#88200 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:10 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. nilovg Dear friends, I wrote a report in 1977 about my pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. This was translated into Thai and edited together with the English, but not yet on a net. Therefore I decided to retype it and now I shall post it in parts. Nina. #88201 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:12 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 1, no 1. nilovg the Hague, April 1977. Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka Chapter 1. “Buddhism in Daily life” was the theme of a Buddhist seminar held in Sri Lanka. Do we really practise the Buddha’s teachings in our daily lives? Aren’t we often forgetful of them? When we are impatient, where are the loving kindness (mettå) and compassion (karuùå) the Buddha taught? In theory we know about the different ways of wholesomeness he taught. We think that we have understood how to cultivate wholesome deeds, wholesome speech and wholesome thoughts, but most of the time we are forgetful of wholesomeness. A schoolteacher in Sri Lanka told me that he does not teach the children in a theoretical way, but that he teaches them how to apply immediately what they have learnt. I felt like a child who has been taught how to apply the Dhamma in the different situations of life. I found out that I overlooked many things which are taught in the suttas, such as kindness, gentle speech, speech at the righ time, patience and many other ways of wholesomeness. We think that we have understood the Dhamma, but we have not really understood it. It was most helpful to be reminded of the practice of the Dhamma and to discuss the Dhamma with many new friends we made in Sri Lanka. I was reminded to live in the present moment, not in the past or the future, and to “study” the present moment with mindfulness. “If there is no study of the present moment, right understanding (paññå) cannot grow”, Khun Sujin reminded us every day. In the past, satipaììhåna (the foundations of mindfulness) was taught and widely practised in Sri Lanka by monks, nuns and layfollowers. Countless people in Sri Lanka attained arahatship. They attained because they were mindful of any reality appearing at the present moment throught eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. Captain Perera of the Buddhist Information Center in Colombo organised a five week seminar of Dhamma discussions which were held in Colombo, Aurådhapura and Kandy. Ms. Sujin (Khun Sujin) and Ms. Duangduen had come from Thailand, Sarah from England and I from Holland. We all met in Sri Lanka on the occasion of this seminar. The venerable Bhikkhu Dhammadhara and the venerable Bhikkhu Jetananda had come from Thailand several months ago and Samanera Sundara arrived at the same time as Khun Sujin. ------- Nina. #88202 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - Thank you much for the reply. > >What are "these five factors gaining the training from the Thus Gone One"? > > >Alex: Confidence, Health, not crafty or fraudulent shows himself as s/he is, effort, achieves wisdom (rise & fall - udayabbaya-ñana?). T: I think these five requirements are for monks. 1. Absolute faith/conviction/confidence in the Teacher comes first (then the "lending ear"). 2. Robust health is important to support persistent effort day and night. 3. Honesty/open-mindedness is necessary for compatability & promoting unity with other monks (otherwise, he will have to look for another monk community). 4. Abiding "with aroused effort, for the dispelling of demerit and the accumulation of merit" and becoming "firm not giving up the yoke for things of merit" are for purification of virtue (siila). 5. "Becomes wise endowed with the noble ones penetration of the rising and falling of the five holding masses, for the rightful destruction of unpleasantness." is most important since it is the goal of the holy life (destruction of dukkha -- Nibbana). No mentioning of jhana. But how could the vipassana on the origination and cessation of the five aggregates be fruitful without samma samadhi as supporting condition [see SN 12.23: Upanisa Sutta]? So, it is obvious that jhana is bundled with vipassana (i.e. "yoked" together). > >And why does DN 22 not state the same restriction? >Alex: I am not sure, perhaps if you can reach Jhana (up to 4th if we stick to the texts and be conservative) then a week should be enough, and it is a given that you have the above 5 qualities mentioned in MN85 in order to try this at all. That is a good answer, Alex. Thanks. However, I don't think it satisfies others who believe in slowly accumulating understanding. Tep === #88203 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:59 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana may require Jhana: Sankhitta Sutta AN8.63 dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - You summarized the practice for arahantship in AN 8.63: Sankhitta Sutta by the following diagram : 4 Brahmaviharas -> Jhanas -> 4 Sattipatthana -> Arhatship http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.063.than.html Following your advice, I have carefully read the sutta and seen the following seven-step training diagram: 1. Develop good-will as awareness-release until it becomes steady, consolidated & well-undertaken. 2. Then develop the awareness-release with rupa-jhana factors from the 1st to the 4th (or 5th) rupa-jhana. 3. Next, repeat Step 1 and Step 2 for Compassion, Appreciation (mudita), and Equanimity. 4. Develop satipatthana on "the body in & of itself" with the rupa- jhana factors as in Step 2. 5. - 7. Develop satipatthana on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves with the rupa-jhana factors as in Step 2. So we can see that developing the four frames of references in this sutta is quite different from DN 22, where the emphasis is on mindfulness and awarenes, not on concentration, although the key principle ('ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world') is the same. Thank you for the excellent food for thought. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Tep and all, > > I've just re-read an awesome sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.063.than.html > #88204 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:03 am Subject: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo szmicio Dear Dhamma friends, Today I find out that Bhikkhu Dhammadharo died in car accident. I am a little bit shock and depressed. Can you say something about his life? It is realy hard to find anything on the web. After I have read his "Be here now" I feel so much greatefulness for this. His article is really amazing. Why nobody knows Bhikkhu Dhammadharo? bye Lukas #88205 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 19-jul-2008, om 17:03 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Today I find out that Bhikkhu Dhammadharo died in car accident. > > I am a little bit shock and depressed. > > Can you say something about his life? It is realy hard to find > anything on the web. -------- N: Do not feel depressed about death, it had to happenSo long as we are in the cycle of birth and death, death is unavoidable. In the next life there are again nama and rupa arising and falling away.The last afternoon of his life he had been listening intently to a talk Kh Sujin gave in the house of some friends. Bhikkhu Dhammadharo helped in so many ways explaining the Dhamma to others. I remember many of his sayings, they were very direct. You will hear more as I post my Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. He lived as a bhikkhu in Sri Lanka for quite some time. You will not find much on a web since he did not like writing, he preferred speaking. 'Be here now' were some of his spoken words which I edited. He found it not good enough, saying it should be revised, but I am glad I did. Also as a layman after he disrobed, he went on many of the trips with Kh Sujin and Thai friends. He was so kind and generous, concerned for other people, a good friend. Nina. #88206 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:15 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo szmicio Dear Nina > > Today I find out that Bhikkhu Dhammadharo died in car accident. > > > > I am a little bit shock and depressed. > > > > Can you say something about his life? It is realy hard to find > > anything on the web. > -------- > N: Do not feel depressed about death, it had to happenSo long as we > are in the cycle of birth and death, death is unavoidable. Yeah.. but there is still sadness. I will wait for your Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. bye Lukas #88207 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:15 pm Subject: Re: Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > >Alex: Confidence, Health, not crafty or fraudulent shows himself >as s/he is, effort, achieves wisdom (rise & fall - udayabbaya-ñana?). > > T: I think these five requirements are for monks. For all. > No mentioning of jhana. In that sutta, there is mention of Buddha going to 4th Jhana and achieving triple knowledge. Its not unlikely that Buddha would teach something close to that. after first 2 knowledges: "When the mind was concentrated, pure, free from minor defilements, malleable workable not disturbed, I directed the mind for the destruction of desires. I knew, this is unpleasant, this is the arising of unpleasantness, this is the cessation of unpleasantness and this is the path to the cessation of unpleasantness as it really is. I knew these are desires this the arising of desires this the cessation of desires and this the pathtothecessation ofdesiresas it really is. When I knew and saw this the mind was released from sensual desires, from the desires `to be' and from the desires of ignorance. When released knowledge arose. I'm released, birth is destroyed, what should be done, is done, the holy life is lived, I knew, there is nothing more to wish" http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima2/085-bodhirajakumara-e1.html If I remember, almost the exact formula was used for guidance to stream entry except it was a weaker version of that and without first 2 knowledges. The first people that the Buddha wanted to teach (due to their wisdom) were Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta. They are said to posses Arupa Jhanas. > But how could the vipassana on the origination and cessation of the >five aggregates be fruitful without samma samadhi as supporting >condition [see SN 12.23: Upanisa Sutta]? It can't. The only possible argument is the duration of samadhi. If for a person a mind moment on a 4th Jhanic level is enough, GOOD FOR HIM! In the suttas, it often lasts for hours. Example: Buddha spent 12 hours or so sitting in one sessions to get 3 knowledges, + the preparation time. > >Alex: I am not sure, perhaps if you can reach Jhana (up to 4th if >we stick to the texts and be conservative) then a week should be >enough, and it is a given that you have the above 5 qualities >mentioned in MN85 in order to try this at all. > > That is a good answer, Alex. Thanks. However, I don't think it > satisfies others who believe in slowly accumulating understanding. The answer doesn't satisfy myself either (my restless kilesas, G-d bless 'em). Craving is insatiable black hole, and the craving can be not just for food and material things but for mind objects as well. I know, it is tough: "And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html It is intersting that even Ven. Sariputta didn't know every single dhamma teaching prior to becoming an Arahant and hearing the Buddha's answer. Ex: AN Book of Nines: iv, 378,IX, ii, 12 With attached remainder. Sariputta didn't know about 9 types of ariyas. This was not taught before as the Buddha has said. 3 types of Stream Enterers, Once returner, 5 types of Anagamis. In that sutta the Buddha has said that he taught this only when asked (By Sariputta) and not before and said it first to Ven Sariputta. This does have certain consequences to the traditional story of Puggalapannati book, doesn't it? Best wishes, Alex #88208 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:35 pm Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), ----- <. . .> KH: > > Now we have gone our separate ways again, haven't we? How can there be a need for anything? Howard: > There is the need to go beyond simply thinking correct things and being calmed by that. That isn't the goal, though it is good. ----- Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not occur without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions are rare. But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I am trying to make a purely logical statement: If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no problem. Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. You might say there is a need for right understanding, or confirmation, of the above statement (a need to practise satipatthana), but a need for whom? There are only dhammas. Do dhammas need right understanding? No; dhammas are impersonal, uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? Ken H #88209 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:47 pm Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta truth_aerator Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not occur > without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions > are rare. What are the conditions for right understanding? >But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I > am trying to make a purely logical statement: > > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. Isn't that logically correct? >>> No. The statement doesn't really follow. Why is there no problem if there are only dhammas? Ask people in hell on how they feel. There are only dhammas, man! Problem is that PAIN IS, delusion (causing emotional pain and additional pain after death) IS. Just because "there are only dhammas" will not convince you or me, to go stand in front of a rushing truck on a busy highway testing this out. No, truck, no crash, JUST DHAMMAS! :) > If there is nothing (no one) apart > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. >dhammas are impersonal, uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? Stick a hand into a boiling water, jump in a fire, go jaywalking on a busy freeway during red light, and tell us the results... You'll probably find a creative excuse on "not-doing" this. There are just dhammas man, why be afraid and try wriggle out of this? :) :) :-) Best wishes, Alex #88210 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/19/2008 5:35:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), ----- <. . .> KH: > > Now we have gone our separate ways again, haven't we? How can there be a need for anything? Howard: > There is the need to go beyond simply thinking correct things and being calmed by that. That isn't the goal, though it is good. ----- Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not occur without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions are rare. But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I am trying to make a purely logical statement: If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no problem. Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, "logically correct" - EXCEPT emotions "don't care" about logic (LOL!), and, for that matter, neither does wisdom. Logic is very useful, both "on the path" and off, but it won't "do it". ;-) ------------------------------------------ You might say there is a need for right understanding, or confirmation, of the above statement (a need to practise satipatthana), but a need for whom? ----------------------------------------- Howard: That's just wrongly said. Not for whom, but for what. And the "what" is bodhi. ----------------------------------------- There are only dhammas. Do dhammas need right understanding? No; dhammas are impersonal, uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? ------------------------------------------ Howard: Is there the direct knowing? And is there the detachment? For the full and final end to dukkha, right understanding is needed. It is the sine qua non. ------------------------------------------- Ken H ======================= With metta, Howard #88211 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 3:57 pm Subject: Re: illogic truth_aerator Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), > > Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not occur > without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions > are rare. >>> This can be summarized as C -> U Where C = right conditions Where U = right understanding C, therefore U. This is logical. The phrase "and those conditions are rare" is redundant. > But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I > am trying to make a purely logical statement: So far, the only apparent mistake was redundancy. > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. And why is that? > Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. As I've said, test it out on a truck driving towards you at 70 mph. > You might say there is a need for right understanding, or > confirmation, of the above statement (a need to practise > satipatthana), but a need for whom? Need for what, not for whom. Red herring, turning to strawman, way to go, mate! You have justified the need for "right conditions" for "right understanding". Buddha has stated samadhi (and other factors) as right conditions for "vision of things as they are", "liberation" and so on. >There are only dhammas. Do dhammas need right understanding? No; >dhammas are impersonal, uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? > > Ken H Yeh, really. With what you've said above, why do you study and visit this site at all? Okay, you may say that there is no "Ken". Okay, stick your hand into a fire to be absolutely certain. No Ken will suffer! Tell me how it goes, okay? Best wishes, Alex #88212 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/20 kenhowardau : > Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), > > > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. > > Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. > Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he could no longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full well there is no-one being hurt. But the simple fact remains that a realisation of anatta does nothing to end suffering. Pain is still pain if it is not "your pain". Ven Channa was an Arahat, BTW. 'Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear-consciousness I realized, ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta seeing cessation of the nose, nose-consciousness and things cognizable by nose-consciousness, I realized, nose, nose-consciousness and things cognizable by nose consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of taste, taste-consciousness and things cognizable by taste-consciousness I realized, taste, taste-consciousness and things cognizable by taste-consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of the body, body-consciousness and things cognizable by body-consciousness I realized, body, body-consciousness and things cognizable by body-consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of the mind, mind-consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness I realized, mind, mind-consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self' Cheers Herman #88213 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: illogic upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Ken) - In a message dated 7/19/2008 6:57:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), > > Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not occur > without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions > are rare. >>> This can be summarized as C -> U Where C = right conditions Where U = right understanding C, therefore U. This is logical. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Not quite Alex. What Ken said should be symbolized by ~C -> ~U (i.e., if there are not the right conditions, then there is not right understanding), and that is equivalent to U -> C (i.e., if there is right understanding, then there were the right conditions), the converse of what you gave. But that isn't so very important. ------------------------------------------- The phrase "and those conditions are rare" is redundant. > But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I > am trying to make a purely logical statement: So far, the only apparent mistake was redundancy. > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. And why is that? > Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. As I've said, test it out on a truck driving towards you at 70 mph. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: That feels like a problem to you and me (and to Ken, too, without a doubt) precisely because we don't truly know at the deepest level of knowing that there are only impersonal empty phenomena arising and ceasing. We have not awakened, even at the most elementary stage. We only know this superficially, at the level of intellect and belief, not at by means of supermundane wisdom. And at the level of emotion we prefer some dhammas to others, and we identify with and cling to some of them, and we mentally push away others. ---------------------------------------------- > You might say there is a need for right understanding, or > confirmation, of the above statement (a need to practise > satipatthana), but a need for whom? Need for what, not for whom. Red herring, turning to strawman, way to go, mate! You have justified the need for "right conditions" for "right understanding". Buddha has stated samadhi (and other factors) as right conditions for "vision of things as they are", "liberation" and so on. >There are only dhammas. Do dhammas need right understanding? No; >dhammas are impersonal, uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? > > Ken H Yeh, really. With what you've said above, why do you study and visit this site at all? Okay, you may say that there is no "Ken". Okay, stick your hand into a fire to be absolutely certain. No Ken will suffer! Tell me how it goes, okay? Best wishes, Alex ========================== With metta, Howard #88214 From: "connie" Date: Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 nichiconn I like this, too, Scott: "...As to the fourth way of name-giving, this concerns elements that make their own name as they arise. 