have to stop too. The following sutta shows the importance of sati and viriya as "indriya" during a practice leading to the 1st jhana (and samma samadhi). "Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with renunciation, abandoning thinking imbued with sensuality, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with renunciation. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with non-ill will, abandoning thinking imbued with ill will, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with non-ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with harmlessness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmfulness, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmlessness. "Just as in the last month of the hot season, when all the crops have been gathered into the village, a cowherd would look after his cows: While resting under the shade of a tree or out in the open, he simply keeps himself mindful of 'those cows.' In the same way, I simply kept myself mindful of 'those mental qualities.' "Unflagging persistence was aroused in me, and unmuddled mindfulness established. My body was calm & unaroused, my mind concentrated & single. Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. [MN 19: Dvedhavitakka Sutta] Tep === #87166 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - Thank you for the comment. > Tep (to Connie): > A rule-of-thumb to test someone's true understanding of a subject > matter is by how s/he is able to summarize it in a few sentences. > Alex (#87159): AND be able to behave with less greed, anger and delusion. Not to mention be able to reach Jhana (which requires to let go of the hindrances and unwholesome mental states). If one truly truly understands anatta and other things, then one won't act in an egotistic way and will have a much easier time attaining to wholesome states of mind - Jhana. T: As I understand it, understanding of not-self comes with the abandonment of self-identification views in Stream-enterers. Yet the conceit 'I am' is completely eradicated only in an Arahant. See Khemaka Sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.089.than.html Do you think egotism includes both self-identification views and conceit, or not? Tep === #87167 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:59 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the conventional teaching. kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------- <. . .> Ph: > > Are you denying that there are two kinds of truth taught in the > Dhamma, the conventional (I forget the Pali - starts with > S...samyutta or something like that) and the paramattha? If you do > deny this, good luck, as you said to Howard. If you don't deny it, > and admit your error, be a wee bit more careful throwing around > the "a" word. (not the "A" word.) -------- You are referring to "appalling" as in my references to "appalling mistake" and "appalling slander." Imagine the following scenario: The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for our sakes, he journeyed for countless aeons in samasara fulfilling all the conditions necessary for him to become a Teaching Buddha. Then, when this most hard-won of all teachings is finally put before us, we say, "Oh this is just the same as all the other teachings! There is nothing new here! All we need to know is 'Be good and you will get your reward:' it's as simple as that." If I were an emotional man - which I am not - I would be moved to tears by that appalling scenario. To think of the appalling ingratitude! The appalling injustice! The appalling slander! The appalling waste! The appalling appallingness! :-) ------------------------- Ph" > Or maybe you're saying there are people who deny the paramattha. I doubt there are, not here. -------------------------- To accept (not deny) the paramattha is to accept there is only the paramattha. How many of us accept that? --------------------------------- Ph: > Or maybe you think the conventional teaching is simply for the purpose of making the paramattha easier to communicate, a kind of shorthand. For example, a sutta telling a person to reflect "I will grow old and die" does *not* mean "I will grow old and die", those words are just conventional shorthand for the dhammas involved. That is probably the way you see it, isn't it? -------------------------------- I could say 'yes' but there would need to be some explanation of my answer. Whenever there is the idea of a self, the true Dhamma will sound like ridiculous, dangerous, nonsense. However, when there is no idea of self we can say quite properly that there are only fleeting dhammas (no self that grows old and dies). -------------------- Ph: > Really, a shame, I think,that you have been deprived of a full appreciation of the Dhamma because of your premature encounter with the deep paramattha teachings. The conventional teaching has a depth and fullness that stands on its own and shouldn't be belittled by those who truly care about the Buddha's teaching. -------------------- A conventional teaching can be wholesome (kusala). That is a very good thing in its way. But it will not lead to final release from dukkha. The Buddha's teaching does lead to final release from dukkha. To equate it with a conventional teaching would be an app . . . :-) ------------------------------ Ph: > Nor should the paramattha, which is obviously where the ultimate liberation lies. ------------------------------ There is only one Dhamma. There is only one 'way in which things are.' Why would anyone try to see two Dhammas where there is only one? -------------------------------------- Ph: > By the way, I thought of a very good example of the way the Buddha's teaching of morality, even in the conventional form, goes way beyond that of other codes of morality. The sutta in AN that says that when we abstain from evil deeds, we provide protection to immeasurable beings, and that protection thereby returns to us. This is a conventional teaching (good luck reducing it to a single moment dhamma) but it goes infinitely further and deeper than the kind of morality taught in other religions. I would like to make a study of this sort of thing, someday, if I ever have time. --------------------------------------- Sheesh! I don't know where to begin, Phil. You seem to be saying that someone who labels himself a Buddhist will receive higher rewards than someone else . . . for performing exactly the same deeds . . . (?) . . No, maybe that is not what you are saying. I will wait till the book comes out. :-) As for "good luck reducing it to a single moment dhamma," well that is one area in which I have no trouble at all. You will call me a fundamentalist and an extremist, but I only have to remember there are only dhammas. After that it all falls into place. I can quite honestly say I never find it hard to see how a conventional-language explanation can be reworded as an Abhidhamma explanation. --------------------- Ph: > Anyways Ken, please have more respect for the conventional teaching. It is not just shorthand for your beloved dhammas. --------------------- Harrumph! :-) Ken H #87168 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:18 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Dear Alex, - > > Thank you for the comment. > > > Tep (to Connie): > > A rule-of-thumb to test someone's true understanding of a subject > > matter is by how s/he is able to summarize it in a few sentences. > > > > Alex (#87159): > > AND be able to behave with less greed, anger and delusion. Not to > mention be able to reach Jhana (which requires to let go of the > hindrances and unwholesome mental states). > > If one truly truly understands anatta and other things, then one > won't act in an egotistic way and will have a much easier time > attaining to wholesome states of mind - Jhana. > > T: As I understand it, understanding of not-self comes with the > abandonment of self-identification views in Stream-enterers. >>> Yes. Strong enough understanding (with the "heart" so to speak) will lead to Ariyahood and is itself a characteristic of Ariyahood. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.089.than.html > > Do you think egotism includes both self-identification views and > conceit, or not? > > Tep > === > Craving, conceit, views regarding self, and whatever is derived from these. Best wishes, Alex #87169 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:40 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the Buddhist teaching. truth_aerator Hi Ken, Phil and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, > but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for > our sakes, he journeyed for countless aeons in samasara fulfilling > all the conditions necessary for him to become a Teaching Buddha. >>>> Well, where did all the KS causes and conditions went(tm)? Remember, you can't "will to happen" (which would including willing to or not to become and Arahant). According to deep historical research by the Scholars and according to the main suttas - the mahayana like Bodhisatva concept came later. Through the earlier suttas the evidence points to the fact that Buddha Gotama (as all the Buddhas actually) was a first ARAHANT in this epoch who taught others . He became a Buddhist only after he met Buddha Kassapa and on the 3rd life he became an extraordinary Arahant who taught others. This makes the Buddhist teaching even stronger and capable of bringing one to Arahant/Buddhahood quicker. >>>>>>>> The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for our sakes, he journeyed for countless aeons in samasara fulfilling all the conditions necessary for him to become a Teaching Buddha. Then, when this most hard-won of all teachings is finally put before us, we say, "Oh this is just the same as all the other teachings! <>>> >>>> Similiar could be said for Jesus Christ, Prometheus or some other suffering hero character who suffered for us... Thats appealing to emotions that you are using... Best wishes, Alex #87170 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:41 pm Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part III nichiconn Dear Tep, You make me laugh - eagleness. Say not! May we practice hummingbird [ & i, at least, less flea or mosquito (always leaving a bit of an itch)]. Meanwhile, I enjoy meeting with you as a bookworm. While (seldom if) ever in a position to judge (well & truly), judge, I do, and not "innocently", but with passion, prejudice, pride -- misgiving? For 'the egg-born' (ex: certain birds, a mosquito, the unhatched human) - where is Reason? The passage you cut earlier: insight with aasavas; not associated with the paths and their fruition. The Guide/Netti: 400. 