'For no one, when feeling arises, says: "Be thou called feeling".... For feeling, whether it be in the past, future or present, is [after all and always] just feeling. And so is perception, so are mental activities, so is consciousness...]'..." Scott: It often appears to me that feeling, for example, is just there, underneath the thoughts, as it were, and long before them. The thoughts have names and explanations for feeling but these are just thoughts. This wordless experience called feeling is definitely what it is. connie: Took awhile to get back to, but the following was another neat thing your remarks reminded me of: Expositor, p.38 [(SN v 12) Padesavihaarasutta] 'by whatever mode of life I lived after I first attained Buddhahood, I have [these two weeks] lived by that mode of living' This he expanded: There are ten positions: of the aggregates, the field of sense, the elements, the Truths, the controlling powers, the causal signs, applications of mindfulness, jhaana, mind and states. Of these the Teacher at the foot of the great Wisdom Tree intuited the five aggregates fully; for three months he lived only by way of the aggregate of feeling. He intuited the twelve sense-organs and the eighteen elements fully; for three months he lived only, by way of feeling, in the field and in the element of mental presentations. He intuited the four Truths fully; for three months he lived only by way of the five emotional indriyas. He fully intuited the chain of the causal genesis; for three months he lived by way of feeling with touch as its cause. He intuited the four applications in mindfulness fully; for three months he lived only by way of feeling to which mindfulness was intensely applied. [31] He intuited the four Jhaanas fully; for three months he lived only by way of feeling among the factors of Jhaana. He intuited mind fully; for three months he lived by way of feeling mind only. He intuited (other) states fully; for three months he lived only by way of (one or other of) the triplet of feeling. Thus the Elder set forth an introduction to Abhidhamma by means of the Padesavihaarasutta. The Elder Sumanadeva, resident in a village, while translating the Scriptures at the base of the Brazen Palace thought: 'This heterodox believer, who does not know the introduction (nidaana) to Abhidhamma, is just like one crying (helpless) with uplifted arms in the forest, or like one who has filed a lawsuit without a witness.' peace, connie #88215 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 nilovg Dear Connie and Scott, Op 20-jul-2008, om 6:33 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > Expositor, p.38 [(SN v 12) Padesavihaarasutta] 'by whatever mode of > life I lived after I first attained Buddhahood, I have [these two > weeks] lived by that mode of living' This he expanded: There are > ten positions: of the aggregates, the field of sense, the elements, > the Truths, the controlling powers, the causal signs, applications > of mindfulness, jhaana, mind and states. Of these the Teacher at > the foot of the great Wisdom Tree intuited the five aggregates > fully; for three months he lived only by way of the aggregate of > feeling. ------- N : a difficult text, we need the footnotes: S.Z. Aung explains that 'the Buddha lived his thoughts'. He 'actually experienced what he intuited'. it does not mean that he was aware only of feeling. He 'intuited the five aggregates fully'. Nina. #88216 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 19-jul-2008, om 21:15 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > N: Do not feel depressed about death, it had to happenSo long as we > > are in the cycle of birth and death, death is unavoidable. > > Yeah.. but there is still sadness. ------ N: Yes, because it has conditions for its arising, it is not my sadness. We take it for my sadness and find it very important, and that is very common. But we can learn that it is only an element devoid of self. Nina. #88217 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 19-jul-2008, om 23:35 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > You might say there is a need for right understanding, or > confirmation, of the above statement (a need to practise > satipatthana), but a need for whom? There are only dhammas. Do > dhammas need right understanding? No; dhammas are impersonal, > uncaring, phenomena. So who needs it? ------- N: Dhammas are uncaring, I like the way you put it. The effect of right understanding is indeed less worry. Lodewijk send you warmest greetings and asked whether you are still writing on the list. I said, yes, Ken writes very straighforward to Howard all the time! Nina. #88218 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:21 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 1, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The seminar was opened in Colombo by the venerable “Mahå Nayaka” (the chief monk) with the traditional lighting of the oillamp. The sessions were held nightly in the form of discussions. During the day we met our Singhalese friends in their homes and discussed Dhamma in a more personal way. All through those five weeks we spent in Sri Lanka we enjoyed the wonderful hospitality of the Singhalese while we stayed as guests in their houses. They gave us every day delicious curry luncheons and dinners, there was no end to their generosity. Captain Perera looked after us throughout our stay and when we had problems with visas or other matters he just smiled and said, “All wounds get healed.” The Buddha visited Sri Lanka three times and during these visits he went to sixteen different places. Relics of the Buddha have been enshrined in several stupas (dågabas) and a sapling of the original Bodhi Tree in Gaya was brought over in olden times. It was planted in Anurådhapura where it is still growing today. A new sprout developed recently from this tree. Is this not a hopeful sign that the Dhamma is still flourishing in Sri Lanka? I became interested in the history of Sri Lanka and started to read the “Mahåvaÿsa”, an old chronicle, compiled at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century A.C. After the third Council, which was held in India during the reign of King Asoka (250 B.C.), missionaries were sent out to different countries. The arahat Mahinda, King Asoka’s son, was sent to Sri Lanka together with four other monks, a samanera (novice) and a lay-disciple. They went to Mahintale where they met the Singhalese King Devånampiya Tissa while he was hunting deer. The King laid aside his bow and after Mahinda had tested him on his readiness to hear the Dhamma he preached to him the “Lesser Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant’s Foot Print” (Middle Length Sayings I, no 27). This sutta describes the life of a bhikkhu who abstains from ill deeds through body, speech and mind, who “guards the six doors” through mindfulness, develops jhåna (absorption-concentration) and finally attains arahatship. The following day Mahinda and the other monks went to Anurådhapura where the King presented Mahinda with the royal park. This place became the “Mahå Vihåra” (Great Monastery), a famous center of Buddhism. The monastery of Cetiyapabbata and many other monasteries were established as well. Mahinda had brought the “Tipiìaka” and the Commentaries to Sri Lanka and these were translated into Singhalese. Many Singhalese wanted to lead the “homeless life” and were ordained as a monk. Women wished to become bhikkhunís, nuns, and in order that they could be ordained, Bhikkhuní Saòghamittå, Mahinda’s sister, came to Sri Lanka. She brought the sapling of the Bodhi tree from India to Sri Lanka. During the reign of King Devånampiya Tissa the “Thupåråma Dågaba”, the oldest stupa in Sri Lanka, was also constructed and in this stupa the relic of the Buddha’s right collarbone has been enshrined. ******* Nina. #88219 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/7/20 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear Lukas, > Op 19-jul-2008, om 21:15 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > >> > N: Do not feel depressed about death, it had to happenSo long as we >> > are in the cycle of birth and death, death is unavoidable. >> >> Yeah.. but there is still sadness. > ------ > N: Yes, because it has conditions for its arising, it is not my > sadness. We take it for my sadness and find it very important, and > that is very common. But we can learn that it is only an element > devoid of self. Can WE learn that WE are devoid of self? No, Nina, WE can't learn that. But WE can and will die. All of us, guaranteed. WE won't know our own death, but others will. WE is a shared reality, and WE know that, which is why WE post. Cheers WE, from Herman's perspective #88220 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:30 am Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Alex, I see you have written a more recent post to me on this thread, but I will reply this one anyway. -------------- <. . .> A: > What are the conditions for right understanding? -------------- RU is something that only a Buddha can teach. Therefore, one condition for RU must be the teaching of a Buddha mustn't it? Similarly, another condition is that the teaching is heard (listened to, wisely considered etc). Every time RU arises in this way it performs functions. The more it arises the stronger it gets and the more functions it performs. These are the conditions for complete, supramundane, right understanding. ------------------ KH: > >But, if you could just bear with me for a little while, I > am trying to make a purely logical statement: > > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. Isn't that logically correct? >>> A: > The statement doesn't really follow. Why is there no problem if there are only dhammas? Ask people in hell on how they feel. There are only dhammas, man! ------------------- Look again and you will see the proviso "if there are only dhammas." I am not talking about a reality in which there are people. If there are only dhammas then there is no one who suffers, is there? I am not saying there is no suffering in such a reality, I am just saying that there is no one who suffers. If we study the Dhamma we can see how there is suffering but no sufferer. Ken H #88221 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> KH: > If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no problem. Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. >> Howard: > Yes, "logically correct" - EXCEPT emotions "don't care" about logic (LOL!), and, for that matter, neither does wisdom. Logic is very useful, both "on the path" and off, but it won't "do it". ;-) ------- Thanks, I was beginning to think I had gone mad. :-) I am not concerned here about what emotions might make of logic, and I'm not sure I follow your point about `logic and wisdom.' But at least we have an in principle agreement! Ken H #88222 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Hi Herman, Op 20-jul-2008, om 11:39 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Can WE learn that WE are devoid of self? > > No, Nina, WE can't learn that. ------- N: O.K. It can be learnt. The Buddha taught the Path. He would not have taught the Path if it were impossible. Nina. #88223 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 7/20/2008 6:30:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: RU is something that only a Buddha can teach. Therefore, one condition for RU must be the teaching of a Buddha mustn't it? Similarly, another condition is that the teaching is heard (listened to, wisely considered etc). Every time RU arises in this way it performs functions. The more it arises the stronger it gets and the more functions it performs. These are the conditions for complete, supramundane, right understanding. ========================== Language is a funny thing, and words have very differing senses. The term 'right understanding' is one of these multi-semantic terms. It can mean correct point of view (or factual description of the way things are), or it can mean the faculty of wisdom. The Buddha, in my opinion, is the perfect and only complete teacher of the first, and the perfect and only complete teacher of the means to cultivate the second. I find your answer to what are the conditions to be too simple, Ken. You say that the sole conditions, the first quite conventional, by the way, are: 1) listening to the Buddhadhamma and carefully thinking it over, and 2) some wisdom already developed (and then serving as condition for more wisdom). It is not at all my reading of the Buddha's instructions that all that need be done is to listen and consider. There are other religionists, true believers all, who say to just study the "holy word". Just study Torah, just read the Gospels, just read the words of Mohammed, just peruse the Vedas. All the rest will follow, they say. They are idiosyncratic even within their own fold, and what they espouse, as I see it, is false religion. With metta, Howard #88224 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:51 am Subject: Re: Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - I am now being led into the territory where there are more questions than answers. >A: ..after first 2 knowledges: "When the mind was concentrated, pure, free from minor defilements, malleable workable not disturbed, I directed the mind for the destruction of desires. ..." >If I remember, almost the exact formula was used for guidance to stream entry except it was a weaker version of that and without first 2 knowledges. T: At the stream entry level it is not clear to me what concentration is required (as a support for sotapatti-magga). Do you have a thought on this? >A: In that sutta the Buddha has said that he taught this only when asked(By Sariputta) and not before and said it first to Ven Sariputta. This does have certain consequences to the traditional story of Puggalapannati book, doesn't it? T: What consequences do you see? Tep === #88225 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:56 am Subject: Accepting Bhaavanaa Means Accepting Development Of Samatha And Vipassana abhidhammika Dear Sarah, Nina, Mike, Scott, Rob K, Sukin, Ken H, Jon, Howard, Phil, Alex, James, Andrew How are you? Sarah wrote: `As far as I'm concerned, bhavana can never be translated (as you do here) as "formal development".' Suan replied: Bhaavanaa without any context is merely the action of causing or development. But, in the context of samatha and vipassanaa being developed in line with the Buddha's teachings, formal development is a better unambiguous technical term. Not necessarily, a literal translation. Sarah wrote: "Formal development suggests a purposeful following of activities by self with wrong view, as far as I understand the phrase." Suan analysed: The above statement can be analysed three ways. 1. Formal development implies a purposeful following of activities. 2. Formal development involves self with wrong view. 3. Formal development has two undesirable qualities in terms of a purposeful following of activities and self with wrong view. Now, Sarah, what was your complaint about? What is it that you were against? 1. Are you against a purposeful following of activities? 2. Are you merely against self with wrong view? In this case, you have no objection to a purposeful following of activities. 3. Are you merely against a purposeful following of activities? In this case, you have no objection to self with wrong view. Perish the thought! 4. Or, are you against both a purposeful following of activities and self with wrong view? 5. Are you merely against the Pali term `bhaavanaa' being translated as formal development or formal meditation? In this case, do you accept development of samatha and vipassanaa in line with the Buddha's prescriptions in all Three Pali Pi.taka? Put it another way, you accept the obligations associated with development of samatha and vipassanaa. By the way, both samatha and vipassanaa are compulsory for the successful development of the Noble Eightfold Path (A.t.thangikomaggo). Sarah also asked: "Btw, where do you read the texts as suggesting bhavana can be translated as 'formal meditation'?" Suan answered: I read Pali texts. As far as I am concerned, if you accept bhaavanaa and its obligations in line with the Buddha's teachings, we can easily drop the qualifier `formal' from formal development and formal meditation. How about that? Do you have any problems with accepting samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa? Cheers! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org Dear Suan, Always good to hear from you. --- On Sun, 6/7/08, abhidhammika wrote: Suan: >Sarah wrote: >"The path is the same for us all, Alex. It starts with right understanding of dhammas even now as we speak without any attachment to results. And then, it starts again in just the same way and again and again..... >This is what bhavana/meditation is all about." >Sarah, you gave me an impression with the above statment that you accept formal development (bhaavnaa) of the Noble Eightfold Path (a.t.thangiko maggo) starting with right view (sammaadi.t. thi)(right understanding, as you put it), without attachment to anything, of course. .... Sarah: As far as I'm concerned, bhavana can never be translated (as you do here) as "formal development". Formal development suggests a purposeful following of activities by self with wrong view, as far as I understand the phrase. If you understand it differently, I'll be glad to hear. At this moment, if there are the right conditions in place, such as sufficient wise reflection on dhammas, right understanding of the Path can arise, assisted by the other path factors. This is the beginning, again and again. At such moments of Path arising, there is no clinging to results and no expectation about any results. No self following any formal practice is involved. I hope this clarifies. Btw, where do you read the texts as suggesting bhavana can be translated as 'formal meditation'? .... Suan:> Did I understand your statement correctly? Was the impression I got acceptable to you? .... Sarah: Sorry to disappoint, but no. Panna is as conditioned as any other sankhara dhamma. Metta, Sarah =========== Dear Sarah, Alex, Herman, Nina, Phil, Scott, Mike How are you? If you don't mind, I have a question for you. Sarah wrote: "The path is the same for us all, Alex. It starts with right understanding of dhammas even now as we speak without any attachment to results. And then, it starts again in just the same way and again and again..... This is what bhavana/meditation is all about." Sarah, you gave me an impression with the above statment that you accept formal development (bhaavnaa) of the Noble Eightfold Path (a.t.thangiko maggo) starting with right view (sammaadi.t.thi)(right understanding, as you put it), without attachment to anything, of course. Did I understand your statement correctly? Was the impression I got acceptable to you? Thanks in advance. Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org PS, Alex, keep up the good work. :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > A:> And one of the best defence of KS, is that she teaches those kinds of > people whose character type isn't advised to meditate. To each his > own, I guess. > .... > S: The path is the same for us all, Alex. It starts with right understanding of dhammas even now as we speak without any attachment to results. And then, it starts again in just the same way and again and again..... > > This is what bhavana/meditation is all about. > > Metta, > > Sarah > =========== > #88226 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:20 pm Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------ <. . .> H: > Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he could no longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full well there is no-one being hurt. ------------ That doesn't sound right to me. Are you saying there can be satipatthana (direct knowledge that there are no sentient beings (nothing apart from dhammas)) and intention to kill a sentient being at the same time? There must be some mistake! Ken H #88227 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/7/20 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Herman, > Op 20-jul-2008, om 11:39 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > >> Can WE learn that WE are devoid of self? >> >> No, Nina, WE can't learn that. > ------- > N: O.K. It can be learnt. The Buddha taught the Path. He would not > have taught the Path if it were impossible. > Nina. True. Now the question remains, is the Path a learning exercise, as in the acquisition of a right way of thinking, or is it the unlearning of an incorrect way of thinking? Cheers Herman #88228 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/21 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > ------ > <. . .