'Science' is a unity. Herein, what is science? It is knowledge about suffering, knowledge about the origin of suffering, knowledge about cessation of suffering, knowledge about the way leading to the cessation of suffering; knowledge about the past, knowledge about the future, knowledge about the past and future; knowledge about specific conditionality and dependently arisen ideas; (Dhs. 292; cf Pe 122). This is a diversity. Unity and diversity. Very nice: [storied] palace of one and all. What's with the castle, anyway? I itch to read. peace, connie #87171 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:44 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the conventional teaching. philofillet Hi Ken Thanks for your patient and friendly response to my over-the-top post. There is no doubting your deep enthusiasm for the Dhamma. > Ph: > > > Are you denying that there are two kinds of truth taught in the > > Dhamma, the conventional (I forget the Pali - starts with > > S...samyutta or something like that) and the paramattha? If you do > > deny this, good luck, as you said to Howard. If you don't deny it, > > and admit your error, be a wee bit more careful throwing around > > the "a" word. (not the "A" word.) > -------- > > You are referring to "appalling" as in my references to "appalling > mistake" and "appalling slander." Imagine the following scenario: > > The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, > but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for > our sakes, he journeyed for countless aeons in samasara fulfilling > all the conditions necessary for him to become a Teaching Buddha. > > Then, when this most hard-won of all teachings is finally put before > us, we say, "Oh this is just the same as all the other teachings! > There is nothing new here! All we need to know is 'Be good and you > will get your reward:' it's as simple as that." Ph: But Ken, surely you don't deny that the Buddha only taught the Dhamma that was "particular to the Buddhas" or however that goes when he had determined the listener's mind was ready for it? And as I've said many, many times, I'm not saying that even when it comes to conventional morality that the Dhamma is the same as other religions because in order to "be good and get your reward" (or avoid punishment, which is something that is indeed in the Buddha's teaching to householders, and often, is you study AN, even there there is a training that is unique to the Buddha. Christians just fall on their knees and ask for their reward, and get it. It's absurd. Buddhists have their deeds of body, speech and mind. That is what determines (though of course not in a strictly determined way, we don't know where the patisandhi citta will come from) one's destination. We have to earn our ticket, wherever "we" are going. Don't you see how it is different from other religions? There is a strict diligence involved, a mental training. You can reflect on that if you'd like. No response desired. :) And yes, for householders in the suttanta, there is a lot of interest in one's destination. Perhaps BB has selected suttas in a way that places an emphasis on this in his brief (around 200 suttas, I think) AN anthology, but there are many suttas that get at this. I refuse, personally, to believe that a sutta that tells a householder to be concerned about his destination was not intended by the Buddha to be a sutta that tells a householder to be concerned about his destination. He was the greatest teacher, as we know. Again, as usual, I trust that the translators are doing a decent job. BB also says as much in his introduction, that it is generally seeking a more refavourable rebirth that motivates householders to practice the Dhamma in the Buddhist tradition. Is he wrong? I doubt it. > > If I were an emotional man - which I am not - I would be moved to > tears by that appalling scenario. To think of the appalling > ingratitude! The appalling injustice! The appalling slander! The > appalling waste! The appalling appallingness! :-) Ph: Yes, indeed. If one were to reject the deep teachings, that would be appallingly appaling indeed. I'm not doing that. I'm just insist that they are grown into, or not, very, very gradually and that in my opinion in your approach there is too much inisistence on them from the beginning. In my opinion, and I think it is supported by the suttas mentionned above (in which the Buddha refrains from teaching the deep teachings until he knows the listener's mind is ready.) > A conventional teaching can be wholesome (kusala). That is a very > good thing in its way. But it will not lead to final release from > dukkha. The Buddha's teaching does lead to final release from dukkha. > To equate it with a conventional teaching would be an app . . . > :-) Ph: The paramattha is deeper, of course, and insight into it is where ultimate liberation (final release) lies. But the "conventional teaching" *is* also the "Buddha's teaching." Thus I was asking about that Pali word that starts with S. What is this conventional truth, this conventional teaching, and what is it purpose? Simply to make the paramattha more communicatable or is there a valid purpose for having conceptual objects that one values or pursues. How does the conventional teaching *of the Buddha* help to provide conditions for better insight into the deep teachings particular to the Buddha? I think that this conventional truth is very important too. So let's start by finding that Pali word that starts with an "S"...please. Metta, Phil #87173 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,270 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII [(xi)-(xii) Birth, etc.] 270. As regards the clause 'With becoming as condition, birth', etc., the definition of birth should be understood in the way given in the Description of the Truths (Ch. XVI,31ff.). Only kamma-process becoming is intended here as 'becoming'; for it is that, not rebirth-process becoming, which is a condition for birth. But it is a condition in two ways, as kamma condition and as decisive-support condition. 271. Here it may be asked: 'But how is it to be known that becoming is a condition for birth?' Because of the observable difference of inferiority and superiority. For in spite of equality of external circumstances, such as father, mother, seed, blood, nutriment, etc., the difference of inferiority and superiority of beings is observable even in the case of twins. And that fact is not causeless, since it is not present always and in all; nor has it any cause other than kamma-process becoming since there is no other reason in the internal continuity of beings generated by it. Consequently, it has only kamma-process becoming for its cause. And because kamma is the cause of the difference of inferiority and superiority among beings the Blessed One said, 'It is kamma that separates beings according to inferiority and superiority (M.iii,203). From that it can be known that becoming is a condition for birth. 272. And when there is no birth, neither ageing and death nor states beginning with sorrow come about; but when there is birth, then ageing and death come about, and also the states beginning with sorrow, which are either bound up with ageing and death in a fool who is affected by the painful states called ageing and death, or which are not so bound up in one who is affected by some painful state or other; therefore this birth is a condition for ageing and death and also for sorrow and so on. But it is a condition in one way, as decisive-support type. This is the detailed explanation of the clause 'With becoming as condition, birth'. *********************** 270. bhavapaccayaajaatiaadivitthaarakathaa bhavapaccayaa jaatiitiaadiisu jaatiaadiina.m vinicchayo saccaniddese vuttanayeneva veditabbo. bhavoti panettha kammabhavova adhippeto. so hi jaatiyaa paccayo, na upapattibhavo. so ca pana kammapaccayaupanissayapaccayavasena dvedhaa paccayo hotiiti. 271. tattha siyaa -- katha.m paneta.m jaanitabba.m bhavo jaatiyaa paccayoti ce. baahirapaccayasamattepi hiinapa.niitataadivisesadassanato. baahiraana.m hi janakajananiisukkaso.nitaahaaraadiina.m paccayaana.m samattepi sattaana.m yamakaanampi sata.m hiinapa.niitataadiviseso dissati. so ca na ahetuko sabbadaa ca sabbesa~nca abhaavato, na kammabhavato a~n~nahetuko tadabhinibbattakasattaana.m ajjhattasantaane a~n~nassa kaara.nassa abhaavatoti kammabhavahetukova. kamma.m hi sattaana.m hiinapa.niitataadivisesassa hetu. tenaaha bhagavaa ``kamma.m satte vibhajati yadida.m hiinappa.niitataayaa´´ti (ma0 ni0 3.289). tasmaa jaanitabbameta.m ``bhavo jaatiyaa paccayo´´ti. 272. yasmaa ca asati jaatiyaa jaraamara.na.m naama, sokaadayo vaa dhammaa na honti. jaatiyaa pana sati jaraamara.na~nceva, jaraamara.nasa"nkhaatadukkhadhammaphu.t.thassa ca baalajanassa jaraamara.naabhisambandhaa vaa tena tena dukkhadhammena phu.t.thassa anabhisambandhaa vaa sokaadayo ca dhammaa honti. tasmaa ayampi jaati jaraamara.nassa ceva sokaadiina~nca paccayo hotiiti veditabbaa. saa pana upanissayako.tiyaa ekadhaava paccayo hotiiti. aya.m bhavapaccayaa jaatiitiaadiisu vitthaarakathaa. #87174 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:40 pm Subject: gimme an "S" - Phil nichiconn thanks for asking, Phil: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_v.htm << vohaara-desanaa: 'conventional exposition', as distinguished from an explanation true in the highest sense (paramattha-desana). It is also called sammuti-sacca (in Sanskrit samvrti). (App.). >> also, have my sympathies. connie #87175 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the conventional teaching. kenhowardau Hi Phil, Ph: > So let's start by finding that Pali word that starts with an "S"...please. > Simile? :-) Ken H #87176 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:03 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,270 nichiconn Path of Purity, pp.692-3 In "Conditioned by becoming, birth comes to pass" and the rest, the decision regarding birth and so on should be understood as explained in the exposition of the Truths {ch. xvi, p.591f}. And here, by becoming is meant karma-becoming, which - and not rebirth-becoming - is the cause of birth, and that in two ways through karma and sufficing condition. Objection might arise: How may it be known that becoming is the cause of birth? By seeing divisions such as low and high (in the born aggregates), although there is equality in external causes. For although there is equality in external causes, such as the parents, union, blood {read *sonitaa*} and food, even in the case of twins there are seen such divisions as low and high. Such divisions are not without condition, for they do not always happen to all. [576] There is no other condition than karma-becoming, since there is no other reason in the subjective continuity of beings who give rise to it. Hence karma-becoming is the condition. For karma is the condition of the divisions of the low and the high among beings, as the Blessed One has said: "It is their deeds which divide people into high and low." {Majjhima iii, 203} Therefore may it be known that becoming is the cause of birth. And because when there is no birth, there is no old age and death, nor states such as old age, death and sorrow, but when there is birth there are old age-and-death and states beginning with sorrow, which are bound with old age and death, in the case of a foolish person who has been touched by painful states called old age and death, and which are not bound therewith in the case of one who has been touched by this and that painful state {such as a loss of relatives and so on}, therefore, this birth should be known as the cause of old age and death and sorrow and so on. It however constitutes a single cause by way of the point {The Tiikaa explains this to be such as is not found in the Pa.t.thaana but is found in the Suttanta methods of exposition.} of sufficing condition. This is the detailed discourse on "Conditioned by becoming, birth comes to pass" and so on. #87177 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:12 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the Buddhist teaching. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hi Ken, Phil and all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > > > > The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, > > but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for > > our sakes, he journeyed for countless aeons in samasara fulfilling > > all the conditions necessary for him to become a Teaching Buddha. > >>>> > > Well, where did all the KS causes and conditions went(tm)? Remember, > you can't "will to happen" (which would including willing to or not > to become and Arahant). Hi Alex, There's that auto-disagree function cutting in again! Sure, there are only paramattha dhammas (and let's never forget that) but we can talk in terms of people and places and things to do. When we talk about the Bodhisatta making a vow this is conventional language for the relevant paramattha dhammas that arose at that time. You really must try to understand the discussions rather than just look for things to disagree with. (I could put that in irrefutable Abhidhamma terms, but I can't be bothered at the moment.) ---------- <. . .> KH: > >The Bodhisatta could have become an arahant at any time he wanted, > but he chose instead to take the most arduous of journeys. Just for > our sakes, he > <>>> >>>> A: > > Similiar could be said for Jesus Christ, Prometheus or some other > suffering hero character who suffered for us... > > Thats appealing to emotions that you are using... ----------- See above. Ken H #87178 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:12 pm Subject: Sundries scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, I thought I'd make a few comments. I've been watching the usual shenanigans on the list when you and Jon are 'away'. The cats will play. I've been involved in it for awhile and then backed off, thankfully to prepare for a series that connie and I are working on for the list. I must say that, although the Dhamma study in preparation is good, I don't actually anticipate much from the list itself once the series begins. I know, its a bit pessimistic of me, and that I see it differently than you - conditions, eh, ;-) but the level of harassment and down-right opposition for opposition's sake is high. It does give rise to thoughts about the day-to-day Dhamma: reactions to Provocateurs and Detractors both in thought and in action. I've been overly provocative myself at times, of late, so I'm part of the problem. I always get into it as if it were either a hockey game or a psychotherapy group or a mixture of both - a hard-hitting action group. I realise I'm a bit of an idealist, wishing for a space where some unimpeded Dhamma study can occur, but this may not exist. All the views - the humanity. I still can't keep from seeing the list as a group, and, as years of experience in groups with the, say, 'disordered of character' lead me to want to do, simply feel like tossing the trouble makers. I can see myself naturally taking cues from writing styles, content, timing, etc. to proliferate some great psychodiagnostic fantasies. I know this is not the way here. I will hope to develop more patience but hope is not patience and it either comes or not. Vows are clouds. This is obvious from experience. Sometimes I just imagine taking my pile of books and going it alone. Yay say half the list! Sometimes I recall the early months I was on the list and how the game, which I didn't quite understand, seemed to get a little rough. This is not cool, in my opinion, and new people are often preached and harassed right off the list. I notice I took numbers and still sometimes see that I want to give as good as I got or get. I do watch you and Jon, but as yet am not as patient. I see all this as being by conditions as well. When I type a bodycheck in the form of a rebuttal, sometimes it is sent, sometimes it is not. It is usually always better that it is not. The odd bodycheck is deserved by the recipient and then I get to be the psychopath who delights in dishing out vipaaka and toying with the prey. ;-) I guess when I find myself alone with my books it will be due to conditions. It is tempting. I do find so many opportunities to learn on the list, and so many to get all worked up and impatient. Sounds like life. As I mentioned, I'm laying low from replying for awhile, but am by no means gone. Not all that fruitful, I find, what with psychopaths and hysterics on board (forgive the unpleasantness of the labelling). Oh, yeah, I didn't mention myself, figuring it was totally appararent: Mopey Old Narcissists. I'm sort of burnt out these days in general, but that's just part of the single-parent thing. And I'm in a transition, I think, in terms of how best to use the list to study Dhamma. I'm waiting to see how it'll play out. I find that it is getting a bit difficult to take views and try to find the alternate view from within the 'orthodox' literature. I find it rather confirming of the views of those I will call the Detractors find so hard to manage: I simply find no reason to doubt that, for example, there can be energy and effort without the need for some sort of deliberate 'practise'. I'm only not developing jhaana because there are no inclinations arising which would cause this to occur. Why fight it? Why pretend? Why try to force things to be other than they are? I'm not going to force myself to 'practise' jhaana just to cave to pressure from the 'buddhist community'. And this pressure is very real - it is written of here every day. If conditions ever combine, there would be a chance for this sort of development. Despite the very clear sense that the famous 'buddhist community' finds the views on DSG so heinously unacceptable, I find it cool that I don't. I find that the reading of the Suttas makes so much more sense even with the limited understanding I have, because one doesn't get caught up in 'what should I do to make this all happen'. Anyway... I don't quite know what to think about the evangelical and puritanical thrust of some 'modern buddhists', even on the list. I guess this is 'religion' and hence, ignorable. I like how the idea of paramattha-sacca versus vohaara-sacca (especially the whole range of concepts that this reveals) makes so much sense to me. I don't know enough Dhamma to be able to explain it to others but it just seems cool to me that it makes so much sense when, to others, it is such a sticking point. (See, narcissist - I'm so special - ha ha). The shift I'm feeling is like I'm tired of sort of 'defending' a position. This was arising but something else is now. I'm not an apologist for anyone's position that I know of, and don't wish to appear so. As for Kh. Sujin, I'm totally in to what she says simply because I seem to get it and don't feel any opposition at all. When I repeat to the Detractors that she isn't my teacher, I simply mean that these days I think the Dhamma is the teacher and pa~n~naa understands what it does and then I think some thoughts which I may or may not understand. Not to be helped, really. And good too, because what's a guy to do? I personally feel totally saved from having to wander in the confusing morasse of western buddhist nonsense. Good to know. And certainly, methinks, not to be given to another by any means. I know what I know and I know that it isn't me that knows it, if you know what I mean ( a lot of 'knows' in that). I just get it in a way similar to the way you get it but am way behind in the study and intellectual understanding part of things, you know, compared to you. And I don't get it in the way that, say the Detractors get it, but the way the Detractors get it is also by conditions. Not that I worry about it, eh. I know I don't even need to do that (you know, study) but I want to and I like to and its like part of my nature (or say due to conditions because really, there are no mopey narcissists, no hysterics, no psychopaths) and all that so, I'll continue. I certainly don't in any way think I'm 'practising' anything when I study Dhamma. I know that the true study of Dhamma comes and goes by conditions throughout the waking and dreaming day and doesn't involve books or people. As I mentioned, I've still too much impatience for those whom I think are simply malicious-seeming, and appearing to come out in an almost unified front to disrupt and shut down peaceful Dhamma study. O for a quiet, secluded place of Peace to discuss Dhamma with the like-minded. Boring, you might say. Nice, I would say. One might ask what the dynamics are behind such an obvious oppositionality as that evidenced by the Detractors: Is it a secret wish to come to the knowledge or be convinced? Sure... None of this, of course, really matters. Views arise of many kinds. Dhammas of many kinds arise with these views as condition I hope I get through the burn out I mentioned earlier. It can't last forever. The Dhamma *is* the best break. Things don't break until they do. It does indeed 'come back to the seeing, hearing, thinking and so on everytime' as you say - no arguments from me. I'm glad, too. Thank Dog Dhamma is not pop-psychology (I'm still bitchy, I see - conditions)! And still burnt out. Oh well. I'll slip back into semi-retirement until connie and I start our upcoming series - stay tuned - I'll not have to fight about any of these comments I'm sure ;-) if conditions are such that I don't, otherwise... Sundries over and, Scott out (as TG likes to say). #87179 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:23 pm Subject: Subject: Sundries nichiconn scott, you're beautiful, man. connie #87180 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:24 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the Buddhist teaching. truth_aerator Hi Ken, Scott, Sukinder, Nina, Sarah, Jon, and other Abhidhammikas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Alex, Sure, there are only paramattha dhammas >>> Do you have DIRECT KNOWLEDGE AND VISION thus: "there are only paramattha dhammas" ?. Best wishes, Alex #87181 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 7:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is thinking? egberdina Hi Lukas, 2008/6/19 szmicio : > Hi all, > What is thinking? How this thinking arise? Who or what thinks? Thinking is unspoken (subvocal) speech. As you know, speech is quite normal and useful in a social situation, if one is intent on exchanging information with other human beings. Thinking, in such a scenario, is simply rehearsing, or preparing, prior to speaking. Thinking in a non-social situation may be helpful in "hammering out" a solution to a problem, but a lot of thinking, in a non-social context serves no useful function. It is having a conversation with yourself, and what can you possibly tell yourself that you don't already know? Of course, speech is not only used to exchange information. Speech is also used to share misinformation of all sorts, whether it be ignorance dressed up as knowledge ranging to straighout lies. All of this is done with the intention of having some control, some influence, some advantage over the world and over others. This is so for thinking as well, except for that it is ourselves we intend to deceive, when we listen to our own dishonest thoughts. Strange idea, deceiving oneself, isn't it :-) Cheers Herman #87182 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:14 pm Subject: Re: Respecting the conventional teaching. philofillet Hi Ken No, it's the other kind of truth, the Pali word for conventional truth. I think it sounds something like samyutta - something like