> > H: > Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he > could no > longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full well > there is no-one being hurt. > ------------ > > That doesn't sound right to me. Are you saying there can be > satipatthana (direct knowledge that there are no sentient beings > (nothing apart from dhammas)) and intention to kill a sentient being > at the same time? > > There must be some mistake! > No mistake whatsoever. In amongst all them dhammas there may be dhammas that are an understanding of conditionality. From the understanding that the sentient body is the condition for pain, and that the certain use of a knife will end all sentience, a simple and correct conclusion was made by Channa. The Buddha said he was flawless in what he did. I think you are mistaken, though, in referring to killing a sentient being, when at all other times you maintain that there are only namas and rupas. Cheers Herman #88229 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:25 am Subject: RE: [dsg] "proper anatta view" prior to "noteworthy" levels of meditation. dacostacharles Hi Reverend Aggacitto I agree with you 110% Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of reverendaggacitto Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 01:14 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] "proper anatta view" prior to "noteworthy" levels of meditation. Hello Again Every body! it is interesting to see that there are those who believe that a proper view of anatta is required for "note worthy" levels of meditation.Meditation is the ONLY vehicle that was given to PRACTICE the Buddha Dharma.It's purpose is a method to reveal insight by way of mindfulness.If having "proper anatta view" were a requirement for "noteworthy" levels of meditation,then meditation would not be needed for deep levels of insight!You would ALREADY have it! bhikkhu/reverend aggacitto jhana meditation #88230 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:58 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma story Vs Mahayana story. Why you chose the first one? dacostacharles Hi Alex, I guess you asked a very tough question, but insightful – I think. Personally, I see them all as fables so it does not matter what is or is not true, just how useful the info is. Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alex Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 02:46 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Abhidhamma story Vs Mahayana story. Why you chose the first one? Hello all, I know that some of you believe the mythical (hsitorically & scientifically unverifiable) of Buddha going to high Heaves to preach Abhidhamma all in one session (few month) to the angels that "Hey, you ain't go no soul!". Historically, linguistically, literal and scholastic analysis shows that Abhidhamma (like the Mahayana) suttas is a later work. The story of Abhidhamma and its origin itself came much later, at approximately the same time as Mahayana Sutras (give or take a century or 2). Question: Why do you belive the (unverifiable) story of Buddha teaching Theravada Abh to Devas rather than believing that he was discriminative in his teaching and has left Mahayana sutras hidden in a dragon realm to be discovered by Nagarjuna. Or more, according to some Saṃdhinirmocana sûtra there were 3 turnings of the wheel of Dharma. In the first turning he taught the "sravaka" doctrine, in the 2nd and 3rd turning of the wheel of Dharma he has taught the Higher Teaching (The Mahayana) - so the legend goes. What makes you prefer to believe in one account versus the other? Any important reasons? #88231 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: illogic truth_aerator Hi Howard, Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Ken) - > > In a message dated 7/19/2008 6:57:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Hi Ken, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > > > > Hi Howard (Alex and Herman), > > > > Yes, I know what you are saying; right understanding does not >occur > > without the right conditions for it to occur, and those conditions > > are rare. > >>> > > This can be summarized as > > C -> U > Where C = right conditions > Where U = right understanding > > C, > therefore U. > > This is logical. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not quite Alex. What Ken said should be symbolized by ~C -> ~U >(i.e., if there are not the right conditions, then there is not >right >understanding), If right conditions are present, then right understand will be. So C->U , C, therefore U is correct. If right conditions are not present, then no C, No U (no right understanding). > Howard: >That feels like a problem to you and me (and to Ken, too, without a > doubt) precisely because we don't truly know at the deepest level >of knowing that there are only impersonal empty phenomena arising >and ceasing. >>>>> Exactly. As far as I am concerned, the Buddha's teaching is pragmatic. To make all suffering cease. Mere understanding, without making it be "in one's heart and every cell of the body." isn't enough. Best wishes, Alex #88232 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:30 pm Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta truth_aerator Hi Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > RU is something that only a Buddha can teach. Therefore, one > condition for RU must be the teaching of a Buddha mustn't it? > Similarly, another condition is that the teaching is heard >(listened to, wisely considered etc). Every time RU arises in >this way it performs functions. The more it arises the stronger it >gets and the more functions it performs. These are the conditions >for complete, supramundane, right understanding. Where did I say that sutta study is not important? It is important. However by itself it is NOT ENOUGH. Serious Bhavana is needed for those who aren't Ariyans yet. > Look again and you will see the proviso "if there are only >dhammas." And do you directly percieve that, or are you talking about what you have read? > If there are only dhammas then there is no one who suffers, is > there? But do we act and percieve in that manner? > If we study the Dhamma we > can see how there is suffering but no sufferer. By reading we can only read. By developing Bhavana, then can we see. Best wishes, Alex #88233 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:41 pm Subject: Re: Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Dear Alex, - > >> I am now being led into the territory where there are more questions > than answers. > > >A: ..after first 2 knowledges: > "When the mind was concentrated, pure, free from minor defilements, > malleable workable not disturbed, I directed the mind for the > destruction of desires. ..." > >If I remember, almost the exact formula was used for guidance to > stream entry except it was a weaker version of that and without >first 2 knowledges. > > T: At the stream entry level it is not clear to me what >concentration is required (as a support for sotapatti-magga). Do you >have a thought on this? Udayabbaya-ñana (rise & fall) at least, or something equivalent. Maybe even 4 Jhanas. But definately temporary supression of hindrances does occur. > >A: In that sutta the Buddha has said that he taught this only when > asked(By Sariputta) and not before and said it first to Ven > Sariputta. This does have certain consequences to the traditional > story of Puggalapannati book, doesn't it? > > T: What consequences do you see? In that sutta the Buddha has admitted that he only talked about Arahants (Below pudgalas were not mentioned) . This refutes the enumeration of induvidials being tought prior to this event. I don't know at which point did Sariputta join the order, but it seems quite plausible that this event happened after Sariputta achieved Arahatship, and these teachings were definately MUCH LATER than Buddha's awakening. Best wishes, Alex #88234 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:50 pm Subject: Re: Accepting Bhaavanaa Means Accepting Development Of Samatha And Vipassana truth_aerator Hi Suan, Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, Nina, Mike, Scott, Rob K, Sukin, Ken H, Jon, Howard, > Phil, Alex, James, Andrew > > Sarah wrote: > > "Formal development suggests a purposeful following of activities >by self with wrong view, as far as I understand the phrase." > > Suan analysed: > > The above statement can be analysed three ways. > > 1.Formal development implies a purposeful following of > activities. There must be a "purpose" , chanda, and that is to eliminate avijja, nivaranas and bhavanize bojjhangas. > 2.Formal development involves self with wrong view. Not in all cases. Tell that to Mahasi, tell that to Ajahn Brahm, tell that to Buddha! Best wishes, Alex #88235 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:22 pm Subject: Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Herman, I am sorry for being distracted by your story about Channa. Let me try again to ask my original question: If there were only dhammas . . . (NB; I said "if" so I am not interested in whether or not you agree there are only dhammas: "If" Herman "if!") If there were only dhammas then there would be no cause for concern would there? There would be no possibility of harm done to any sentient beings. (There might be the illusion of harm done to sentient beings, but there would in fact be no such harm. Would there?) If, on the other hand, there were sentient beings, or if there were anything other than fleeting, automaton-like conditioned dhammas, then things might be different - there might well be cause for concern. But I am not asking that. My question is, *if there were only dhammas* then there would be no rational, logically consistent, cause for concern, would there? Ken H > > Are you saying there can be > > satipatthana (direct knowledge that there are no sentient beings > > (nothing apart from dhammas)) and intention to kill a sentient being > > at the same time? > > > > There must be some mistake! > > > > No mistake whatsoever. In amongst all them dhammas there may be > dhammas that are an understanding of conditionality. From the > understanding that the sentient body is the condition for pain, and > that the certain use of a knife will end all sentience, a simple and > correct conclusion was made by Channa. The Buddha said he was flawless > in what he did. > > I think you are mistaken, though, in referring to killing a sentient > being, when at all other times you maintain that there are only namas > and rupas. > > #88236 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > ------- > N: Dhammas are uncaring, I like the way you put it. The effect of > right understanding is indeed less worry. Lodewijk send you warmest > greetings and asked whether you are still writing on the list. Hi Nina, Yes, less worry for sure when we remember the way things ultimately are. Please say thanks to Lodewijk and my warmest regards in return. I'm still here! :-) Ken H BTW, I got my computer back today, repaired and upgraded. Ready for that Visudhimagga thread! :-) #88237 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta nilovg Dear Ken, Op 21-jul-2008, om 8:08 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > BTW, I got my computer back today, repaired and upgraded. Ready for > that Visudhimagga thread! :-) ------ N: Looking forward. I am sure Larry is waiting. Nina. #88238 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Hi Herman, Op 21-jul-2008, om 1:35 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > N: O.K. It can be learnt. The Buddha taught the Path. He would not > > have taught the Path if it were impossible. > > Nina. > > True. > > Now the question remains, is the Path a learning exercise, as in the > acquisition of a right way of thinking, or is it the unlearning of an > incorrect way of thinking? ------- N: Both. By acquiring right understanding wrong understanding is eliminated little by little. We have, to begin with, wrong understanding of seeing, taking it for my seeing, or I see. But as we become familiar with the characteristic of seeing appearing at this moment, we come to understand that it arises because of visible object and eyesense. It just appears when there are conditions and nobody can make it arise at will, at this very moment or at that moment. This is the level of pariyatti, and pariyatti is intellectual understanding of reality now. It is not yet direct understanding, but it is the right condition for pa.tipatti later on. Nina. #88239 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:43 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 282, 283 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 282, 283 Intro: In the previous sections it was explained that the Wheel of Becoming has no beginning and that ignorance is mentioned as the first link because it is the foundation of the cycle of birth and death. In the following sections it is emphasized that the Wheel of Becoming has no maker, no creator, and that it is empty of permanence, beauty, happiness and self. Text Vis. 282: This Wheel of Becoming consists in the occurrence of formations, etc., with ignorance, etc., as the respective reasons. Therefore it is devoid of a maker supplementary to that, ------ N: Therefore it is devoid of a maker, no cause other than ignorance, etc. as the Tiika states. Thus, there is no maker supplementary to the links of the Wheel, beginning with ignorance. --------- Text Vis.: such as a Brahmaa conjectured thus, 'Brahmaa the Great, the Highest, the Creator' (D.i,18), to perform the function of maker of the round of rebirths; and it is devoid of any self as an experiencer of pleasure and pain conceived thus, 'This self of mine that speaks and feels' (cf. M.i,8). This is how it should be understood to be without any maker or experiencer. ----- N: The text refers to M I, “Discourse on All the Cankers”. Ven. Bodhi in his note 40: < The self as speaker represents the conception of the self as the agent of action; the self as feeler, the conception of the self as the passive subject.> With these words an eternalist view is expressed, viewing the self as transmigrating and experiencing the fruits of deeds that are lovely and that are depraved. ---------- Text Vis. 283: However, ignorance--and likewise the factors consisting of formations, etc.--is void of lastingness since its nature is to rise and fall, and it is void of beauty since it is defiled and causes defilement, and it is void of pleasure since it is oppressed by rise and fall, and it is void of any selfhood susceptible to the wielding of power since it exists in dependence on conditions. Or ignorance--and likewise the factors consisting of formations, etc.--is neither self nor self's nor in self nor possessed of self. That is why this Wheel of Becoming should be understood thus, 'Void with a twelvefold voidness'. -------- N: When one clings to personality belief (sakkaya di.t.thi), one believes that the khandhas are self, that they belong to a self, that they are contained in a self or that a self is contained in them. However, this is not true, the factors which are the links of the Dependent Origination are neither self nor self's nor in self nor possessed of self. ----------- Conclusion. The Wheel of becoming ‘ exists in dependence on conditions’, as we read. One may believe that it is self who speaks and feels, who is happy or sad, who undergoes the results of deeds or who transmigrates from one life to the next life. But, as it has been explained, there is no self who goes from a former life to a next life. What we read about 'void with a twelvefold voidness' should be applied to each of the links of the Dependent Origination. That is why in the previous sections all the different conditions for each of the links have been explained in detail. One link conditions the next one by way of conditions that are conascent, or, when conascence does not apply, by way of decisive support and other conditions. Going back to Text Vis.161: A mere state that has got its conditions Ushers in the ensuing existence; While it does not migrate from the past, With no cause in the past it is not. --------- Text Vis. 162: So it is a mere material and immaterial state, arising when it has obtained its conditions, that is spoken of, saying that it comes into the next becoming; it is not a lasting being, not a soul. And it has neither transmigrated from the past becoming nor yet is it manifested here without cause from that. ---------- N: The Tiika states that ignorance and so on are the cause. So long as ignorance and clinging have not been eradicated, there is a cause for rebirth: there is the arising of citta in a next life so long as there are conditions for it. Even at this moment one citta arises and is succeeded by a following one and none of them is self or belongs to a self. All of them arise because of their appropriate conditions. --------- Nina. #88240 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:56 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 1, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, The Buddhist teachings declined in India, but they were preserved in Sri Lanka. However, when one studies the history of Sri Lanka one sees how difficult it must have been to preserve them. Invading kings and also local kings who did not support the Sangha threatened the survival of the teachings. After an invasion by Tamils, King Dutthagåmaní (about 150 B.C.) restored the position of the Sangha and started to build the “Ruvanvelisåya”, the great and famous stupa of Anurådhapura, which contains relics of the Buddha and which is together with the Bodhi Tree the center of worship in Anurådhapura up to today. Not only wars, also famines have threatened the survival of the teachings which were not yet committed to writing. Many people died during those famines and the arahats who survived on roots and fruits continued to recite the teachings with heroic fortitude. When they had no more strength to sit up, they continued reciting while lying down. Wars, famines and also the introduction of wrong beliefs and wrong practice made it difficult to preserve the teachings. Finally, in 89 B.C., the teachings were committed to writing. Five hundred monks undertook this great enterprise in the cave of Aluvihåra (Alulena) which we visited during our pilgrimage. Several centuries later (410 A.C.) Buddhaghosa Thera came from India to Sri Lanka. Here he composed his famous “Path of Purification” (Visuddhimagga). He edited all the commentarial material he found in Sri Lanka and translated these Commentaries from Singhalese into Påli. The Commentaries to the Vinaya, to most of the Suttanta and to the seven books of the Abhidhamma are attributed to Buddhaghosa. The “Atthasåliní” (Expositor) is the Commentary to the first book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani. Sri Lanka, where the Tipitaka and the Commentaries were preserved, is an inspiring country to visit in order to recollect the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. The fact that numerous arahats lived in this country proves that the Dhamma was truly practised in daily life. Despite decline of Buddhism and even persecution, the Singhalese have maintained many wholesome traditions which were originated in the olden times, such as the presenting of dåna to the monks, the celebration of “Uposatha Day” and many other ceremonies. The Singhalese of today see the relevance of the Buddhist teachings in their daily lives. Numerous books on the Dhamma written by learned bhikkhus and layfollowers and also a Buddhist Encyclopedia are being published today. Many Singhalese are well versed in Påli and they are able to chant texts from the teachings. Our hostess in Colombo would spend the evening of Uposatha day in her shrineroom, chanting in Pali the “Satipatthåna Sutta” and other parts of the scriptures. One of our hosts who had invited us to luncheon recited from the “Karaníya Mettå Sutta” in the car, while his wife was driving. We noticed that people did not only think about mettå but that they also practised mettå. Their mettå appears in their generosity and their thoughtfulness for the guests they receive into their homes. ****** Nina. #88241 From: "jessicamui" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:04 am Subject: A Question while translating the Canki Sutta jessicamui Dear Friends, I'm translating the Canki Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 95) into Chinese. The sutta records a conversation between the Buddha and a young brahmin student called Kapathika. Through out the conversation, the Buddha is using the name "Bharadvaja" in addressing to Kapathika. Does anyone know why the Buddha is using this name ? What does it mean in this context ? Thanks a lot for your help ! Jessica. #88242 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Herman) - In a message dated 7/21/2008 1:23:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Herman, I am sorry for being distracted by your story about Channa. Let me try again to ask my original question: If there were only dhammas . . . (NB; I said "if" so I am not interested in whether or not you agree there are only dhammas: "If" Herman "if!") If there were only dhammas then there would be no cause for concern would there? There would be no possibility of harm done to any sentient beings. (There might be the illusion of harm done to sentient beings, but there would in fact be no such harm. Would there?) If, on the other hand, there were sentient beings, or if there were anything other than fleeting, automaton-like conditioned dhammas, then things might be different - there might well be cause for concern. But I am not asking that. My question is, *if there were only dhammas* then there would be no rational, logically consistent, cause for concern, would there? Ken H =================================== Ken, this is an iffy matter. I was too quick in saying that there is logic to your position. That is only partly so. The (actual) realization of the way things are will indeed remove suffering in "one" who has awakened, but your "no harm" conclusion is off the mark. At the time of the Buddha there was a school of materialists who took the position that since a person wasn't anything in itself, but just a cluster of entirely impersonal particles separated by space (with mentality a function of the material particles), there was nothing at all wrong in putting a sword through one of these clusters! Now, exactly the same "nothing matters" argument could be made by one who considers namas as first-class phenomena, and not just epiphenomena. In fact, that seems to be your position precisely. As you write, "There would be no possibility of harm done to any sentient beings." That's a problem with your position, Ken. It is a position that says that because there are nothing but dhammas, there is no importance to the fact of pain and suffering arising within various streams of dhammas. According to thi s position, the pain, suffering, grief, and so on of sentient beings does not matter, for "no harm is done." But, Ken, it is exactly suffering that the Buddha considered to be of central import. A position