that. I love them similes though! Come to think of it, you have a point. It is often through similes that the Buddha makes great use of the conventional teaching...For example, the blind sea turtle whose probability of rising to the surface through a yoke (?) floating on the sea is as good as the probability of a human birth, if I recall correctly. A conventional teaching to urge us to...well, nevermind. ;) Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > Ph: > So let's start by finding that Pali word that starts with > an "S"...please. > > > > Simile? > > :-) > Ken H > #87183 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:20 pm Subject: Re: Sundries philofillet Hi Scott > O for a quiet, secluded place of Peace to discuss Dhamma with the > like-minded. Boring, you might say. Nice, I would say. I can understand what you mean. I always longed for this as well when I talked about dojo busters and now I am one of the latter. I do think the truth settles in deeply when the like-minded get together. Now the list is possibly more contentious than I've ever seen it. I think you and other folks who are "not students of AS but of the Dhamma" have been showing amazing patience and diligence in dealing with all the distractions. Kudos! Metta, Phil #87184 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility sukinderpal Dear Tep, (Ken and Herman), > > Neither true nor untrue. Equanimous attitude should be maintained. .................. > Sukin: Good to know that you do not disbelief the story. > Just wanted to check. :-) T: Now you are talking like KenH ! I have to repeat to him what I just said all the time. S: I don’t know how, but then you are the one on the receiving end and therefore in a better position to observe this. But allow me to explain some of what instigated me to question you. You had recently been questioning whether Buddhaghosa added his own ideas and not in line with the Buddha’s own teaching on the subject. Also in questioning the credibility of Ken’s statement and giving it equal if not lower status to Herman’s own suggestion, it seemed that you too had your doubts. Now I understand someone like Herman who considers the Theravada Canon to be just another set of teachings potentially useful and therefore not only easily rejects some part of it, but also jokes about it. But you Tep are different; you are a born and sworn Buddhist. Memory tells me that when you first joined DSG you expressed deep admiration for and full confidence in Buddhaghosa. Later down the road before your return to DSG this time, I noticed some reservations being expressed. This I took as being a ‘reaction’ stemmed from your disagreement with the view expressed by some of us and which could have been avoided. One way this could have been is that instead of finding fault with Buddhaghosa, you could have seen it as being possibly due to your own lack of understanding. But of course you may also have been influenced by other teachers, Buddhadasa perhaps? ============== Tep: So let me ask you instead: When you do not know whether what you've heard is true or not true, will you believe it, or disbelieve it, or neither? S: In normal social interaction I must say that I am very gullible. I believe what anyone says about himself, even now, so much so that I’ve been even told by third persons of being taken advantage of due to this fact and sure, I have been duped out of great amounts of money, probably mostly because of this. However when it comes to statements about general facts, here I am not as simple minded. ;-) Between believing, disbelieving and neither, I am for ‘neither’. But even here who knows whether this is due to doubt or because one is questioning one’s own preconceptions? If it is the former, I think it would be quite harmful. On the other hand, if one sees where one comes from, that I think is very useful. After all stories are just stories, if they don’t serve the purpose of pointing to the Truth but instead cause one to move further away from it, your story and my story both are equally useless. Stories seemingly fantastic can be seen in light of the nature of ‘realities’ and which would be due to confidence in the Dhamma. On the other hand, stories ‘believable’ but without any clue about where one comes from in this, this may serve only to increase attachment, if not also wrong view and reflects lack of Saddha. I hope you better understand where I’m coming from ;-). Metta, Sukin #87185 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:23 pm Subject: Re: Sundries philofillet Hi again And I'll add that I've always thought it very impressive that though you are a working single father you find time not only to diligently respond in all those threads with folks who are not like minded and do so courteously, but also dig out the Pali to go with all the sutta passages you post. You are the anti-Phil. Metta, Phil #87186 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Error in the Vism. Part III: Comprehend & Comprehended. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Nina, Jon, Han, Alex, Herman, Connie and anyone who is interested), - Let me give my reply after your post below. ------------------------------------------- Dear Tep & all, --- On Sun, 15/6/08, Tep wrote: T:>Patism i, 414 lists four kinds of understanding, only one of which is the full understanding : Whatever ideas(dhammas) are directly known are known. Whatever ideas are fully understood are judged(investigated ). Whatever ideas are abandoned are given up. What ever ideas are developed have a single function(rasa, taste). Whatever ideas are realized are sounded(phassita) . .... S: Again, the first three of these refer to the 3 pari~n~nas in the Vism and commentaries. ... T:> In conclusion: direct knowing and comprehending (fully understanding)the dhammas are in the sekha who is on the Path (Stream). When the dhammas are fully understood, the monk becomes an arahant. This is what the Buddha and Arahant Sariputta taught, not the three-fold full understanding in the Vism. What is your thought? Any disagreement, slightly different opinion, or complete agreement are all welcome ! .... S: I agree that the sekha, from the sotapanna up, directly knows and comprehends dhammas. This entering of the stream leads to arahantship without fail. There cannot be this direct knowledge and abandoning of defilements without the earlier stages of insight and repeated understanding following such insights which has to grow and develop through directly understanding the particular namas and rupas and the general characteristics of them. In other words there cannot be the pari~n~na of abandoning (pahaana) without the pari~n~nas of knowing (~naata) and investigating (tiira.na). The terms may be different in various texts, but the meaning, the path of insight is the same as I understand it. Thank you again for a very interesting series. Metta, Sarah p.s no time to check these messages, apologies for typos. ========= In your reply # 87152 you said you wanted to see the Pali texts in Patism i, 265 . Patism i, 265. ... ... [T: I am skipping the part on training in the higher virtue] ... ... He trains by adverting to these three kinds of training, he trains by knowing them, by seeing them, by reviewing them, by steadying [cognizance] upon them, by resolving with faith upon them, by exerting energy upon them, by establishing mindfulness upon them, by concentrating cognizance upon them, 1)by understanding them with understanding, 2)by directly knowing what is to be directly known, by fully understanding what is to be fully understood, 3)by abandoning what is to be abandoned, by realizing what is to be realized, he trains by developing what should be developed. etc. .... S: My numbering above is guess-work. Do you have the Pali for it? It would also be useful to see the Pali for the reference the Vism gives. So far, it doesn't seem so different. T: No, I do not have it, our good Doctor Han Tun began his Pali contribution later. Yes, I can see a problem with your four numbered items above. The numbering system should be corrected as follows : 1) by understanding them with understanding, 2) by directly knowing what is to be directly known, 3) by fully understanding what is to be fully understood, 4) by abandoning what is to be abandoned, 5) by realizing what is to be realized, [ Patism i, 265] Now you can see clearly that there are five kinds of understanding, and only ONE of them is "full understanding". My message in the three-part presentation is very simple : there are no 'full understanding as the known' (~naata-pari~n~naa), no full understanding by scrutinization(tiira.napari~n~naa), and no 'full understanding as abandoning' (Pahaanapari~n~naa) in the two suttas on 'pari~n~naa', i.e. Pari~n~naa Sutta[SN 22.23] and Pari~n~neyya Sutta[SN 22.106]. In MN 149 about direct knowledge and the various understandings on the Path, there is only ONE full understanding too. Further, you cannot find the three pari~n~naas in the Patism either. Why? Because the Buddha and the Chief Disciple did not define pari~n~naa that way. Plain and simple. T: You made the same numbering error again in Patism 415 : >415, Knowledge is in the sense of that being known and understanding is in the sense of the act of understanding that. Hence it was said : 1)'understanding as direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of what-is-know; 2)understanding as full understanding is knowledge in the sense of judging (investigating) ; 3)understanding as abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up; understanding as developing is knowledge in the sense of single function; understanding as realizing is knowledge in the sense of sounding'. ............ ......... ......... ... .... >S: I put in the numbers to help me comprehend the passages. There may be errors, but especially with the last Psm passages, I think it's clear that the references are to just the same 3 pari~n~nas as given in the Vism quotes. So far, I really can't see the problem. T: Maybe you are closing the eyes all the time? At this point we are dealing with the Patism without cross- referencing to the Vism where the error is seen. Remember we are at the upstream point above the Vism, and so far we have not yet seen the three kinds of full understanding. Why? It is because the error crept in at the downstream point from the Vism. ============== T: Now let's examine another upstream evidence in the Suttas. Please read the Pali texts and see for yourself that there is only one kind of pari~n~na in these two suttas. [SN 22.23] 'Katamaa ca bhikkhave, pari~n~naa? Yo bhikkhave raagakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo. Ayam vuccati bhikkhave pari~n~naati.' "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. This is called comprehension. " SN 22.106 Pari~n~neyya Sutta: To Be Fully Understood (translation by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi) At Saavatthi Bhikkhus, I will teach you things that should be fully understood, full understanding, and the person that has fully understood. Listen to that. [Saavatthi-nidaanam: Pari~n~neyyeca bhikkhave, dhamme desessaami, pari~n~na~nca, pari~n~naataavi~nca puggalam. Tam su.naatha:] .................. And what, bhikkhus, are the things that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood. Feeling .. Perception .. Volitional formations .. Consciousness is something that should be fully understood. [Katame ca bhikkhave, pari~n~neyyaa dhammaa: Ruupam bhikkhave pari~n~neyyo dhammo, vedanaa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, sa~n~naa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, sankhaaraa pari~n~neyyo dhammo, vi~n~naa.nam pari~n~neyyo dhammo, ime vuccanti bhikkhave, pari~n~neyyaa dhammaa.] ................... And what, bhikkhus, is full understanding? The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion: this is called full understanding. [Katamaa ca bhikkhave, pari~n~naa: Yo bhikkhave, raagakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo, ayam vuccati bhikkhave, pari~n~naa.] .................. And who, bhikkhus, is the person that has fully understood? It should be said: the arahant, the venerable one of such a name and clan. This is called the person that has fully understood. [Katamo ca bhikkhave, pari~n~naataavii puggalo: Arahaatissa vacaniiyam. Yvaa yam aayasmaa evamnaamo evamgotto. Ayam vuccati bhikkhave, pari~n~naataavii puggaloti.] --------------------- T: In MN 149 the full understanding through direct knowledge is also mentioned ONE time, the abandonment is mentioned one time, and the realization is also mentioned one time. The three are separate dhammas; they are not bundled together. ;-) [MN 149] “These two things â€" serenity and insight â€" occur in him yoked evenly together. He fully understands by direct knowledge those things that should be fully understood by direct knowledge. He abandons by direct knowledge those things that should be abandoned by direct knowledge. He develops by direct knowledge those things that should be developed by direct knowledge. He realizes by direct knowledge those things that should be realized by direct knowledge. [Tassime dve dhammaa yuganaddhaa vattanti samatho ca vipassanaa ca. So ye dhammaa abhi~n~naa pari~n~neyyaa, te dhamme abhi~n~naa parijaanaati. Ye dhammaa abhi~n~naa pahaatabbaa, te dhamme abhi~n~naa pajahati. Ye dhammaa abhi~n~naa bhaavetabbaa te dhamme abhi~n~naa bhaaveti. Ye dhammaa abhi~n~naa sacchikaatabbaa, te dhamme abhi~n~naa sacchikaroti.] ............................. In Patism, Breathing Treatise III, 247, full understanding is one of the 15 higher trainings: it is the 12th understanding in the list. The numbers are mine. The Pali insert was given by Han Tun here and above too. 247. 1. When he adverts, he is acquainted with those bodies (aavajjato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 2. When he knows, ... (pajaanato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 3. When he sees, ... (passato te kaayaa patividitaahonti). 4. When he reviews, ... (paccavekkhato te kaayaapatividitaa honti). 5. When he steadies his cognizance, .... (cittam adhitthahato te kaayaa patividitaahonti). 6. When he resolves with faith, .... (saddhaaya adhimuccato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 7. When he exerts energy, ... (viiriyam pagganhato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 8. When he establishes (founds) mindfulness, ... (satim upatthaapayato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 9. When he concentrates cognizance, … (cittam samaadahato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 10. When he understands with understanding, ... (pannaayapajaanato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 11. When he directly knows what is to be directly known,... (abhinneyyam abhijaanato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 12. When he fully understands what is to be fully understood, ... (parinneyyam parijaanato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 13. When he abandons what is to be abandoned, ...(pahaatabbam pajahato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 14. When he develops what is to be developed, ...(bhaavetabbam bhaavayato te kaayaa patividitaa honti). 15. When he realizes what is to be realized, he is acquainted with those bodies (sacchikaatabbam sacchikaroto te kaayaa patividitaa honti). That is how those bodies are experienced. [end of quote] ................................. I hope now you may see the consistent message that there is only one pari~n~naa mentioned in the Suttas and also in the Patism. I have rung this bell at least 3 times today ! My apology to everyone for this extremely long post. Sincerely, Tep === #87187 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is found in Buddhagosa but not in Abhidhamma itself? philofillet Hi Herman Thanks, I missed this. It is indeed what I remember reading, from the CMA intro, right? I think these points should just be acknowledged. If there are things that appear for the first time in Buddhagosa, it should not be denied. And it doesn't necessarily mean that these teachings are not valid or helpful, just that they have to be weighed accordingly when compared to the original texts. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > >a point. > > I have pasted this from a post of mine a while back. #87188 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Sarah Sorry I didn't respond to this post. I will stick to one point, if you don't mind. It is a point that could help me work out some of my deep misgivings re AS. > P:> And whether it blinds them to any > shortcomings in the way they present this deep, deep Dhamma to > people who have more desparate needs for the Dhamma, needs that are > about cutting out behaviour in body, speech and mind that causes > immediate and obvious harm to themselves and others, a "cutting out" > that the Buddha states very clearly again and again is a > prerequisite to deeper attainments. > ... > S: It almost sounds as though you think we condone akusala behaviour as you have described! The Buddha taught us to see the harm in the smallest akusala, but we also have to accept that people do behave the way they do by conditions and accumulations. Everyone has their own way. Can I say anything that will prevent you from repeating such a transgression in future? No, all I can do is to stress the great harm of such deeds and the importance of really understanding realities now, including the lesser tendencies of such akusala. It will be up to your panna to really see the harm in such deeds or tendencies. Ph: Of course I know you don't condone it. But as you know, there was one recorded talk in particular that really set me off on this point. If you come across that talk, where Nina tells AS that there is someone who is concerned about committing serious transgressions, could you perhaps put it up on the site for a short time, or something like that. I would like to discuss it and maybe work out some of my displeasure and mistrust. You see, I believe Dhamma friends can be hugely influential in helping us to avoid bad behaviour and not just by the "just understand" approach. And I think the Dhamma lays out various means to practice in order to become a more trustworthy person. (i.e less likely to do evil deeds.) So if you come across that talk in your listening...I guess it's only about a one or two minute exchange and could be transcribed...maybe you could just tell me what CD and the track number and I could try to track it down... Metta, Phil #87189 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:00 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - ... Credibility dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - It is a little bit of fun reading your post, although it sounds somewhat like a police investigation of a suspect. These are the points (or 'charges'?) that you've made : 1. Tep has doubts -- he doubts the venerable Buddhaghosa and he doubts KenH's credibility (as a Buddhist). 2. Tep's inquiry on the error, concerning "full understanding" in the Vism, puts him at odd with the population of the true Buddhists. 3. Lately, Tep has expressed some "reservations" on Buddhaghosa's credibility. That is unforgiving, because the venerable and the Vism are Holy. 4. Tep's reservations are caused by a "reaction" to, or disagreements with, some wise DSG members' views, rather than by his wierd desire to find faults with the venerable. Before I reply to these points, it is better to get your approval first. I might misread you. :-) And you also ask: >Sukin: But of course you may also have been influenced by other teachers, Buddhadasa perhaps? T: Wrong guess, Detective Sukin. Indeed, I admire venerable Buddhaghosa much more than Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. .............. >Sukin: Between believing, disbelieving and neither, I am for "neither". But even here who knows whether this is due to doubt or because one is questioning one's own preconceptions? If it is the former, I think it would be quite harmful. On the other hand, if one sees where one comes from, that I think is very useful. After all stories are just stories, if they don't serve the purpose of pointing to the Truth but instead cause one to move further away from it, your story and my story both are equally useless. Stories seemingly fantastic can be seen in light of the nature of "realities" and which would be due to confidence in the Dhamma. On the other hand, stories "believable" but without any clue about where one comes from in this, this may serve only to increase attachment, if not also wrong view and reflects lack of Saddha. >I hope you better understand where I'm coming from ;-). T: The posts I wrote are very simple and factual for readers who do not have imagination running wild. Please read my three-part presentation and tell me whether it is truthful or not. Examine the content, not a personality. I think you are coming from the world of fictions. Have you ever written a novel? Tep === #87190 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is thinking? nilovg Dear Lukas, your questions are always good. You really consider the Dhamma. Op 18-jun-2008, om 20:51 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > What is thinking? How this thinking arise? Who or what thinks? --------- N: It is citta that thinks, not you. If there were no citta there could not be any thinking. Because there is thinking you know that there is citta which experiences objects. Citta thinks on account what is experienced through the sense-doors. Seeing experiences visible object and seeing and visible object are realities. On account of what is seen we think of many stories, we have ideas about what was seen, and these are not realities but concepts. The persons we think of are not realities, they are concepts or ideas. In the ultimate sense there is no person to be found. I quote from Kh. Sujin's Survey of Paramattha Dhammas: > It seems that thinking lasts, but in reality there are countless cittas succeeding one another. -------- > L: What is vitakka? > What is vicara? ------- N: These are cetasikas assisting the citta. Vitakka directs the citta to the object that it experiences and vicara keeps the citta and other cetasikas occupied with the object, but only for a very short time, during the brief moment citta lasts. These cetasikas arise with many cittas, but not with seeing etc. Seeing just sees and it does not need vitakka and vicara. Vitakka is translated as applied thinking and vicara as sustained thinking, but we should not be misled by these translations. They also arise in sense-door processes, not only in mind-door processes. --------- > L: This thinking arise so easily, and when it arise there can't be > panja, > there cant't be sati. Just blindness. Should we know it? or should we > make something to