that can justify immoral actions, and what you have put forward does so, is faulty - and the Buddha would consider it faulty. One must look at the consequences of a position to properly judge it. By it's fruit you shall know it, to paraphrase Jesus. Perhaps what will be of help in modifying your perspective, in case you do see that there is a problem here and that modification is called for, is that it is not enough to say that "there are only dhammas," but to realize that what there is are dhammas that form integrated wholes and act in concert, that the most important of these dhammas are experiential functions, that many of them HURT, and that it is the suffering that *is* cause for concern and *does* constitute harm. With metta, Howard #88243 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 5:10 am Subject: Re: Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - >> Tep: >> I am now being led into the territory where there are more >> questions than answers. > > >A: ..after first 2 knowledges: > "When the mind was concentrated, pure, free from minor defilements, > malleable workable not disturbed, I directed the mind for the > destruction of desires. ..." > >If I remember, almost the exact formula was used for guidance to > stream entry except it was a weaker version of that and without >first 2 knowledges. > > T: At the stream entry level it is not clear to me what >concentration is required (as a support for sotapatti-magga). > Do you have a thought on this? Alex: Udayabbaya-ñana (rise & fall) at least, or something equivalent. Maybe even 4 Jhanas. But definately temporary supression of hindrances does occur. T: If it does not trouble you much, I would like to see one or two sutta quotes showing that Sotapannas are possessed of 4 rupa-jhanas or even the 1st. I have not been able to find one such sutta myself. ...................... > >A: In that sutta the Buddha has said that he taught this only when > asked(By Sariputta) and not before and said it first to Ven > Sariputta. This does have certain consequences to the traditional > story of Puggalapannati book, doesn't it? > > T: What consequences do you see? A: In that sutta the Buddha has admitted that he only talked about Arahants (Below pudgalas were not mentioned) . This refutes the enumeration of induvidials being tought prior to this event. I don't know at which point did Sariputta join the order, but it seems quite plausible that this event happened after Sariputta achieved Arahatship, and these teachings were definately MUCH LATER than Buddha's awakening. T: I see your point; it is confusing. History is never one of my favorite subjects anyway. Tep === #88244 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question while translating the Canki Sutta nilovg Dear Jessika, Op 21-jul-2008, om 9:04 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > I'm translating the Canki Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 95) into Chinese. The > sutta records a conversation between the Buddha and a young brahmin > student called Kapathika. Through out the conversation, the Buddha is > using the name "Bharadvaja" in addressing to Kapathika. Does anyone > know why the Buddha is using this name ? ------ N: Sometimes the Buddha would address a person using his clan name, we see this more often, also in other suttas. I think this is the case here. Success with your Chinese translations. Nina. #88245 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:29 am Subject: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Dear Alex, - > > T: If it does not trouble you much, I would like to see one or two > sutta quotes showing that Sotapannas are possessed of 4 rupa-jhanas > or even the 1st. I have not been able to find one such sutta myself. > ...................... The Buddha: 'The stream, the stream,' it is said. Now what is the stream? Sariputta: Just this noble eightfold path is the stream: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Just this noble eightfold path is the stream...'Streamwinner, streamwinner,' it is said. Now what is a streamwinner? Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' — SN 55.5 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part2.html #passage-107 Best wishes, Alex #88246 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Tep, and all) - The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' — SN 55.5 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part2.html #passage-107 Best wishes, Alex ============================== I presume, Alex, that you believe that the mention of right concentration in the definition of "the stream" is sufficient. But that will not persuade the followers of Khun Sujin. They consider the path to be a moment of path consciousness, and they consider right concentration not to be jhana but concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana and supported by all the other path factors. You and I, OTOH, consider the path to consist of ongoing attainments of inclination and ability, and right concentration to be attainment of jhana. So, it's apples and oranges, Alex, and your "point" will not be taken as you intend it to be. If I'm mistaken, I stand to be corrected by the followers here of Khun Sujin. With metta, Howard #88247 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Hi Howard, Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >I presume, Alex, that you believe that the mention of right > concentration in the definition of "the stream" is sufficient. Those who believe in Buddha's word, yes. Those who follow KS no. The response was mostly for Tep. >They consider the path to be a moment of path consciousness, and they >consider right concentration not to be jhana but concentration at >*the intensity level* of jhana and supported by all the other path >factors. >>>> N8P may be described as a moment, but there are lots of these moments that last from the time one is practicing for stream entry and until parinibbana. When on reads enough suttas, one will see that high meditate levels can last a long time. As long as 7 days. The ariyans and those practicing for Ariyan path also do not last for one mind moment. ========= Refutation of path being merely a mind moment========= 'Perhaps this venerable one [those below arhatship], when making use of suitable resting places, associating with admirable friends, balancing his [mental] faculties, will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now.' Envisioning this fruit of heedfulness for this monk, I say that he has a task to do with heedfulness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html ================= 'Now, I [Buddha] — without moving my body, without uttering a word — can dwell sensitive to unalloyed pleasure for a day and a night... for two days & nights... for three... four... five... six... seven days & nights. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.014.than.html ======= Who has ears, let them hear! Best wishes, Alex #88248 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/7/21 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Herman, > Op 21-jul-2008, om 1:35 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: >> >> Now the question remains, is the Path a learning exercise, as in the >> acquisition of a right way of thinking, or is it the unlearning of an >> incorrect way of thinking? > ------- > N: Both. By acquiring right understanding wrong understanding is > eliminated little by little. > We have, to begin with, wrong understanding of seeing, taking it for > my seeing, or I see. But as we become familiar with the > characteristic of seeing appearing at this moment, we come to > understand that it arises because of visible object and eyesense. It > just appears when there are conditions and nobody can make it arise > at will, at this very moment or at that moment. But just about everything a householder does is to surround themselves with the aura of predictability. We surround ourselves with timepieces so that we may be doing the right activity at the right time. We set the alarm clock for a certain time, stay in the shower for five minutes, eat from a pre-stocked cupboard, leave home in time to catch the train or bus that gets us to work at the right time, where we work till lunch time, and eat the food we have guaranteed ourselves, work till five, catch the train that takes us home in time for dinner, and then we repeat the whole thing again, just so that we are guaranteed of having a roof over our head, clothes to wear, food in the cupboard and perhaps a feeling that we are a little bit better than some others. And if we no longer do that now, we have done so in the past, all in order to ensure that our future needs would be met. We strive ceaselessly to maintain predictability. > This is the level of pariyatti, and pariyatti is intellectual > understanding of reality now. It is not yet direct understanding, but > it is the right condition for pa.tipatti later on. It should be clear now why pariyatti is so utterly ineffective. When everything that is done is to build and maintain the appearance of a fortress of predictability, there is absolutely no possibility of understanding otherwise. Cheers Herman #88249 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dhammanusarin Hi, Alex and Howard, - [SN 55.5] Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' T: If "whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path" in SN 55.5 means a Sotapanna, the ariya-savaka who attained sotapatti-magga and fruition, then you have rightly proved that Sotapannas are possessed of the four rupa-jhanas (right concentration). But I am inclined to believe that sotapanna has just "entered" (or touched) the Stream through the right view (samma-ditthi) that eradicates the first three fetters[See MN 2, for example]. Without any question, both anagamis and arahants are fully trained in the 4 rupa-jhanas and beyond, so they must be "endowed" with the samma-samadhi without any doubt. >Howard: I presume, Alex, that you believe that the mention of right concentration in the definition of "the stream" is sufficient. But that will not persuade the followers of Khun Sujin. They consider the path to be a moment of path consciousness, and they consider right concentration not to be jhana but concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana and supported by all the other path factors. You and I, OTOH, consider the path to consist of ongoing attainments of inclination and ability, and right concentration to be attainment of jhana. So, it's apples and oranges, Alex, and your "point" will not be taken as you intend it to be. T: I do not understand what "concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana" means, Howard. I just wish they could cite someone's real experience ("attainment" of that kind of concentration), or at least refer to specific passages in the Abhidhamma Pitaka or Suttanta Pitaka as a valid support for that theory. Tep === #88250 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 nichiconn Dear Nina, Scott & All, > Expositor, p.38 [(SN v 12) Padesavihaarasutta] 'by whatever mode of > life I lived after I first attained Buddhahood, I have [these two > weeks] lived by that mode of living' This he expanded: There are > ten positions: of the aggregates, the field of sense, the elements, > the Truths, the controlling powers, the causal signs, applications > of mindfulness, jhaana, mind and states. Of these the Teacher at > the foot of the great Wisdom Tree intuited the five aggregates > fully; for three months he lived only by way of the aggregate of > feeling. ------- N : a difficult text, we need the footnotes: S.Z. Aung explains that 'the Buddha lived his thoughts'. He 'actually experienced what he intuited'. it does not mean that he was aware only of feeling. He 'intuited the five aggregates fully'. Nina. yes (and sure, praise difficulty, nina! how sad would it be if Effort could never arise without Me!). This more or less repeats what you said: the two SN v 12's, when, after having emerged from seclusion He said "I have been dwelling in part of the abode in which I dwelt just after I became fully enlightened." - pp1531-2 Bodhi. There is a footnote (19) saying < PPn 17:9 cites the sutta in arguing against the view that dependent origination is a "simple arising"> and agrees that first he had contemplated . Bodhi's title simply drops that detail of the 'Dwelling'. These 'partly lived' suttas end: <> I liked that: "There is effort" - not "me". But mostly it made me think about subtleness and then the description of the 'wholy dwelling' time in Expositor (p.18): << So much space was flooded by the Buddha's rays. Such power is not the potency of resolve nor of culture. But the blood of the Lord of the world became clear as he contemplated such a subtle and abstruse Law. Likewise the physical basis of his thought, and his complexion. The element of colour, produced by the caloric order, born of the mind, steadily established itself with a radius of eighty cubits. In this way, he contemplated for a whole week>>. peace, connie #88251 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:50 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dhammanusarin Hi, Alex (and Howard), - I found an old discussion about Sotapanna and jhana, and thought you might want to read it. Tep === Message #75179 Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:21 pm Hi Swee, - Thank you for your conversation on jhaana and the sotapanna. > >Swee: According to MN 64 and AN 9.36 [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html], it is said that attainment of at least the first Buddhist jhana is required for anagami-ship and arahant-ship. > T: That opinion I agree with. I remember we once had a few > converations about the sotapanna, and you produced a sutta to show > me that the sotapanna must have the first jhana. However several > other suttas on sotapatti are not so specific about jhana skill at > all. Perfect siila, unshakable saddha (in the Buddha, the Dhamma > and the Sangha), plus knowledge of the Paticcasamuppada have been > cited. MN 2 specifically states that yoniso-manasikara in the Four > Noble Truths will eradicate the three fetters. I interpret that MN > 2 assumes perfect siila as the pre-requisite, and I do believe that > perfect siila is the trade-mark of all sotapannas. Swee: I am very happy to see your agreement here. Bhikkhu Bodhi has written a thesis that suggests the attainment of stream-entry does not require the attainment of any of the Buddhist jhanas. Have you read it before? http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha267.htm ................... T: Yes, I read it before. The idea of pure vipassana meditation, that does not require samatha (jhaana-based serenity), can be found in only one or two suttas that I know of(e.g. AN 4.170). And, of course, there have been debates between dry-insighters and samatha-vipassana practitioners everywhere (including DSG). BB acknowledges samatha as follows: "I myself believe there is strong evidence in the Nikâyas that the jhânas become an essential factor for those intent on advancing from the stage of once-returning to that of non-returner.". So, you are right to notice: "Bhikkhu Bodhi has written a thesis that suggests the attainment of stream-entry does not require the attainment of any of the Buddhist jhanas.". I am also very happy to concur with you on the necessity of the 1st jhana (i.e. as the strong-enough concentration base to support non- distracted contemplation of the khandhas, for example). My reason is as follows: successful development of the four frames of reference will lead to the 1st and 2nd jhaanas (MN 125 and SN 47.10) and further to the 3rd and 4th jhana via samma-samaadhi (see MN 117, DN 22). .............................................. #88252 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 5:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/21 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > > If there were only dhammas . . . (NB; I said "if" so I am not > interested in whether or not you agree there are only dhammas: "If" > Herman "if!") If there were only dhammas then there would be no cause > for concern would there? I believe I have already answered you, but I'll go through this stepwise. If there were only dhammas, would there be a dhamma that was identified as being concern? If there was such a dhamma, then there would be a cause for it. If there was no dhamma identified as concern, then there wouldn't be cause for it. There would be no possibility of harm done > to any sentient beings. (There might be the illusion of harm done to > sentient beings, but there would in fact be no such harm. Would > there?) If there were only dhammas, and there were no dhammas identified as harm, then harm wouldn't be possible. Like wise if there were no dhammas identified as sentience, or beings. But you raise here the fact that even if there are only dhammas, then there are dhammas identified as illusion. And surely illsion has a cause, else it wouldn't be there. > > If, on the other hand, there were sentient beings, or if there were > anything other than fleeting, automaton-like conditioned dhammas, > then things might be different - there might well be cause for > concern. But I am not asking that. My question is, *if there were > only dhammas* then there would be no rational, logically consistent, > cause for concern, would there? As far as I can tell you are stepping outside your own boundaries here in order to make your argument. If there are only dhammas, then illusion, fact, rationality, irrationality, concern, sentience, beings are all there, as are your question and my answer. If there are only dhammas, nothing changes, KenH, Everything will still be just however it is experienced. Cheers Herman #88253 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) upasaka_howard Thanks, Tep. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/21/2008 7:51:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi, Alex (and Howard), - I found an old discussion about Sotapanna and jhana, and thought you might want to read it. Tep /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #88254 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:19 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Hi, Alex and Howard, - > [SN 55.5] > Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is > called a 'streamwinner.' > > The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed >with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' > > T: If "whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path" in SN >55.5 > means a Sotapanna, the ariya-savaka who attained sotapatti-magga >and fruition, then you have rightly proved that Sotapannas are >possessed > of the four rupa-jhanas (right concentration). But I am inclined to > believe that sotapanna has just "entered" (or touched) the Stream > through the right view (samma-ditthi) that eradicates the first >three > fetters[See MN 2, for example]. Without any question, both anagamis > and arahants are fully trained in the 4 rupa-jhanas and beyond, so > they must be "endowed" with the samma-samadhi without any doubt. > I do hope that Jhanas are not necessery for stream entry (or even once-returning), no doubt about that. There are some suttas that possibly suggest such thing (and standart meditations as well), ex: AN9.1 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.001.than.html It may be possible that once samma-ditthi arises, other 7 factors arise (including samma-samadhi) arise either momentarily or up to within 7 lifetimes. However we absolutely have to downplay the literal interpretation of bojjhana suttas (& mn70) which equates samadhi-indriya, 4 Jhanas & samma-samadhi being required not only to for sotopanna but dhammanusarin&saddhanusarin. I do hope that Jhanas are not required, (although they could be helpful). Best wishes, Alex #88255 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:38 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Dear Tep and Everyone, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Hi, Alex (and Howard), - > > I found an old discussion about Sotapanna and jhana, and thought >you might want to read it. > ................... >T: Yes, I read it before. The idea of pure vipassana meditation, >that does not require samatha (jhaana-based serenity), can be found >in only one or two suttas that I know of(e.g. AN 4.170). And, of >course, there have been debates between dry-insighters and samatha- >vipassana Could the difference be semantic only? As you are practicing vipassana, jhanas may arise. 