concentrate? -------- N: The citta that thinks can be akusala and also kusala. Citta thinks with pa`~n~naa about the Dhamma you learn. Sati accompanies each kusala citta, and there are many levels of sati. When you think of giving sati arises with the thinking. But very often akusala citta thinks, with ignorance and blindness. Only pa~n~naa that is more developed can know the characteristic of thinking, but meanwhile there can be more understanding of citta that performs different functions. Citta is a conditioned dhamma and nobody can manipulate it. Concentrate in which way? It has to be with kusala citta, not with attachment, so, pa~n~naa is needed. I quote more from Survey: < When we consider what the subjects are citta thinks about, we shall know why citta thinks about them, even though we sometimes do not like to think about them at all.It is quite natural that citta arises and thinks time and again about what appears through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. We believe that all the subjects citta thinks about are very serious and important, but thinking only occurs because citta arises and thinks of an object, and then it falls away. If citta would not think about all those things we take very seriously, they would not exist at all. > -------- > > L: if there is a thinking , is there micha-ditthi too? ------ N: Not all the time. Let us first understand when the citta is kusala citta and when akusala citta. -------- > L: This blindness lasts for 1 minut, 2 or 30 or more? And If it > appear I > want this clear moments of understanding. ------ N: It is enough to know that countless akusala cittas arise, but we cannot catch them or find out how long they last. It is of no use to want clear understanding, it cannot arise at will. But it is helpful to have more understanding of what citta is. There is no owner of citta, no one who can make kusala citta with understanding arise at will. The conditions are listening, considering, having more intellectual understanding of the Dhamma. Nina. #87191 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:15 am Subject: Metta, Ch 8, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Question: I believe that there is someone who is an avenger, who can cause us to suffer misfortune. When we do good deeds and then transfer the merit to this person can that be to our benefit? When one develops samådhi can one then see such a person? Khun Sujin: The Buddha taught about cause and effect and we should carefully consider this. Is it true that there is someone who could inflict retribution on us and thus control our fate? We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Tens, Chapter XXI, §6) that the Buddha taught to the monks about kamma and its result: Monks, beings are owners of their deeds, heirs to their deeds, they are the womb of their deeds, their deeds are their relatives, to them their deeds come home again. Whatsoever deeds they do, be they good or evil, of these deeds they are the heirs. When someone is born as this person into this world, what is the cause? Is this caused by the kamma he performed himself or by someone else who controls his fate? When a person has gain, honour, praise, happiness, or when he has loss, dishonour, blame and misery, by what are these caused? Are they caused by someone else who controls his fate or are they results of deeds he has performed himself? People believe that someone to whom they in former lives caused suffering can have power over their fate, that he follows them in this life and causes them to be ill or to suffer different kinds of misfortunes. Or if such a person has not caused their misfortune yet, they believe that they should extend merit to him so that he will not cause them to suffer. ********* Nina. #87192 From: "colette" Date: Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:46 pm Subject: What is the Abhidhamma ? ksheri3 "My firends are gonna be there too" AC/DC Hi Alex, What is that? Isn't my "attention getter" or "preface", here, by AC/DC, completely misleading to the ignorant? Wait, isn't it exactly a preface of how I am forced to respond to your post of definitivative answers, here? It is duality, that's it and through our unfortunate condition of being forced to apply language we are simply placed into a position of accusation whether intended or not. Now we get to the the concept of aggegates. Why can't languages have aggregates? And you or anybody is gonna tell me that every word is completely transferable to another language. I am no scholar by any means but I can tell you the difference between daytime and nighttime but you can't take my definition and put it into another language to make it come out perfectly the way I think and said it in my language. For instance, I am constantly baggered by a priest of an American esoteric thoelogy for my applications; case in point: I used Maha-mangala Sutta and I questioned: "avoiding, abstaining from evil; refraining from intoxicants, being heedful of the qualities of the mind: This is the highest protection" and I querried him: I querried him as an aggressive and ignornat criminal wishing to cover up his crimes: "'...refreaning from intoxicants...' what? every week a person comes home with a paycheck that intoxicates them the second they cash the check, how is this possible?" What the fuck are intoxicants? How can I refrain from them if I don't know what they are? What the hell is this ting called "evil"? what is good? You want to see some fancy footwork I then took him to: "Living in a civilized land, have made merit in the past, directing oneself rightly: This is the highest protection" <....> Here comes the big one: who judges what merit is? How can this Buddha suggest that a person sometime in the future dharma will create merit and where is this same Buddha that suggested the event will happen, where is this judge of what merit is, that can give me the consolation of knowing that I had created merit? <....> > > In a message dated 6/18/2008 1:01:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > truth_aerator@ writes: > > > > The development of Panna has NOTHING to do with the amount of > THEORY > > one reads. Entire Buddhist teaching could be summarized into a > > paragraph and if FULLY accomplished, it would result in Arahatship. > > Sometimes we overlook the heart of the teaching amount the > branches. > > > > > > =============================== > > This reminds me of Ajahn Buddhadasa who gave his "summary" > along the lines of "Grasp at nothing as me or mine." colette: THERE IS NO TRICK TO THIS! I simply have lived without anything that I can call my own since 1978. Where is there a trick? If you actually have nothing, then how can you possibly be mislead into believing that you actually have anything? AND THAT INCLUDES A SELF! -------- Of course, the > trick is in the lead-up to that! I remember a number of years back > when Nancy Reagan, the wife of the U. S. President, said with regard > to avoiding the rampant drug problem among American youth "Just > say 'no'!" The amusing part of that, of course, is > > the "Just"! LOL! colette: <...> Sorry, I went off and waisted my time. But I had to say what I needed to say, get it out from my oven so that other things can cook. toodles, colette > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > > Yes Howard, I understand that it is tough to "Just say NO"... But... > that could be, in the long run, easier path. > > > Can you learn more about the actual taste of a dish from reading the > menu? Some prefer to eat the menu too... :) > > You possibly know it even better than me that written word can be > easily misunderstood. By reading about swimming, you will not learn > in a pragmatical way on how to swim. You know, I've heard about one > method of teaching where you simply drop a person into the water and > let them figure it out. <....> #87193 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:03 am Subject: Re: Sundries buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > I thought I'd make a few comments. I've been watching the usual > shenanigans on the list when you and Jon are 'away'. The cats will > play. I've been involved in it for awhile and then backed off, I really like this post. It is real and open. Actually, it even made me feel somewhat sorry for you. And it does beg the question: what are all these anti-KS folks doing in a KS-emphasis discussion group? Well, you have to look at the big picture. The Buddhist today, when choosing a path, can choose between Theravada and Mahayana (and Tibetan which is Mahayana), that's it. The discerning Buddhist feels that the best choice is that which most closely follows what the Buddha actually taught. That eliminates Mahayana as it is obviously filled with all sorts of suttas which the historical Buddha didn't teach. So, the only choice left is Theravada. But, upon closer inspection, Theravada is also filled with texts which the historical Buddha didn't teach: the commentaries and the Abhidhamma. Now, to some Theravadins, the Buddha did teach the Abhidhamma. He supposedly taught it to devas and to Sariputta. Discerning Buddhists don't find that anymore credible than the Mahayana texts in which the Buddha also supposedly taught to devas. To them, anyone who believes such things might as well be a Mahayanist. Depending on where your emphasis lies, this causes problems. If you are a Theravada who emphasizes the suttas (because they are more genunine) and de-emphasizes the commentaries and Abhidhamma, then you see the Dhamma as a practical guide with meditation as the heart of the practice. If you emphasize the commentaries and the Abhidhamma over the suttas, you see the Dhamma as a philosophy with study as the heart of the practice. (It is impossible to find anyone who emphasizes the suttas, commentaries, and Abhidhamma equally because they are not in theoretical accordance). These two camps within Theravada are never going to see eye-to-eye. But, within Theravada, the first camp is currently overtaking the second camp. There are many more Sutta Theravadins than Abhidhamma Theravadins. Personally, I think that this is a very good development and I would like for it to continue. To me, Abhidhamma Theravadins don't follow what the Buddha taught but what "elders" taught. Theravada Buddhists are forever doing to be in disagreement. Scott, maybe it is a good idea for you to go off with your books and study alone.... Metta, James #87194 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:03 am Subject: Re: What is thinking? szmicio Dear Nina, thank you for your answer,it's really helpful. Now I have just one question: > L: if there is a thinking , is there micha-ditthi too? ------ N: Not all the time. Let us first understand when the citta is kusala citta and when akusala citta. There is: kusala citta akusala citta vipakacitta and kiriyacitta what do you mean saying kusala or akusala citta? Do you mean kusala or akusala kamma? or kusala/akusala vipaka too? What is a difference between kusala/akusala citta and vipakacitta? bye Lukas #87195 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Phil, ============= > Sukin: I was limiting myself to the arising of Right View which includes > not being concerned about the past or future. Besides that would be a > moment of kusala of far greater value than Sila of any level, especially > given that it is a dhamma which arises only within the Buddha sasana. > This does not imply as I've said before, that akusala is tolerated, let > alone encouraged. It seems to me that your concern about Sila is > perverted by self view, so much so that expressions of right view as I > have made above, is not only downplayed, but used to then put forward > your own wrong understanding of the Dhamma even more strongly. But > you're going on and on about the need for Sila only impresses those who > are attached to `self’ like you are. Sorry. Ph: Well, Sukin, if you think you are not attached to self, that's a bit unwise, I think. Sukin: You are of course right and as you say below, part of what drives me to post here must include self view, even though I would say that attachment and conceit are much more dominant, and add that in your case there is aversion because you keep misrepresenting what some of us are saying and project your own wrong approach on to us. I’ll never deny any of this! I know that I was more personal in that last post and could have toned it down. However you should know that at the root, I am interested in discussing Dhamma points and not judging anyone. Why would I, after all I have tendency to the full list of akusala to the max! But the misrepresentation makes it harder for the real discussion to happen as I think you will understand. And the main point is that when I point out your or anyone else’s wrong view, it concerns “interpretation” of Dhamma. In which case, that akusala arises while interacting with others, should not detract us from the Dhamma points being discussed. ============ Phil: We're all attached to self whether we are keen on anatta or not. "Detachment from the beginning" is delusionary and contrary to the Buddha's gradual training, I think, though pleasant to reflect on. Sukin: This is an example of what I see as your projecting your own past experiences and misunderstanding on to us. Knowing the “Truth” must automatically come with ‘detachment’, that is its nature. Not knowing the Truth is the reason why tanha somehow finds its way. Now you may question whether there is any “understanding” at all for some of us or that there is even such a thing as ‘intellectual level of understanding’. The first is subjective so no point in talking about it. The latter relates to the matter of ‘beginner’ that I want to discuss with you about, so let me know if you wish to do so. ============= Phil: It is self that drives you to post here as well, don't you think? (Don't answer that, just reflect, if there are conditions for it.) Liberation from self is something to be gained, not decided on by thinking about it and discussing it, or listening to someone talking about it. Sukin: Again here you state something which relates to the fact of the beginner and needs to be discussed. But one point here, no one has ever claimed that pariyatti equals patipatti, let alone realization (your liberation from self). This seems to be the kind of diversion used by quite a few members here, but let’s try to avoid this. ============ Phil: You've been patient with me, Sukin, thanks. You *might* find I will be less irritating for awhile. But I had such a good, diligent feeling day today as a result of posting what I did about striving towards wholesomeness that I will not leave here. Reading posts by people who underappreciate the need for diligent striving conditions it in..."me." Sukin: Yes please I would really appreciate any and every reminder about kusala from you or anyone else. But also be prepared to be pointed out about the “I” which usually accompanies them. ;-) The above in fact indicates to me the difference between our approaches, your thoughts about Sila conditioned thought about not only your own future, but also that of others, and this appears like ‘attachment’ to me. On the other hand, when some of us talk about detachment from the beginning, this is because knowing the present moment includes knowing that whatever arises be it kusala or akusala, this is conditioned and beyond control. Hence there is neither thinking with concern nor feeling of inspiration related to the future. Now I go to your other post. Metta, Sukin #87196 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Phil, ========= Phil: As is often the case, I thought about what I posted while cooking, and now come back to add a couple more thoughts more in concord with what you wrote. Sukin: I’m really happy to see that you reflect on the Dhamma while doing your cooking and riding your bike, this should at least cause you to better appreciate conditionality and anatta, and a wee bit less attached to the idea of meditation? Unless of course, your reflections are such that it leads you to appreciate the need for meditation even more. ;-) ========= Ph: Yes, perhps what you say "those who are attached to self like you are" can be changed just a bit to say "those who are not overly concerned about being attached to self" or something like that. Sukin: I wish I could agree with you. Remember this is not about who has more and who has less akusala, but about view. My position is that wrong view cannot somehow lead to right view, which means that a little or much of it, *both* point to the wrong direction. If your “not overly concerned about being attached to self” refers to the fact of it arising because there remain conditions for it, I would agree with you. However what you really want to show is that the ‘self’ not only is unavoidable, but because of this that it must play a part in the development of understanding. And this I don’t agree with, but you should not then go on to interpret this as being ‘over concern’ on my part. ========= Phil: We are all attached to self, but yes, some of us would acknowledge that the Buddha did not stress detachment from the beginning. Sukin: He may not have put it this way, but don’t you think that if what he states was meant to be understood correctly, the mention of khandhas being what they are, must involve a good deal of detachment in being understood? ========= Phil: You know, aside from a failed attempt to get back into Abhidhamma through the CMA (and I had better try again because everything I learned is disappearing, like a foreign language one never uses) I have been in AN all the time. I know you don't spend a lot of time in AN, but if you did you would see where the differing view of Dhamma comes from. Sukin: All I can say is that if you fail to read the Abhidhamma with the understanding about its application to your moment to moment experiences, I think that you might as well not study it. There is no virtue in reading just for the sake of acquiring ‘information’. From this point of view, I sincerely believe that your reading the Suttas must also then be with a wrong attitude of mind. You will see that those who appreciate the Abhidhamma the way I have stated, these people appreciate the Suttas as well. It is those who insist on the Suttas and reject the Abhidhamma who have a problem with interpretation. The fact that you see the two giving different messages is due to not understanding the Buddha’s teachings as it should be understood. ============== Phil: There are so many suttas dealing with concern with destinations after death, on having one's good deeds as a shelter when approaching death, with simple, straightforward admonitions about one's ethical behaviour. Sukin: Perhaps if you took into account that many of the Buddha’s audience became enlightened upon hearing him speak, you will not interpret what you read to be so simple and straightforward. Saying so you also put those wise laypeople down to being more or less the same as you, in the level of understanding. It is quite easy to see why the Buddha would use the everyday language of the people about the things they already had a particular interpretation in mind, but then He would provide a different way of looking at it, for example, in light of the fact of them being conditioned and anicca, dukkha and anatta. ============== Phil: These suttas have no meaning unless an ego, at least, is involved. Concern about one's destination after death are nonsensical without someone being concerned. Sukin: The Suttas inspire a deeper meaning and more effectively conditions the mind to the good when ‘self’ is not projected into it.;-) ============== Phil: So the Buddha teaches us to approach the Dhamma first in this rather self-involved way, because he knows that is the only way. Most people come to the Dhamma because of fear (whether they admit it or not) and that is necessarily self-involved. Sukin: The difficulty of the Dhamma is not that it’s complicated, but that it’s deep. I could explain to you what I think should be the correct attitude for the beginner, though I can’t be sure if it will be appreciated. But I must say that I find your view expressed above to be dangerous, sorry. ============== Phil: Then, as conditions improve, the air clears if you will, thanks to the wholesomeness developed through the Buddha's gradual training, concentration deepens, understanding deepens. I know you don't see it this way and probably never will, but it is correct, I really believe. But never mind. Sukin: No, but please explain your reasoning, I would like to go into it. ============== Phil: Just to say yes, you're right, I guess am more attached to self than you are in that I am not concerned about it for now. (Ah, but maybe I am *less* attached for that reason because I see the attachment, and play with it, whereas those keen on anatta and "only dhammas" might have less insight into the attachment because of all the musing on detachment....possibly? Again, something to reflect on if you'd like, but no point replying. ) Sukin: :-) I knew this was coming. Just remember one other difference in our approach, yours is geared toward “doing” and mine isn’t. Therefore my pointing out the danger of “self” is not related to anything “I” do, yours on the other hand, seem to require that ‘self’ to even get off the ground. ============== Phil: Did see a very good sutta in AN urging monks to strike out and defeat identity view, however. It is the first I have seen urging us to strive to eliminate identity view in the determined way we are urged to crack down on lust, for example, but there are probably others. Most of the suttas I see dealing with wrong view deal with the basic wrong view I always go on about. You know the one, not believing that there are results of deeds etc. Sukin: Maybe these monks were a little harder to instruct than those who didn’t need to have ‘self view’ stressed so much. ;-) Metta, Sukin #87197 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sukin, 2008/6/17 Sukinder : > Hi Herman, > > > Herman: > OK, so ignorance is a "something" that makes whatever arises appear to > be different to what it really is? > > Suk: I wouldn't put it exactly this way, for something to appear > different to what it really is, likely involves several mental factors. > We also have perversion of consciousness, perception and view to > consider. I think ignorance simply blinds, obscures, though this would > then make it the "root" of the problem, I guess. You're going to love this :-) What you say is basically the same idea that St Paul of the Christians is expressing when he says in 1 Cor 13:12 "Now we see a blurred image in a mirror. Then we will see very clearly. Now my knowledge is incomplete. Then I will have complete knowledge as God has complete knowledge of me." No doubt you will have good