4th Jhana is described as super mindfulness & super equinimity ... . The diversity gets overcame when one enters aruppa stages. So one doesn't have to exclude the other. I am sure that one who reaches sankhara-upekkha-nana could easily and quickly reach 4th (or at least 1st) Jhana. > practitioners everywhere (including DSG). BB acknowledges samatha as > follows: "I myself believe there is strong evidence in the Nikâyas > that the jhânas become an essential factor for those intent on > advancing from the stage of once-returning to that of non- >returner.". > So, you are right to notice: "Bhikkhu Bodhi has written a thesis >that > suggests the attainment of stream-entry does not require the > attainment of any of the Buddhist jhanas.". I've read BB's essay today and some AN suttas that suggest that jhana isn't required for stream. I hope he is right. The possible objection is this: The suttas are oral lectures delivered for specific audience with specific needs and in a specific suited style. Suttas unfortunately are NOT a systematic textbook-like works that try to systematize the teachings, Abhidhamma. Just because the Buddha ommited something in this or that speech, it doesn't mean that that thing is unneeded, only that he didn't need to mention it to that specific audience for whatever reason. You can't mention everything in every single sutta. So you have to be selective. Can anyone find a passage (in suttas, not co's) that unambiguously claims that: a) Bhavana & b) Jhana is not required for ariyahood? Best wishes, Thank you for your post, Alex #88256 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Tep) - In a message dated 7/21/2008 9:38:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Could the difference be semantic only? As you are practicing vipassana, jhanas may arise. =================================== As I read the following section of the Anapanasati Sutta with regard to the factors of awakening, I do believe I'm also reading about jhana (Look at [4], [5], [6], and [7]!) : "And how are the four frames of reference developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination? "[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse. When his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[2] Remaining mindful in this way, he examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, analyzing, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[3] In one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, persistence is aroused unflaggingly. When persistence is aroused unflaggingly in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[5] For one enraptured at heart, the body grows calm and the mind grows calm. When the body & mind of an monk enraptured at heart grow calm, then serenity as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[6] For one who is at ease — his body calmed — the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease — his body calmed — becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[7] He carefully watches the mind thus concentrated with equanimity. When he carefully watches the mind thus concentrated with equanimity, equanimity as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. This is how mindfulness of in-&-out breathing is developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination. (Similarly with the other three frames of reference: feelings, mind, & mental qualities.) With metta, Howard #88257 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/7/22 Alex : > Dear Tep and all, > > > I do hope that Jhanas are not necessery for stream entry (or even > once-returning), no doubt about that. There are some suttas that > possibly suggest such thing (and standart meditations as well), ex: > AN9.1 > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.001.than.html > I was intrigued by your comments. If it is not too personal, why do you hope these things? Cheers Herman #88258 From: han tun Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:15 pm Subject: Computer out of order hantun1 Hi All, My computer is out of order. I will let you know when it has been repaired. metta, Han #88259 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Alex), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Ken (and Alex) - > > . . . > > ========================== Language is a funny thing, and words have very differing senses. > The term 'right understanding' is one of these multi-semantic terms. It > can mean correct point of view (or factual description of the way things > are), or it can mean the faculty of wisdom. The Buddha, in my opinion, is the > perfect and only complete teacher of the first, and the perfect and only > complete teacher of the means to cultivate the second. > I find your answer to what are the conditions to be too simple, Ken. ------- You have misunderstood my answer. Panna is a conditioned dhamma. Whether it is the pariyatti style of panna, or the patipatti or pativedha style, it is still a conditioned dhamma. When we have understood what a conditioned dhamma is we will have understood the Buddha's teaching. ------------------ H: > You say that the sole conditions, the first quite conventional, by the way, ------------------ There are no conventional conditions. This is another way in which you have misunderstood my answer. You think I am referring to 'association with the wise' 'listening' (etc) as things to "do" - as if the Buddha gave conventional instructions to be "carried out." Everything - including 'association with the wise' 'listening' and 'considering' - must be understood in terms of conditioned dhammas. When we understand those things in that way that will be our right understanding. It will be the result of previous association with the wise and listening (etc). And it will be, in the ultimate sense, a form of further association with the wise. ------------------------ H: > are: 1) listening to the Buddhadhamma and carefully thinking it over, and 2) some wisdom already developed (and then serving as condition for more wisdom). It is not at all my reading of the Buddha's instructions that all that need be done is to listen and consider. ------------------------- Right understanding of conditioned dhammas is all that is needed. I think you are saying that sitting in a certain way, or focusing attention on various conceptual (ultimately illusory) objects and activities can also develop panna. But wouldn't that depend on a wrong understanding of sitting and a wrong understanding of focusing on concepts (etc)? For a start, you would have to believe that there was control over those things. But control has no place in ultimate (right) understanding. If there was control I know I would be applying it to much better purposes than just sitting and looking. :-) ------------------------------- H: > There are other religionists, true believers all, who say to just study the "holy word". Just study Torah, just read the Gospels, just read the words of Mohammed, just peruse the Vedas. All the rest will follow, they say. They are idiosyncratic even within their own fold, and what they espouse, as I see it, is false religion. --------------------------------- In the same way, you see my perspective on the Dhamma as false Dhamma. That is because you think I am talking about wise association and listening etc, as things to "do." But I'm not. There are only conditioned dhammas here. Ultimately (in the reality taught by the Buddha) there can be no 'things to do.' Ken #88260 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Computer out of order nilovg Dear Han, I just thought of you yesterday, and missing you on the list. I hope your health is all right. Nina. Op 22-jul-2008, om 6:15 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Hi All, > > My computer is out of order. > I will let you know when it has been repaired. > #88261 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/22/2008 1:27:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Right understanding of conditioned dhammas is all that is needed. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Right understanding by supermundane wisdom of reality being nothing but dhammas *and* of those dhammas being anicca, dukkha, and anatta: fleeting, unsatisfying, impersonal, and seamlessly interrelated - arising and ceasing according to dependent origination, without substance or own-being The question is how that right understanding comes about!!! Yes, supermundane wisdom is the liberator, uprooting defilements and freeing. But nothing comes from nothing! And my point was that the Buddha gave a whole developmental program for its cultivation, never saying "Just study my words an think about them." ----------------------------------------------------- I think you are saying that sitting in a certain way, or focusing attention on various conceptual (ultimately illusory) objects and activities can also develop panna. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Cut it out, Ken! You know darn well I've never talked about "sitting in a certain way" or focusing on objects (though the Buddha did teach kasina meditation, and I hope he wouldn't be overly upset by your admonishing him for that!!) Ken, a conversation becomes stupid and purposeless when words are put in the other's mouth. So, I think I'll let this one stop at this point and just wait for more useful interaction between us to come about. ============================== With metta, Howard #88262 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:00 am Subject: Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9(4)-(7) nichiconn Dear All, Continuing from #88134* with the sutta text and translations, the next two sets of two are: CSCD < Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9(4)-(7) nilovg Dear friends, Sangiitisutta and Commentary. sutta: 'Lack of moral shame and lack of moral dread. ---------- ‘[Ahirika~nca [ahiriika~nca (katthaci)] anottappa~nca.] Co: Not being ashamed of what one should be ashamed of. Thus shamelessness has been explained. Not being afraid of what one should be afraid of. Thus the way of someone who is fearless has been explained. [Ahirikanti ‘‘ya.m na hiriiyati hiriiyitabbenaa’’ti (dha. sa. pali: 1321) eva.m vitthaaritaa nillajjataa. Anottappanti ‘‘ya.m na ottappati ottappitabbenaa’’ti (dha. sa. pali: 1322) eva.m vitthaarito abhaayanakaakaaro.] -------- sutta: Moral shame and moral dread -------------- [‘Hirii ca ottappa~nca.] ------- Co Being ashamed of what one should be ashamed of. Being afraid of what one should be afraid of.Thus shame (of evil) and fear (of the consequences) have been explained. Shame (hiri) has an internal origination and fear (ottappa) has an external origination. For shame oneself is the dominant influence and for fear the world is the dominant influence. Shame is established by the nature of modesty and fear is established by the nature of fear. The explanation of all these modes is given in the Visuddhimagga. [Hirii ca ottappa~ncaati ‘‘ya.m hiriiyati hiriiyitabbena, ottappati ottappitabbenaa’’ti (dha. sa. pali: 1323-1324) eva.m vitthaaritaani hiriottappaani. Api cettha ajjhattasamu.t.thaanaa hirii, bahiddhaasamu.t.thaana.m ottappa.m. Attaadhipateyyaa hirii, lokaadhipateyya.m ottappa.m. Lajjaasabhaavasa.n.thitaa hirii, bhayasabhaavasa.n.thita.m ottappa.m. Vitthaarakathaa panettha sabbaakaarena visuddhimagge vuttaa.] ------- sutta: Contumacy and friendship with evil. [Dovacassataa ca paapamittataa ca.] Co: the word meaning as to do-vacca: dukkha, painful, unpleasant, and vacca: speech. N: Do or du is bad. The subco elaborates: hurtful, kiccha.m, and unpleasant, ani.t.tha.m ---------- Co: Wrong speech in a person who is inclined to contrariness, to hostility, without respect. -------- N: The subco explains that this person has contrariness to the right practice of the Dhamma (dhammanudhamma pa.tipada), that he is inclined to the wrong practice. Practice of the dhamma consistent with the dhamma (dhammanudhamma): Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9(4)-(7) m_nease Hi Nina (and Connie and Scott), Great stuff, very clear and inspiring, conducive to detachment don't you think? mike Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > Sangiitisutta and Commentary. > > sutta: > 'Lack of moral shame and lack of moral dread. > #88265 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:58 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 1, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Shortly after our arrival in Sri Lanka it was “Uposatha Day” (Poya Day). We saw many people clothed in white who observed eight precepts. Even small children observed these until six at night. We were taken out to the Kelaniya temple which was the focul point of the Buddha’s second visit to Sri Lanka. Near the temple is a stupa in which relics of the Buddha have been enshrined and there is also a Bodhi Tree. We heard the sound of drums and all around on the temple grounds people were sitting in small groups, reciting the “ Satipaììhåna Sutta” and other texts. Oillamps were lit, incense was burnt and flowers were offered. The abbot of the temple explained to us that people in Sri Lanka, before offering flowers, take off all the green parts. They do not keep them in water but let them dry out. It is the course of nature that flowers have to wither. Elderly people are not afraid of ageing and death because they realize that they cannot escape from them, just as flowers cannot avoid withering. The stanza which is recited in Sri Lanka when one offers flowers is a beautiful reminder of impermanence. Our host who took us around on that day chanted it for us: "With diverse flowers, the Buddha I adore; and through this merit may there be release. Even as these flowers must fade, so does my body march to a state of destruction." ******** Nina. #88266 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Tep) - > > In a message dated 7/21/2008 9:38:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Could the difference be semantic only? As you are practicing > vipassana, jhanas may arise. > > =================================== > As I read the following section of the Anapanasati Sutta with >regard to > the factors of awakening, I do believe I'm also reading about >jhana (Look at > [4], [5], [6], and [7]!) : > Yes, anapanasati can lead to all jhanas and aruppas (dipa sutta in anapanasati-samyutta). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html Best wishes, Alex #88267 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > 2008/7/22 Alex : > > Dear Tep and all, > > > > > > I do hope that Jhanas are not necessery for stream entry (or even > > once-returning), no doubt about that. There are some suttas that > > possibly suggest such thing (and standart meditations as well), >ex: > > AN9.1 > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.001.than.html > > > > I was intrigued by your comments. If it is not too personal, why do > you hope these things? > > Cheers > > > Herman The easier to achieve stream entry, the better. Best wishes, Alex #88268 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dhammanusarin Hi Howard (and Alex), - I would like to add a little bit more to what you and Alex have said. >Howard (#88256): >As I read the following section of the Anapanasati Sutta with regard to the factors of awakening, I do believe I'm also reading about jhana (Look at [4], [5], [6], and [7]!) : "And how are the four frames of reference developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination? ... ... "[6] For one who is at ease â€" his body calmed â€" the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease â€" his body calmed â€" becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor for awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. ================ >Alex: Yes, anapanasati can lead to all jhanas and aruppas (dipa sutta in anapanasati-samyutta). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html ================= T: Item 6, the "concentration as a factor for awakening" (samadhi- sambojjhanga) is in the same group with right concentration (samma- samadhi) and the concentration faculty(samadhindriya) as described by the Arahant Sariputta in the Treatise on Anapanasati. Ptsm, III, 444. " What is 'concentration'? Unification of cognizance and non-distraction due to long in-breaths are concentration, ...[and so on with all the other modes up to ] ... Unification of cognizance and non-distraction due to out-breaths concentrating cognizance are concentration; any stationariness, steadiedness, steadfastness, of cognizance, non-scattering, non- distraction, non-scatteredness of mentation, serenity, concentration faculty, concentration power, right concentration, is concentration." ............................... T: The "concentration as a factor for awakening" cannot be separated from jhana. "Any concentration accompanied by directed thoughts & evaluations is concentration as a factor for Awakening. And any concentration unaccompanied by directed thoughts & evaluations is also concentration as a factor for Awakening. Thus this forms the definition of 'concentration as a factor for Awakening,' and it is in this manner that it is two." [SN 56.52] "And what is the food for the arising of unarisen concentration as a factor for Awakening, or for the growth & increase of concentration... once it has arisen? There are themes for calm, themes for non-distraction. To foster appropriate attention to them: This is the food for the arising of unarisen concentration as a factor for Awakening, or for the growth & increase of concentration... once it has arisen." [SN 46.51] ............................... T: The faculty of concentration is nothing but right concentration. "And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go, attains concentration, attains singleness of mind. Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters & remains in the first jhana:.. enters & remains in the second jhana ... enters & remains in the third jhana... enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called the faculty of concentration. [SN 48.10: Indriya-vibhanga Sutta] "And what, monks, is right concentration? (i) There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. (ii) With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. (iii) With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, is mindful & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' (iv) With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This, monks, is called right concentration." [SN 45.8: Magga-vibhanga Sutta] ....................... That's all I have to say about "concentration". :-) Tep === #88269 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Alex) - In a message dated 7/22/2008 2:30:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: That's all I have to say about "concentration". :-) ============================== It is quite a bit that you said, and much appreciated by me. :-) With metta, Howard #88270 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:12 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) truth_aerator Hello Tep, Howard, DSG abhidhammikas and all. I was going over AN suttas again and did find that kayagatasati is required for stream entry and later stages. Also, Jhana can be practiced with kayagatasati? ============================================================= 390. If the bhikkhu abides reflecting the body in the body mindful and aware to dispel greed and displeasure for the world, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana, has done his duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful. 469. If he develops mindfulness of in and out breathing, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. Has done his duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful 471. If he develops mindfulness of the body, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. Has done his duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and fruits of worthiness AN 1 ekanipata 016 Ekadhamma http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html ======== Best wishes, Alex #88271 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Howard, Was I really asking so much? :-) ----------- <. . .> H: > Ken, this is an iffy matter. I was too quick in saying that there is logic to your position. That is only partly so. The (actual) realization of the way things are will indeed remove suffering in "one" who has awakened, but your "no harm" conclusion is off the mark. ------------ If there were no hippopotamuses there could be no harm done to hippopotamuses, could there? If there were no sentient beings of *any* kind there could be no harm done to anyone. Nothing could be simpler than that! It's a very simple piece of logic that, I will admit, doesn't tell us anything helpful on its own. As I see it, it is a starting-off point for Dhamma discussion. ---------- H: > At the time of the Buddha there was a school of materialists who took the position that since a person wasn't anything in itself, but just a cluster of entirely impersonal particles separated by space (with mentality a function of the material particles), there was nothing at all wrong in putting a sword through one of these clusters! ----------- Well, you can't fault their reasoning. Without having heard the Buddha's teaching they were doing pretty well. I don't think they would have actually stabbed anyone, do you? Philosophers don't usually take their philosophy that seriously. They were probably quite nice folk - just as most materialist-atheists are today. (I was one for a while.) ---------------- H: > Now, exactly the same "nothing matters" argument could be made by one who considers namas as first-class phenomena, and not just epiphenomena. In fact, that seems to be your position precisely. As you write, "There would be no possibility of harm done to any sentient beings." ---------------- It's a question that has to be asked. When we ask that question we will see that the suttas are answering it. Given that there is no self of any kind, how does a monk (someone who realises that truth) practice virtue? How does a monk practice mindfulness? . . . develop wisdom? How does a monk do anything at all (if here is no monk to begin with)? The answers can all be found in the Dhamma - if we are asking the right questions. ------------------------ H: > That's a problem with your position, Ken. It is a position that says that because there are nothing but dhammas, there is no importance to the fact of pain and suffering arising within various streams of dhammas. According to this position, the pain, suffering, grief, and so on of sentient beings does not matter, for "no harm is done." But, Ken, it is exactly suffering that the Buddha considered to be of central import. A position that can justify immoral actions, and what you have put forward does so, is faulty - and the Buddha would consider it faulty. One must look at the consequences of a position to properly judge it. By it's fruit you shall know it, to paraphrase Jesus. Perhaps what will be of help in modifying your perspective, in case you do see that there is a problem here and that modification is called for, is that it is not enough to say that "there are only dhammas," but to realize that what there is are dhammas that form integrated wholes and act in concert, that the most important of these dhammas are experiential functions, that many of them HURT, and that it is the suffering that *is* cause for concern and *does* constitute harm. --------------------- There you go again with your "integrated wholes." Such things were never a part of the Buddha's teaching. They are a polite denial of his teaching (of anatta). Watch out for them! :-) Ken H #88272 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/22/2008 8:49:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Was I really asking so much? :-) ----------- <. . .> H: > Ken, this is an iffy matter. I was too quick in saying that there is logic to your position. That is only partly so. The (actual) realization of the way things are will indeed remove suffering in "one" who has awakened, but your "no harm" conclusion is off the mark. ------------ If there were no hippopotamuses there could be no harm done to hippopotamuses, could there? If there were no sentient beings of *any* kind there could be no harm done to anyone. Nothing could be simpler than that! --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, that's just silly. There is suffering, is there not? That is harm. (I won't get into the business of "no sentient beings" for the moment.) ----------------------------------------------------- It's a very simple piece of logic that, I will admit, doesn't tell us anything helpful on its own. As I see it, it is a starting-off point for Dhamma discussion. ---------- H: > At the time of the Buddha there was a school of materialists who took the position that since a person wasn't anything in itself, but just a cluster of entirely impersonal particles separated by space (with mentality a function of the material particles), there was nothing at all wrong in putting a sword through one of these clusters! ----------- Well, you can't fault their reasoning. Without having heard the Buddha's teaching they were doing pretty well. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, Ken, Ken. So, you really think they're doing well? The Buddha did not. Ken, a point of view that would excuse murder on the premise that there is no one who is killed is a lunatic point of view. ------------------------------------------------ I don't think they would have actually stabbed anyone, do you? Philosophers don't usually take their philosophy that seriously. They were probably quite nice folk - just as most materialist-atheists are today. (I was one for a while.) --------------------------------------------------- Howard: If points of view have no connection with reality and actual events, it is worse than pointless. Is that your idea of the Dhamma? Pure philosophy that would excuse killing - but no problem, because it doesn't take itself seriously? Ken, this is seriously crazy. ------------------------------------------------- ---------------- H: > Now, exactly the same "nothing matters" argument could be made by one who considers namas as first-class phenomena, and not just epiphenomena. In fact, that seems to be your position precisely. As you write, "There would be no possibility of harm done to any sentient beings." ---------------- It's a question that has to be asked. When we ask that question we will see that the suttas are answering it. Given that there is no self of any kind, how does a monk (someone who realises that truth) practice virtue? How does a monk practice mindfulness? . . . develop wisdom? How does a monk do anything at all (if here is no monk to begin with)? The answers can all be found in the Dhamma - if we are asking the right questions. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, now you are saying nothing concrete in the slightest that provides an escape from the pit you have fallen into. You have put forward a no-person position that condones putting a sword through someone as a position the logic of which cannot be faulted. Now, I say that unless you condone murder, you should rethink what is reasoning that cannot be faulted. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ H: > That's a problem with your position, Ken. It is a position that says that because there are nothing but dhammas, there is no importance to the fact of pain and suffering arising within various streams of dhammas. According to this position, the pain, suffering, grief, and so on of sentient beings does not matter, for "no harm is done." But, Ken, it is exactly suffering that the Buddha considered to be of central import. A position that can justify immoral actions, and what you have put forward does so, is faulty - and the Buddha would consider it faulty. One must look at the consequences of a position to properly judge it. By it's fruit you shall know it, to paraphrase Jesus. Perhaps what will be of help in modifying your perspective, in case you do see that there is a problem here and that modification is called for, is that it is not enough to say that "there are only dhammas," but to realize that what there is are dhammas that form integrated wholes and act in concert, that the most important of these dhammas are experiential functions, that many of them HURT, and that it is the suffering that *is* cause for concern and *does* constitute harm. --------------------- There you go again with your "integrated wholes." Such things were never a part of the Buddha's teaching. They are a polite denial of his teaching (of anatta). Watch out for them! :-) -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, if you are serious in your "no-harm" conclusion, we are too far apart to have worthwhile debate. ------------------------------------------------ Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard #88273 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:27 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,284 Vism.XVII,285 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 284. [(ii) The Three Times] After knowing this, again: Its roots are ignorance and craving; Its times are three as past and so on, To which there properly belong Two, eight, and two, from its [twelve] factors. 285. The two things, ignorance and craving, should be understood as the root of this Wheel of Becoming. Of the derivation from the past, ignorance is the root and feeling the end. And of the continuation into the future, craving is the root and ageing-and-death the end. It is twofold in this way. ****************** 284. eva~nca viditvaa puna, tassaavijjaata.nhaa, muulamatiitaadayo tayo kaalaa. dve a.t.tha dve eva ca, saruupato tesu a"ngaani.. 285. tassa kho panetassa bhavacakkassa avijjaa ta.nhaa caati dve dhammaa muulanti veditabbaa. tadeta.m pubbantaahara.nato avijjaamuula.m vedanaavasaana.m, aparantasantaanato ta.nhaamuula.m jaraamara.naavasaananti duvidha.m hoti. #88274 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:51 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and others), - Your earlier message (#88255) shows some confusion you have experienced with the suttas : > > Alex: The suttas are oral lectures delivered for specific audience with specific needs and in a specific suited style. Suttas unfortunately are NOT a systematic textbook-like works that try to systematize the teachings, Abhidhamma. > > Just because the Buddha ommited something in this or that speech, it doesn't mean that that thing is unneeded, only that he didn't need to mention it to that specific audience for whatever reason. You can't mention everything in every single sutta. So you have to be selective. T: In short one must read the Buddha's words with wisdom. But only an arahant has fully understood/comprehended the Dhamma. So, we cannot avoid confusion yet. >A: I was going over AN suttas again and did find that kayagatasati is required for stream entry and later stages. T: Do you mean that practicing kayagatasati leads to eradication of the first three fetters? >A: Also, Jhana can be practiced with kayagatasati? T: In the Kayagatasati Sutta several practices are listed, and the four rupa-jhanas are included in that list. So, immersing the body with the jhana factors is kayagatasati. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html > Alex: Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali : >390. If the bhikkhu abides reflecting the body in the body mindful and aware to dispel greed and displeasure for the world, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana ... >469. If he develops mindfulness of in and out breathing, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. ... >471. If he develops mindfulness of the body, for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. ... >580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and fruits of worthiness ... T: A question to ask ourselves is : Can we abide mindfully of in-and- out breathing for a fraction of a second? On the first thought I think I can be mindful of in-and-out breathing for at least a minute with no difficulty. No problem! But is the QUALITY of my mindfulness during that one minute good enough to claim that I am "abiding in jhana", say the 1st jhana? Is my mind solidly free from the five hindrances before and during that one minute? I don't know yet, Alex, since I have not experienced all the five jhana factors yet [vitakka, vicara, piti, sukha, ekaggata]. Maybe whenever I know that I am abiding in jhana for a fraction of a second, then I will be able to tell about the quality of mindfulness over a longer interval. Sincerely, Tep === #88275 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta kenhowardau Hi Herman, ----------- <. . .> H: > I believe I have already answered you, but I'll go through this stepwise. If there were only dhammas, would there be a dhamma that was identified as being concern? If there was such a dhamma, then there would be a cause for it. If there was no dhamma identified as concern, then there wouldn't be cause for it. ------------ OK, so far so good! ------------------ KH: > > There would be no possibility of harm done > to any sentient beings. (There might be the illusion of harm done to > sentient beings, but there would in fact be no such harm. Would > there?) H: > If there were only dhammas, and there were no dhammas identified as harm, then harm wouldn't be possible. ------------------- That might be true, but is it relevant, or are you wandering off the topic? I am talking about harm to you and me and all the other so- called sentient beings. In the world of conditioned dhammas there are only conditioned dhammas - no sentient beings of any kind. Therefore, harm (suffering, dukkha) is simply dukkha; it is not the suffering of a sentient being. --------------------------- H (If there were only dhammas, and there were no dhammas identified as harm, then harm wouldn't be possible.) > Likewise if there were no dhammas identified as sentience, or beings. ---------------------------- . . . which there aren't. Or are you saying there are? -------------------------------------------- H: > But you raise here the fact that even if there are only dhammas, then there are dhammas identified as illusion. And surely illsion has a cause, else it wouldn't be there. --------------------------------------------- This is getting too convoluted, Herman. I simply said: if there were no sentient beings (if there were only non-sentient things) there could not possibly be harm to sentient beings. Was that such a difficult statement to agree with? -------------- H: > As far as I can tell you are stepping outside your own boundaries here in order to make your argument. If there are only dhammas, then illusion, fact, rationality, irrationality, concern, sentience, beings are all there, as are your question and my answer. If there are only dhammas, nothing changes, KenH, Everything will still be just however it is experienced. --------------- Well that's interesting! So if I experience heat as cold, or black as white, or good as evil, or non-sentience as sentience, then that is the way those things are! Is that what you are trying to tell me? Ken H #88276 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9(4)-(7) nilovg Dear Mike, Op 22-jul-2008, om 18:51 heeft mlnease het volgende geschreven: > Great stuff, very clear and inspiring, conducive to detachment > don't you > think? ------- N: Yes, especially designation.> as to friendship. We may think of a good friend, and > then there is always a mixture of appreciation of his kusala and > attachment: he is such a nice person, so kind and agreeable. But > this is so pure: the naamakhandhas are proceeding: citta and > cetasikas. Very straightforward. As to conducive to detachment: more is needed, not just thinking of a beautiful text and being inspired. This is my weakness and I have to be reminded: only satipatthana now can eventually lead to detachment from the idea of person. It may seem strange: being aware of hardness now as it appears through the bodysense, how can this lead to detachment? It seems so ordinary, so common, almost dull. It is the beginning, and we know that there is a long way to go: being aware over and over again of characteristics as they appear through the six doorways. But if we do not see the benefit of this, there are no conditions to begin being aware. Once when I was in India, I said to Kh Sujin: this is a beautiful text, and she said: Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:19 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 1, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, The discussions during the seminar I found very useful. We spoke about the many kinds of kusala the Buddha taught. Dåna (generosity), síla (morality) and bhåvanå (mental development) can be practised in daily life. We read in the “Sigalovåda Sutta” (Dialogues III, no 31) that the Buddha, when he was staying in the Bamboo Wood near Råjagaha, at the Squirrels’ Feedingground, spoke to Sigåla about good qualities to be developed in daily life. We read, for example, that the Buddha said to him: “Who is wise and virtuous, Gentle and keen-witted, Humble and amenable, Such a one to honour may attain. Who is energetic and not indolent, In misfortune unshaken, Flawless in manner and intelligent, Such a one to honour may attain. Who is hospitable and friendly, Liberal and unselfish, A guide, an instructor, a leader, Such a one to honour may attain. Generosity, sweet speech, Helpfulness to others, Impartiality to all, As the case demands. These four winning ways make the world go round, As the lynchpin in a moving car. If these in the world exist not, Neither mother nor father will receive, Respect and honour from their children. Since these four winning ways The wise appraise in every way; To eminence they attain, And praise they rightly gain.” When we read these words of advice they may seem simple to us, but how difficult it is to follow them all the time. There are more conditions for unwholesome moments of consciousness (akusala cittas) than for wholesome moments of consciousness (kusala cittas) in a day. The more one sees one’s lack of kusala, the more one realizes that it is important to know oneself, to know precisely the different moments of consciousness which arise. When we see how ugly akusala is we want to cultivate more kusala. Seeing the disadvantage of akusala and the value of kusala is a degree of wisdom, of understanding. This understanding is the condition for the development of kusala. ******* Nina. #88278 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:14 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) jonoabb Hi Herman > Are realms realities? That would of course depend on one's definition of "realities"! And I have no idea what your definition of that term might be. To my understanding of the texts, realities ("dhammas") are anything having an identifying characteristic that can be directly known, in the sense of being experienced by consciousness accompanied by panna. They are classified in various ways, including as khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, satipatthana. The following are examples of dhammas as so defined and classified: - seeing consciousness and visible object; - hearing consciousness and sound; - body-door consciousness and the objects experienced through the body-door - mind-door consciousness that "thinks about" what has been seen, heard, etc, or about ideas (but not the "thoughts" themselves that are the object of discursive thinking); - the mental factors that accompany the different kinds of consciousness. How does this compare with your own definition of "a reality". Jon #88279 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:16 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state jonoabb Hi Phil and Andrew > Ph: Obviously the Buddha, being the Buddha, wouldn't recommmend to > people of feeble understanding to try to see things in the ultimate > sense you've laid out. Maybe there can be direct understanding > of "presently arisen states" in the sense of ongoing mind states > (moods etc) which would of course be conceptual...at times pondering > re the ultimate. There is a sutta that talks about "pondering" on > the Dhamma as one of the 4 ways the Dhamma is lived. This pondering > is certainly valuable. But we cannot know the 17 mind-moments of > rupa, we cannot "see" it, we can ponder on it only, I think. I agree with your conclusion here, Phil. Beginning awareness can have no depth or sharpness to it, so we can certainly forget about seeing all the components of a single moment of citta ;-)) On this same point, Andrew recently asked: Are "you" able to be directly aware of a cetasika NOW (i.e. single mind moment, trillionth of a second)? To my understanding, awareness of a single moment of a cetasika would require extremely highly developed panna, perhaps even the wisdom of a Buddha or the great disciples. Beginning awareness is necessarily a somewhat imprecise thing. It's characteristic is that a presently arising nama or rupa is seen as being just a nama or rupa (for example, visible object seen as being just visible object, that which appears through the eye-door). But not as a single moment of such. Jon #88280 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity jonoabb Hi Andrew > Gethin's book is an introductory text and he does a very good job > explaining some of the seemingly bizarre things in Dhamma to people > who are brand new to the teachings. > > If I put it this way, it may help: what if a newcomer to Dhamma > listened to your account of nama and rupa and "streams of > consciousness" (a term you are happy to use in the right context) and > asked you - > "OK why don't I experience 17 moments of rupa in animal form followed > by 17 moments of rupa in human form?" Well OK, but I wouldn't have thought such a question particularly likely, given that our whole concept of a lifespan involves there being no change between birth and death. But I've no problem with Gethin raising it. I was particularly interested to know whether it was a subject (or terminology) mentioned somewhere in the texts, and if so, what the texts say about it. > Also, is not the paccaya a study of patterns? Well I suppose it could be put that way. Is that what he means by "patterns"? Thanks for bringing up the points. Jon #88281 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:22 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state jonoabb Hi Andrew > By spreading understanding over multiple mind moments, do you not > immediately make that understanding conventional? Can you explain > what you mean by it not just being a single moment of a dhamma? Understanding is always momentary, but that does not necessarily mean one moment of understanding one (kind of) dhamma is followed by one moment of understanding another, different (kind of) dhamma. It can just as well mean multiple moments of understanding of the same (kind of) dhamma. Also, an understanding of rise and fall (as single-moment understanding of different dhammas would seem to imply) is one of the stages of insight development. Jon #88282 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:24 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Ken > I'm sorry, but I can't follow your train of thought. ... > > Weren't we trying to imagine how the concept of a continuity (or > stream) of consciousness would translate into right understanding? > I'm not sure how your answer fits the bill. But, as I said, I will > be able to look into it more when I have my computer back. Sorry, but I've also lost the thread on this one ;-)) I think perhaps I was commenting on your suggestion that when a sense object is experienced by panna there is the understanding that the presently arisen citta was conditioned by an impulsive (kamma- productive) citta in the past the fruit of which is being experienced right now. Anyway, as we've both lost track, let's leave it for now ... Jon #88283 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:11 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Ken > > > I'm sorry, but I can't follow your train of thought. ... > > > > Weren't we trying to imagine how the concept of a continuity (or > > stream) of consciousness would translate into right understanding? Dear Jon and KenH May I butt in and suggest that it may be to the benefit of all on DSG if you persist with this discussion? Please correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that KenH disapproves of expressions like "santati", "streams of consciousness" and "patterns" because he has taken mind-moment theorising to its natural conclusion and these expressions he feels are indicative of grasping at something outside the entirely momentary 5 khandhas i.e. self-view. Hence, the fabled "act of dana" is problematical to Ken H because it necessarily goes beyond the mind moment and is therefore "not real" merely conceptual - and as the Buddha's teaching is necessarily and entirely "ultimate" (a term that only makes sense in the mind moment), such concepts have no place in the Dhamma. If we "do an act of dana" in the conceptual sense, Ken H argues that we do it simply because that is what society presently does. It has nought to do with Dhamma. I have tried previously to raise 2 questions about Ken H's views. The first was to the purpose of Abhidhamma: was it meant as a literal explanation of reality to be repeated and recited like the Catholic prayers of my youth with people frowning upon any departure from established terminology and formulations? Or is it a model (a raft?) with all the limitations of a model? The second question I thought would have been of great interest on DSG but not a soul (sorry!) took it up! And that was a warning given by Buddhaghosa in a commentary! Unfortunately, I have not been able to find a translation of these passages to post on