reasons why your version is better than St Paul, but I agree with neither of you :-) You both seem to agree that there is some sort of conflict happening between the entities known as ignorance and wisdom. You're both eternalists, I'm here to tell you. > > Suk: Sorry I could not trace the Sutta having no idea what A.111.. > referred to. However from what you quoted, this is what I'm guessing: I accept what you are saying. I quoted directly from Nyanatiloka's entry on dukkha. I must say that the various numbering systems in use to reference Pali texts are a constant source of equanimity to me :-) > > > S: Well, now you know that I can't agree with the above. In the absence > > of dana, sila and bhavana, a baby has ignorance all the time. > > Herman: > The way I see it, dana and sila are meaningless in the absence of a > concept of beings, both other and self. You are in fact saying that > the baby needs to develop self-view in order to not be ignorant. Are > you saying that wrong view is a pre-requisite for right view? > > Suk: Yes Dana and Sila both these require the concept of "beings". We agree. Let's leave it at that. > > Herman: > Ahhhh, now you're talking. Mindfulness. Not your explanation of what > it is, or how it arises, but the fact of mindfulness. I agree that the > baby lacks the ability to be mindful, But in order for mindfulness to > become possible, the baby needs to develop awareness of itself. > > Suk: :-) You mean that all these years you did not take the mention of > 'patipatti' or 'satipatthana' to be 'mindfulness' of the present moment? > And do you agree with my above statement about the necessity of hearing > the Dhamma being pre-requisite for the kind of mindfulness? But of > course, our understanding of mindfulness is quite different, isn't it? I don't make a habit of agreeing with propositions about the world that do not rely on observation. And that is the difference between our views. IMO, it perverts the meaning of "to understand" if whatever is supposedly being understood has no referent in the world. Was it you or someone else that had the very good example of understanding Father Christmas? It is exactly the same with your theories of mindfulness. > ============= > > > Suk: As far as experience through the five sense doors which is vipakka > is concerned, I guess baby or adult the frequency must be more or less > the same. The baby has not acquired language and the ability to label > experiences; hence his object of attachment would not include many of > the concepts adults have. And perhaps you might say that he has > advantage in that he does not form elaborate explanations which serves > to justify 'views' held as do adults and which thereby are reinforced. > We agree on the major points. > But proliferation / papanca are not only about ditthi, but also tanha > and mana, besides this is not just reference to elaborate thoughts, but > actually point to every instance of these three dhammas arising. A baby > obviously has tanha and he has mana, and a baby can 'cry' for a long > time, therefore he does proliferate a lot. In other words, a baby may > have no wrong view, but neither does he have the right view needed to > deal with ignorance and those other two papancas. And this makes him > *not* the DSG heaven. Here on the DSG what is stressed is the fact of > this moment what ever it be, has arisen by conditions, hence every time > that there is any understanding even intellectually of this, nothing > better could be asked for. Certainly, no projected ideal state would > follow from the kind of right understanding, hence any temptation to > follow a wrong practice. ;-) You are saying that an understanding of craving makes a difference between babies and dsg'ers. I see a difference in degree, but not in kind. Both babies and dsg'ers will be bundles of craving until the day they die. What is different is that dsg'ers are more adept at satisfying their cravings, hence some of them cry less :-). But the very old will be just like the very young, helpless in the face of their cravings. As to practice, it simply is whatever you do, and no dsg'er is not in the business of satisfying their cravings. > ============== > > Herman: > I highlighted mindfulness earlier on in your post. One of the > startling features of mindfulness is the realisation that no action > (kamma) is ever necessary, forced or caused. There is no condition, in > a mindful state, which is causing me to do anything. I always do > something, but whatever I do, it is not conditioned, it is > unconditioned. > > Suk: The present moment has already fallen away, what is, is. Between > wrong view and right view for example, which ever was the 'reality' of > the present moment, this would have been accumulated and added to the > tendency for the same. Both of these are 'causes' which means that the > 'mindfulness' that you are referring to would condition not only > vipakka, but also adds to the possibility of the same arising in the > future. > > That in fact it has arisen now, points to the fact of it having arisen > in the past and this is evidence of 'conditionality'. Conditioned too > are the moments preceding the mindfulness and the one which follows. > Indeed there is *no* moment which is not conditioned. I could accept this if you could point to any condition, or cluster of conditions, which is making it necessary that you do whatever you do when mindful. I accept that when people are on autopilot, action is conditioned. But no amount of conditionality is sufficient to explain mindful kamma. > Herman: > We have an obvious problem here, Sukin. You seem to deny action, > because everything that happens is down to conditions, as far as > you're concerned. > > Suk: The conditions I assert refer to those between paramattha dhammas. > These perform functions and have characteristics individual and general. > Fleeting though they are, the citta accompanied by certain mental > factors can condition verbal and bodily actions. Therefore I do not deny > action, including that some are useful while others are not. Fascinating stuff. Cittas have bodies, do they? > What I do > deny are views that fail to take into account such facts and instead > believe in the need for certain conventional activities to be followed > and which then gives 'intention' an overriding role it does not have. > The result is an insistence on a view of conditionality lying outside of > paramattha dhammas and instead be in the realm of concepts. Sitting in a > particular pose in order to develop mindfulness by anchoring on breath > is one example, and also your own ideas regarding 'social influence' and > the need thereby to be physically removed from that. At least the authors of the paramattha dhamma scheme realised that kamma could no longer be action if they wanted to make sense, it had to be limited to intention. If you want to maintain that you do not deny action, you might like to explain the difference between action and intention, and how action can possibly come from intention. > Herman: > But you acknowledge that you just don't know what > those conditions are. But I'm saying that taking the position that > everything is down to conditions, is an act, and that there are no > conditions which are sufficient to explain you taking that position, > if you are mindful. I deny that conditions can explain the reality of > any action taken mindfully. > > Suk: I don't know the details of conditions involved, I don't even > really know "one" condition directly. What I know is mostly with > suttamaya and cintamaya panna. However even at this level, I am > confident enough to know that you or anyone else won't be able to > persuade me to change my mind about this, that mindfulness and every > other moment gone before and which follows are *conditioned* realities. I don't doubt that you are able to completely close your "mind". That is your action, and it is not explainable by conditions. > ============ > > Conditions are that I feel very sleepy and must go now. Isn't going to > > sleep a good example of anatta and conditionality? :-)) > > Herman: > No, there is nothing making you go to bed. Still, you go, and that is > kamma, not anatta. You cannot have your anatta and your kamma, Sukin, > sorry :-) > > Suk: It looks like you need to reevaluate your understanding of both > kamma and anatta. But I hope someone else will help you with that. ;-) Why would you wish that on anyone? :-) But you have convinced me that you do have an understanding of kamma that can bear any scrutiny. Sleep tight :-) Herman #87198 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sukin, The last bit should have read: Why would you wish that on anyone? :-) But you have convinced me that you do NOT have an understanding of kamma that can bear any scrutiny. Cheers Herman #87199 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/17 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> Given that this relationship between preceding and succeeding cittas >> has come to be conventionally designated, I assume that this >> relationship can become known. > > Yes, I agree that the conditions that hold between dhammas can be > directly known. This knowledge is an aspect of the development of > direct knowledge of dhammas themselves. > >> This relationship is a knowable reality. > > It depends what you mean here. Conditions holding between dhammas are > knowable, but there is no entity to be known apart from the individual > dhammas that are so related. I don't get the significance of your point. We agree that there are multiple individual dhammas, and the knowable relationships between them. That is the entity, the stream of consciousness. What possibilities are you at pains to deny here, in saying that there is no entity to be known apart from this? Are you suggesting that there are no unknown entities? > >> I assume from your next paragraph, in which you deny the >> possibility of factors "external" to a stream, ... > > Not quite. I'm saying that as there is no stream in the ultimate > sense, there can be no internal or external in relation to a stream. > > Of course, it's still possible to talk about (conventionally) a stream > and to designate things as internal and external in relation to it, > but we may have to identify how we are conceptualising things if that > line of discussion is to proceed. You've lost me, I'm afraid. Are there multiple individual dhammas and the knowable relationships between them, or not? What do you mean, if that is what you mean, that this is not so ultimately? > >> ... that the knowing of >> this very real relationship between succeeding and preceding cittas >> can be part and parcel of this very "stream". In other words, you are >> saying that it is possible for a stream to know itself, and refer to >> itself, if only partly. > > In purely conventional terms, this could be said. All terms are always purely conventional, Jon. Are you suggesting there are ultimate terms? > >> > Hoping this clarifies. >> >> Well, I hope that I have clarified for you that if "stream of >> consciousness" is an approved designation for a knowable set of >> relationships, then the designations "I", "me" or "self" are to be >> preferred because they 1) refer to exactly the same reality and 2) >> require far less typing. > > Happy to agree. After all, that's the approach taken by the Buddha in > the discourses ;-)) > I look forward to your reply :-) Cheers Herman