DSG for discussion. Perhaps someone else could oblige? The reference is Vibhanga-atthakatha 198-199. If someone can post these passages, may I suggest that we all examine them to see if Ken H's views could possibly be a form of nihilism outside Dhamma. I am open to all possibilities, yeah or nay. What do you think? Best wishes Andrew #88284 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:12 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi Jon and all > > This pondering > > is certainly valuable. But we cannot know the 17 mind-moments of > > rupa, we cannot "see" it, we can ponder on it only, I think. > > I agree with your conclusion here, Phil. Beginning awareness can > have no depth or sharpness to it, so we can certainly forget about > seeing all the components of a single moment of citta ;-)) Yes, I gues my example above was a pretty extreme awareness to mention. But what you called my "trouble with satipatthana" (or words to that effect to get at my doubts re satipatthana in daily life) continues. Today as I was walking I was pondering seeing and visible object. I can believe in a moment of awareness of a moment of seeing *and* visible object together, which isn't of course a single dhamma, but the characteristic of seeing on its own, the characteristic of visible object on its own? No, I'm not there. But that's ok. > > On this same point, Andrew recently asked: > Are "you" able to be directly aware of a cetasika NOW (i.e. single > mind moment, trillionth of a second)? > > To my understanding, awareness of a single moment of a cetasika would > require extremely highly developed panna, perhaps even the wisdom of > a Buddha or the great disciples. > > Beginning awareness is necessarily a somewhat imprecise thing. It's > characteristic is that a presently arising nama or rupa is seen as > being just a nama or rupa (for example, visible object seen as being > just visible object, that which appears through the eye-door). But > not as a single moment of such. Ph: oh, ok..but... the oft-heard phrase "presently arisen realities" certainly sounds like it would be "a single moment of such." And what you say above "a presently aring nama or rupa is seen as being just a nama or rupa" but...not a single moment of such...? I can't wrap my head around this but that's ok. I'm in a good place with the Dhamma these days, by the way. Carrying on with my intentional practices (wrong view laden, no doubt) but also doing fairly diligent book study. I think pariyatti *should* be book study because if we try to lift it out of the book its all about lobha or something. Anyways, nice touching bases... Metta, Phil > #88285 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:54 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi again I wrote below: > But what you called my "trouble with satipatthana" (or > words to that effect to get at my doubts re satipatthana in daily > life) continues. Today as I was walking I was pondering seeing and > visible object. I can believe in a moment of awareness of a moment > of seeing *and* visible object together, which isn't of course a > single dhamma, but the characteristic of seeing on its own, the > characteristic of visible object on its own? No, I'm not there. Come to think of it, I don't believe in seeing "visible object" either, though I know of course it is correct theory. I see trees, cars, not visible object, as far as my awareness can experience it. Yesterday when joking a car came up the street at me fast, and there was an aversive reaction. I wasn't reacting to sound, or visible object, I don't think, I was reacting to the car I saw and heard, a kind of object which has been clearly marked as an aversion causing object. (Saw dog get hit by car, lots of run ins with drivers over the years etc.) So while I understand what abhidhamma says about visible object coming before mind door processes put it together into a car, that is not how I experience things. I see cars, I hear cars, I hate cars etc. I am still wondering (now and then) whether the "visible form" of ayatanas in suttas is not in fact referring to things like cars, women etc rather than the visible object of abhidhamma. For example, the Buddha says "no form is more like to cause lust" or however he puts it than a woman, no sound, no smell, no taste, etc. He's talking about women, baby, hot blooded sweet smelling sexy lay-dees! Not visible object etc... Anyways, these are just some of the things I'm pondering these days. When I come back here for good (in the autumn) maybe there will be conditions that motivate me to finally discuss things in a proper way. We'll see... Metta, Phil #88286 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Vism.XVII,284 Vism.XVII,285 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.696: The three times of the wheel of becoming. Having known this, one should know further that - It roots are craving, ignorance; Its times are three, past and so on, To which respectively belong Two, eight, and two, from its twelve parts. The two states: ignorance and craving should be understood to be the root of this wheel of becoming. As carrying on the past, it has its root in ignorance and its end in feeling; as being continuous with the future, it has its root in craving and its end in old age and death. Thus it is twofold. #88287 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state nilovg Dear Phil, I am glad you are still there. Op 23-jul-2008, om 14:12 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > I think pariyatti > *should* be book study because if we try to lift it out of the book > its all about lobha or something. ------- N: pariyatti is not just book study, although it may begin that way. Actually it is already considering the reality appearing now, it concerns the present moment. But it cannot yet be precise in the beginning. As you say, knowing just seeing, or just visible object, that is difficult. At the first stage of insight it can be realized. ------- You write: For example, the Buddha says "no form is more like to cause lust" or however he puts it than a woman ------- N: Yes, this is the suttanta method, and this does not give all the details of the different processes. If colour would not impinge on the eyesense, could you see a woman, a car? Nina. #88288 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:28 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear KenH, Andrew, Re: Buddhaghosa's warning (#88283)! Vibhanga-atthakatha 198-199. Dispeller of Delusion: 923. (vi) Then there are here four methods of treating the meaning, namely, (a) the method of identitiy, (b) the method of diversity, (c) the method of inactivity and (d) the method of appropriate nature. This Wheel of Existence should therefore also be known accordingly "as to the kinds of method". 924. Herein, (a) the non-interruption of the continuity thus: "With ignorance as condition, formations; with formations as condition, consciousness", just like a seed's reaching the state of a tree through the state of the shoot and so on, is called the "method of identity". One who sees this rightly abandons the annihilation view by comprehending the unbrokenness of the continuity which occurs due to the linking of cause with fruit. And one who sees it wrongly clings to the eternity view by apprehending identity in the non-interruption of the continuity which occurs (pavattamaanassa) through the linking of cause with fruit. 925. (b) But the defining of the characteristics of ignorance and so on is called "the method of diversity". One who sees this rightly abandons the eternity view by seeing the arising of constantly new [states]; and one who sees it wrongly clings to the annihilation view by apprehending individual diversity in what happens in a single continuity as though it were a broken continuity. 926. (c) The absence of such activity on the part of ignorance as: 'Formations must be made to arise by me,' or on the part of formations thus: 'Consciousness [must be made to arise] by us' and so on, is called the "method of inactivity". One who sees this rightly abandons the self view by comprehending the absence of a doer; one who sees it wrongly clings to the no-action view because he does not perceive that, though there is no activity, the causative function of ignorance, etc. is established as a law by their respective natures. 927. (d) But the production of only formations, etc. respectively and no others, with ignorance, etc. as the respective reasons, [199] like that of curd, etc. with milk, etc. as the respective reasons, is called the "method of appropriate nature". One who sees this rightly abandons the no-cause view and the no-action view through comprehending how the fruit accords with its condition. One who sees it wrongly, by apprehending it as non-production of anything from anything, instead of apprehending the occurrence of the fruit in accordance with its condition, clings both to the no-cause view and the theory of determinism. 928. Thus this Wheel of Existence, "As to the source in the [four] truths, as to function, prevention, similes, Kinds of profundity, and method, should be known accordingly". 929. For there is none who, even in a dream, has got out of the fearful round of rebirths which, like a thunderbolt, is ever destructive, unless he has severed with the knife of knowledge, well-whetted on the stone of sublime concentration, this Wheel of Existence which offers no footing owing to its great profundity and is hard to leave behind owing to the maze of many methods. peace, connie #88289 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:53 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: predictability, was Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Hi Herman, Op 22-jul-2008, om 1:14 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > N: But as we become familiar with the > > characteristic of seeing appearing at this moment, we come to > > understand that it arises because of visible object and eyesense. It > > just appears when there are conditions and nobody can make it arise > > at will, at this very moment or at that moment. ------- > > H: But just about everything a householder does is to surround > themselves > with the aura of predictability. We surround ourselves with timepieces > so that we may be doing the right activity at the right time. We set > the alarm clock for a certain time....And if we no longer do that > now, we have done so in the past, all in order to ensure that our > future needs would be met. We strive > ceaselessly to maintain predictability. > > > This is the level of pariyatti, and pariyatti is intellectual > > understanding of reality now. It is not yet direct understanding, > but > > it is the right condition for pa.tipatti later on. > > It should be clear now why pariyatti is so utterly ineffective. When > everything that is done is to build and maintain the appearance of a > fortress of predictability, there is absolutely no possibility of > understanding otherwise. ------ N: You speak about several actions that ensure predictability, and to a certain degree they do work, agreed. When life goes smoothly, unless... We can make beautiful plans, but it depends on conditions, beyond our control, whether these come true. We receive warnings in life, they are messengers. Sickness and death of dear people may quite unexpectantly come along and hit us very hard. They can turn our life completely upside down. This can cause us to see that after all there is not as much control over events as we would have thought. The messengers of old age, sickness and death can teach us about the truth of life. Thus far we were speaking about thinking of the alarmclock, many outward actions that we plan, but now we should consider the many different cittas that do such planning. We should turn to our life inwardly. There are countless cittas arising and falling away, sometimes we plan with attachment, sometimes with aversion, and at times with kusala citta when we are concerned for others. When anger arises, it does so before we have time to realize that there is anger. Can we control it? In a certain way, when we see the disadvantage of it and this is a condition for kusala citta instead of anger. But we cannot say that we are master of the countless cittas that arise extremely rapidly one after the other. There simply is no time to direct them. I do not deny that right understanding is a controlling factor, but at the same time let us not forget that it is a cetasika that can arise only when there are the proper conditions for its arising. Nina. #88290 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, >N: pariyatti is not just book study, although it may begin that >way. Is pariyatti suttamayapanna? > Actually it is already considering the reality appearing now, This sounds more like cittamayapanna. Please describe the Bhavanamayapanna and how it differs from the above two. Best wishes, Alex #88291 From: mlnease@... Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9(4)-(7) m_nease Good reminders all, Nina, thanks again. mike #88292 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Jon) - As you know, I don't consider trees, cars, and women (LOL! Why am I thinking of "fast cars" and "fast women"? ;-)) as merely concept let alone nothing-at-all, but as integrated collections of dhammas acting in concert. However, I hasten to add that one never literally *sees* a tree, car, or woman. They are known only through the mind door, and that mind-door knowing is the culmination of a multitude of mental processes of seeing, perceiving, and conceiving, building level upon level upon level of abstraction - and included in all that processing is, for all but arahants, an imposition of wrong view, specifically that of self-existence and of individuals where in fact the trees, cars, and women are only conglomerates. With metta, Howard #88293 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:08 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear KenH, Andrew, > > Re: Buddhaghosa's warning (#88283)! Vibhanga-atthakatha 198-199. > Dispeller of Delusion: > 923. (vi) Then there are here four methods of treating the meaning, namely, (a) the method of identitiy, (b) the method of diversity, (c) the method of inactivity and (d) the method of appropriate nature. This Wheel of Existence should therefore also be known accordingly "as to the kinds of method". > 924. Herein, (a) the non-interruption of the continuity thus: "With ignorance as condition, formations; with formations as condition, consciousness", just like a seed's reaching the state of a tree through the state of the shoot and so on, is called the "method of identity". One who sees this rightly abandons the annihilation view by comprehending the unbrokenness of the continuity which occurs due to the linking of cause with fruit. And one who sees it wrongly clings to the eternity view by apprehending identity in the non- interruption of the continuity which occurs (pavattamaanassa) through the linking of cause with fruit. > 925. (b) But the defining of the characteristics of ignorance and so on is called "the method of diversity". One who sees this rightly abandons the eternity view by seeing the arising of constantly new [states]; and one who sees it wrongly clings to the annihilation view by apprehending individual diversity in what happens in a single continuity as though it were a broken continuity. > 926. (c) The absence of such activity on the part of ignorance as: 'Formations must be made to arise by me,' or on the part of formations thus: 'Consciousness [must be made to arise] by us' and so on, is called the "method of inactivity". One who sees this rightly abandons the self view by comprehending the absence of a doer; one who sees it wrongly clings to the no-action view because he does not perceive that, though there is no activity, the causative function of ignorance, etc. is established as a law by their respective natures. > 927. (d) But the production of only formations, etc. respectively and no others, with ignorance, etc. as the respective reasons, [199] like that of curd, etc. with milk, etc. as the respective reasons, is called the "method of appropriate nature". One who sees this rightly abandons the no-cause view and the no-action view through comprehending how the fruit accords with its condition. One who sees it wrongly, by apprehending it as non-production of anything from anything, instead of apprehending the occurrence of the fruit in accordance with its condition, clings both to the no-cause view and the theory of determinism. > 928. Thus this Wheel of Existence, > "As to the source in the [four] truths, > as to function, prevention, similes, > Kinds of profundity, and method, > should be known accordingly". > 929. For there is none who, even in a dream, has got out of the fearful round of rebirths which, like a thunderbolt, is ever destructive, unless he has severed with the knife of knowledge, well- whetted on the stone of sublime concentration, this Wheel of Existence which offers no footing owing to its great profundity and is hard to leave behind owing to the maze of many methods. Hi Connie Thanks so much for this! What a wonderful resource DSG is! The part I was thinking of is 925 above. Is the KenH viewpoint a "broken continuity" viewpoint? I raise this for open discussion. Herman has already made the interesting comment that "continuity" meets his own definition of a "self". It seems to me that KenH has difficulty reconciling the teaching of anatta with the teaching of continuity. Do others see this as problematical? Why? Why not? A good point to clear up, don't you think? Regards Andrew PS in 926, Buddhaghosa refers to "a law by their respective natures". In modern English, we could call this a "pattern", couldn't we? #88294 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:28 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. truth_aerator Hi Andrew and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" >wrote: > The part I was thinking of is 925 above. Is the KenH viewpoint > a "broken continuity" viewpoint? Broken continuity, may sound kinda contradictory. Doesn't it? What's whiteness of Darkness? Or we have another semantic clintonian issue, it all depends what "broken" and "continuity" is. IMHO, what makes a viewpoint is speculation beyond bare hindrance- free super mindful & concentrated experience. So Does KenH has a direct perception of "broken continuity" ? If no, then it is a viewpoint to him. > I raise this for open discussion. Herman has already made the > interesting comment that "continuity" meets his own definition of > a "self". A continuous "stream" can be a conventional self, and this continuous change withing that particular stream is what separates one conventional person from another. However the nature of the fact of change, refutes the idea of Unchaning Higher Self. So the continuity DOES affirm what the Buddha DID TEACH. Best wishes, Alex #88295 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:40 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear Andrew, if I wanted to find out where KenH might be coming from, I'd start by turning the page: Expositor Vol.1, p.244 << 931 Therefore, practising for his own and others' benefit and happiness, and abandoning other duties, Let the wise man, ever mindful, so practise that he here may find A footing in the deeps, so manifold, of the Dependent Origin. End of Suttanta Division B. ABHIDHAMMA DIVISION (a) Schedule (maatikaa) 932 The Master, who has unobstructed knowledge regarding all states, has thus shown in the Suttanta Division by way of plurality of consciousness the structure of conditions freed from knots and tangles, as though spreading out the great earth and as though extending space; and now, **because this structure of conditions exists [200] not only in a plurality of consciousnesses but also in a single consciousness, he said avijjaapaccaya sa"nkhaaro <138.27> ("with ignorance as condition, a formation [arises]") and so on, thus setting forth the schedule in order to teach, as to its various aspects, the structure of conditions of a single conscious moment by means of the Abhidhamma Division.** >> Pretty sure that's where he comes in; not that he has an argument with the Suttanta methods. peace, connie #88296 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:48 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > if I wanted to find out where KenH might be coming from, I'd start by turning the page: > > Expositor Vol.1, p.244 > << > 931 Therefore, practising for his own and others' benefit and happiness, and abandoning other duties, > Let the wise man, ever mindful, > so practise that he here may find > A footing in the deeps, so manifold, > of the Dependent Origin. > > End of Suttanta Division > > B. ABHIDHAMMA DIVISION > (a) Schedule (maatikaa) > 932 The Master, who has unobstructed knowledge regarding all states, has thus shown in the Suttanta Division by way of plurality of consciousness the structure of conditions freed from knots and tangles, as though spreading out the great earth and as though extending space; and now, **because this structure of conditions exists [200] not only in a plurality of consciousnesses but also in a single consciousness, he said avijjaapaccaya sa"nkhaaro <138.27> ("with ignorance as condition, a formation [arises]") and so on, thus setting forth the schedule in order to teach, as to its various aspects, the structure of conditions of a single conscious moment by means of the Abhidhamma Division.** > >> > > Pretty sure that's where he comes in; not that he has an argument with the Suttanta methods. Hi Connie Thanks again for your fantastic input. I don't have the page to turn, unfortunately - that's why I had to ask! ;-) I confess that the above passages aren't self-explanatory to me. You have highlighted some of it (in the passage commencing with reference to the Master who has unobstructed vision of all states). Would you like to explain what the passage means to you? Again, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't KenH take exception to the "reality" of "pluralities of consciousnesses"? Isn't it at the very mention of "pluralities" (and similar terms) that he identifies wrong view / self view? This is the heart of the issue. It arises again and again on DSG and nobody questions it! We are constantly told to "understand the present realities". Wouldn't it be good to know if that is a reference to a plurality or singularity of realities? DSG 101! Sorry for being a dunce! Hope to hear more. Regards Andrew #88297 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:22 pm Subject: [dsg] What is a question? was Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching jonoabb Hi Alex > Everyone knows that there are 5 senses & mind. What I am concerned is > to "how" to develop full detachment from them. This is what others > didn't know. At best the arupavadin ascetics taught detachment from 5 > senses and part of the mind. Only Buddha taught HOW to detach from > absolutely everything. When you say detachment from the 5 senses and the mind, what kind of detachment are you referring to? There is the detachment that comes from the absence (i.e., the non-arising) of attachment, and there is the detachment that comes from the complete eradication of attachment. The former is temporary, while the latter is permanent. Both are mentioned in the teachings, but only the latter is unique to the teaching of a Buddha. Absolute detachment - in the sense of the eradication of attachment - from the 5 senses and mind, comes only from the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas. It does not come from developing more of the temporary kind of detachment. Unless and until the appropriate level of insight is attained, and the underlying tendency to attachment is eradicated, there will always be the potential for that tendency to arise, no matter how much calm or concentration has been developed. > > Yes, agreed that we are talking about bhavana. But I don't think > > there's any sutta that defines or describes bhavana > > as "meditation". "Meditation" as a translation of "bhavana" > >literally, "development") is found only in relatively recent times, > >o my knowledge. > > No kidding sherlock, modern english language is also relatively > recent development. > > Ok so I can say "Bhavana". Rose by any other name smells just as > sweet. > > Buddha did teach formal bhavana. Check out the suttas. I think you are saying that you don't mind dropping "meditation" and using "development" instead, as long as it can be understood to mean "formal" development ;-)) And by "formal development" you mean the kind of development described in MN125, involving a life dedicated to the attainment of jhana (as well as vipassana). There are a number of suttas that mention roots of trees, etc as in MN 125. However,there is no textual basis for regarding bhavana as necessarily involving a life dedicated to the attainment of jhana. Jon > =========== MN125 =============== > "And when, Aggivessana, the ariyan disciple is possessed of > mindfulness and clear consciousness, then the Tathagata disciplines > him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, choose a remote lodging in a > forest, at the root of a tree, on a mountain slope, in a wilderness, > in a hill-cave, a cemetery, a forest haunt, in the open or on a heap > of straw.' He chooses a remote lodging in the forest... or on a heap > of straw. Returning from alms-gathering, after the meal, he sits down > cross-legged, holding the back erect, having made mindfulness rise up > in front of him, he, by getting rid of coveting for the world, dwells > with a mind devoid of coveting, he purifies the mind of coveting. By > getting rid of the taint of ill-will, he dwells benevolent in mind, > compassionate for the welfare of all creatures and beings, he > purifies the mind of the taint of ill-will. By getting rid of sloth > and torpor, he dwells devoid of sloth and torpor; perceiving the > light, mindful, clearly conscious, he purifies the mind of sloth and > torpor. By getting rid of restlessness and worry, he dwells calmly > the mind subjectively tranquilized, he purifies the mind of > restlessness and worry. By getting rid of doubt, he dwells doubt- > crossed, unperplexed as to the states that are skillful, he purifies > the mind of doubt. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.125.horn.html > =============================== #88298 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:27 pm Subject: Re: Retreats (was, response to hate mail etc) jonoabb Hi Alex > Of course there were non-meditative monks. As a general rule, those > who intensily engaged in Bhavana (if only for a week like Maha > Mogallana or 2, like Ven. Sariputta) being reclusive monks, they > achieved Arahatship and then were busy helping new commers. You mention here a "general rule" that reclusive monks who intensively engaged in bhavana for a week or two achieved Arahatship (and then were busy helping new comers). I have never heard of such a general rule. Do you have any authority (sutta or otherwise) for this? > Not to all. There is one type of carita (character type) for which > nettipakarana prescribes intense study. ... But for most, retreats are > required. Here is another of your general statements (i.e., For most persons, retreats are required for the development of the path) that I would like to see some sutta (or other textual) authority for. DN2 (which you cite) describes one particular scenario; it does not establish a general rule. Jon ==================== DN2 ======================= > > "A householder or householder's son, hearing the Dhamma, gains > > conviction in the Tathagata and reflects: 'Household life is > > confining, a dusty path. The life gone forth is like the open air. > It > > is not easy living at home to practice the holy life totally > perfect, > > totally pure, like a polished shell. What if I were to shave off my > > hair and beard, put on the ochre robes, and go forth from the > > household life into homelessness?' > > > > "So after some time he abandons his mass of wealth, large or small; > > leaves his circle of relatives, large or small; shaves off his hair > > and beard, puts on the ochre robes, and goes forth from the > household > > life into homelessness. > > > > "When he has thus gone forth, he lives restrained by the rules of > the > > monastic code, seeing danger in the slightest faults. Consummate in > > his virtue, he guards the doors of his senses, is possessed of > > mindfulness and alertness, and is content. > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html > > ============= #88299 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Herman > It will forever be true that you wrote this post, Jon. And it will be > forever true that you did not abstain from doing so. Denial of > action/inaction IS your action, Jon, it is what makes you you. Yes, that is the conventional take on the matter. But I think the message from the teachings is that it is the underlying intention (the dhamma/reality that is cetana cetasika) that determines the moral quality, and the efficacy, of an action. If you don't see it that way, then by what measure, in your view, is an action to be assessed or evaluated (for example, as being kusala or akusala, or in whatever way you consider to be useful/important)? Jon #88300 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Herman > I hope you guys enjoy your trip to Australia. Please let me know if > you were able to get there without doing anything. Getting to another country without doing anything would hardly be possible. But then, that's life as we (and rest of the world) know it, isn't it? According to the teachings, the reality of the present moment is other than "Australia" or "doing something". There are "realities" arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, and it is these realties that are to be the object of insight knowledge. So conventional doing or not-doing is of no real significance. Jon PS Thanks for the good wishes. Everything going fine so far. #88301 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta corvus121 Hi Jon (and Herman) I hope you don't mind me posing some questions below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: There are "realities" > arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, You seem to be saying that there is absolutely no connection between realities and conventional circumstances. Take, for example, a conventional circumstance strange to me - that of "being handsome/attractive". Do not the teachings cover the conditioning relationship between realities and that conventional circumstance? Why the insistence on separateness between ultimate and conventional? Would not a more accurate statement of the traditional Theravadan outlook be that conventional truth and ultimate truth are different views of the same phenomena (both true)? > So conventional doing or not-doing is of no real significance. > So a conventional act of dana or of hearing the true Dhamma is not of significance in the Buddhadhamma? I am clearly missing or misconstruing something here. Perhaps you can help me put my finger on it? Regards Andrew #88302 From: "Sukinder" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:14 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state sukinderpal Hi Alex, Nina, Phil and all, Hope you don't mind that I come into this. Alex, I dropped our other discussion because you started quoting too many suttas for me to be able to keep up with, but I hope that you will understand. Nina will correct me where I'm wrong, but as you probably know, this is something I wanted so much to discuss with Phil, but since that hasn't happened yet, I would like to comment some here. ================= > >N: pariyatti is not just book study, although it may begin that > >way. > > Is pariyatti suttamayapanna? > > > > Actually it is already considering the reality appearing now, > > This sounds more like cittamayapanna. > > Please describe the Bhavanamayapanna and how it differs from the > above two. Sukin: Suttamayapanna > cintamayapanna > bhavanamayapanna and pariyatti > patipatti > pativedha have some overlap, but they do not correspond exactly. Suttamayapanna and cintamayapanna would both come under Pariyatti. On the opposite end, I believe that Bhavanamayapanna covers both patipatti and pativedha (not sure about this though). I've not read any literature about any of this, but from what I gleaned listening to A. Sujin and reading DSG, here is my understanding / misunderstanding: The Buddha spoke, however were there no one to `understand' what he said; his words would not be meaningful. Therefore as I understand it, Suttamayapanna refers to a level of "understanding" of those words and not to mere remembrance and thinking over of the different concepts. Also considering that when we hear teachings of other religions about other forms of kusala, there arises a level of understanding which conditions calm. However, this is not the kind of understanding got from hearing about the nature of present moment realities, which is what the Dhamma teaches. Here on hearing about the moment being conditioned and anicca, dukkha and anatta, there arises also a level of detachment as consequence. Sure, even the Buddha's words can be interpreted as one does when hearing other teachings, i.e. in terms of `self', and this includes hearing about `detachment'. However when this is seen instead of being about conditioned realities in the present moment, some story about what `self' needs to do, no level of detachment is involved and doesn't imo, count as suttamayapanna. So even though Suttamayapanna is just a small step compared to Bhavanamayapanna, having in fact the same point of reference, it is indeed a "big step away" from other kinds of understanding. And this is one reason never to downplay and underestimate Suttamayapanna or Pariyatti. True, this level of understanding, rather than knowing the actual characteristic of realities, a concept of these is the object of consciousness at the time. But his is how it must be, don't you think? Without hearing the Dhamma, we make wrong interpretations and form all sorts of wrong opinion about the nature of the present moment experience. But with some intellectual understanding, we should begin to correct such perceptions and misunderstandings at this level. Moreover, since wrong view has been accumulated for an endlessly long time and this being accompanied always by attachment, it is not surprising that the Dhamma too will be wrongly interpreted to serve `self'. Hence the need to listen patiently and being wary of any temptation to "just do it". This "doing it" is what I see as being the problem with so called meditators. This I see as being due to not having really had right intellectual understanding of the Dhamma. On the other hand, bhavanamayapanna and patipatti, which is what `practice' really is, like suttamayapanna, is reference to a conditioned arising of panna of a particular level and this cannot come without much development not only of suttamayapanna, but also cintamayapanna. Cintamayapanna is a level up from suttamayapanna in that instead of being prompted by hearing the Teachings, it is a level of `application' of the same. It is sometimes spoken of as being what bodhisattas alone can have, but this is in context of hearing / not hearing the Dhamma. It involves the perception of "signs" in experience prompting "wise reflection" on such as impermanence and suffering. In our case, the same process happens only *after* hearing the Teachings, in fact a good development at the level of suttamayapanna, but involves also the fact of conditionality and anatta. But even this is only `conceptual', different from patipatti which has actual characteristic of a reality as object. One important feature of this is that growing more firm with suttamayapanna, one comes back to the present moment with increased conviction of this being the only true object of knowledge and insight. It helps to steer one away from thinking that one should be observing `concepts' such as bodily posture or movement and to discriminate between knowing say `breath' as concept from the reality of hardness / softness, heat / cold etc. The overall effect is that one becomes more convinced of the fact that development must be about "now" and not at some projected time, place and involving some special posture. This latter is the stuff of "rite and ritual" and not of the development of wisdom. Correct development on the other hand is what leads to such statements as "there are only dhammas" and "there is only the present moment". And this I believe is what conditions bhavanamayapanna and patipatti and which then leads to vipassana panna and pativedha. All this takes a tremendously long time and you can be sure that any suggestion, implicit or otherwise, that the Buddha came out and taught a `short cut', this most likely would be an interpretation conditioned by `self view'. It includes ideas such as need for Jhana, for extended retreat, formal vipassana practice and also such ideas as needing to develop sila and so on first. The latter is based on what `self' perceives as being within reach, this much is within its control to determine and therefore if one kept at it, one would soon reach the goal. Alex, I've said more than merely talking about Suttamayapanna etc. But I think they are all connected and so hope you don't mind my bringing up the controversial subjects, ;-) Metta, Sukin #88303 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 24-jul-2008, om 4:48 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > We are constantly told to "understand the present realities". > Wouldn't it be good to know if that is a reference to a plurality or > singularity of realities? DSG 101! ------ N: Only one reality can be known at a time since citta can know only one object at a time. I do not see nay problem, do you? Nina. #88304 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:35 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi Howard Thanks for the below. Well said. Yes, you're right, there is in fact no "seeing a tree." However, hard for me now to fathom any form of awareness that is closer to the truth than seeing a tree -- i.e hard to fathom awareness of visible object as visible object...but not to worry about that! It is the deep truth, good to ponder on it without expectations of awareness of it, in my opinion. So actually not "hard", just beyond me, and that's fine... Metta, Phil >However, I hasten to add that > one never literally *sees* a tree, car, or woman. They are known only through > the mind door, and that mind-door knowing is the culmination of a multitude > of mental processes of seeing, perceiving, and conceiving, building level > upon level upon level of abstraction - and included in all that processing is, > for all but arahants, an imposition of wrong view, specifically that of > self-existence and of individuals where in fact the trees, cars, and women are > only conglomerates. > #88305 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:40 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi Sukin > this > is something I wanted so much to discuss with Phil, but since that > hasn't happened yet, I would like to comment some here. Hopefully someday...I am feeling a hunch that my need to berate your teacher will have passed for good when i am back here in the Fall and I'll be able to discuss properly. I am feeling content with my approach of having confidence in what I can understand from suttas, but am also aware of the shortcomings of having a lot of confidence in that, and appreciate the chance to talk with people who favour getting at things from a deeper dhamma-only angle.. (though I'm not sure that's the best way either...) So looking forward to finally discussing things with you in a proper manner, in a few months... Metta, Phil #88306 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta sarahprocter... Hi Herman (& Ken H), --- On Sun, 20/7/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > >K: If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > problem. > >> Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. **** H:> Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he could no longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full well there is no-one being hurt. But the simple fact remains that a realisation of anatta does nothing to end suffering. Pain is still pain if it is not "your pain". Ven Channa was an Arahat, BTW. **** S: Yes, he developed all insights and became an arahat in those brief moments after cutting his throat: B.Bodhi quotes the commentary notes to this sutta: "MA: He cut his throat, and just at that moment the fear of death descended on him and the sign of future rebirth appeared. Recognising that he was still an ordinary person, he was aroused and developed insight. Comprehending the formations, he attained arahantship just before he expired." **** H: 'Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing the cessation of ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear-consciousness I realized, ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by ear consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self.<....> ***** S: No mention of roots of trees or jhanas here. Whatever the time, place or occasion, even if (as in Channa's case) it is a desperate act, the path remains the understanding of realities, such as eye-consciousness and visible object, as "not me, I'm not in them and they are not self". There's no other way, no other method to attaining enlightenment. Metta, Sarah ========== #88307 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > Op 24-jul-2008, om 4:48 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > > > We are constantly told to "understand the present realities". > > Wouldn't it be good to know if that is a reference to a plurality or > > singularity of realities? DSG 101! > ------ > N: Only one reality can be known at a time since citta can know only > one object at a time. > I do not see nay problem, do you? > Nina. Hi Nina Yes, I do see a problem - the "time" you are talking about lasts for a trillionth of a second. So when we approach conventional language like "don't worry about doing or not doing, just understand the presently arising realities in our daily lives", how are we to digest that advice? Is it useful advice to we worldlings? Would you care to say something about Buddhaghosa's commentary (kindly posted by Connie) and the possibility of incorrect understanding of teachings about citta leading to various wrong views? Do you not agree that knowledge of those pitfalls is important? Best wishes Andrew #88308 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Dhammadharo sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Sat, 19/7/08, szmicio wrote: >Today I find out that Bhikkhu Dhammadharo died in car accident. I am a little bit shock and depressed. Can you say something about his life? It is realy hard to find anything on the web. After I have read his "Be here now" I feel so much greatefulness for this. His article is really amazing. Why nobody knows Bhikkhu Dhammadharo? .... S: Jon and I knew him well as a bhikkhu and lay-man. In fact Jon was his main supporter for most of the time he was ordained. After he disrobed, he stayed at Jon's place in Bangkok and after we moved to Adelaide (Australia), Alan did too. (Both he and Jon were originally from there). Later, after we'd moved to Hong Kong, he moved back to Bangkok and it was a few years later that he had the accident. He had been a TV presenter before ordaining in Bangkok, so always spoke very clearly and confidently, with a deep appreciation of the teachings. I recently transcribed some parts of our discussion with A.Sujin at his funeral in Bangkok following the terrible car-accident. If you search on the homepage under 'Alan Driver's funeral', you'll find these extracts which I think you'll find interesting. I'd be glad to discuss any of them with you further (and I know Nina would too). I too felt shocked and unhappy when I first heard he'd died. You'll see in one of the messages how I recall arriving at the funeral in tears. However, after A.Sujin's reminders about the clinging to one's own feelings, reminders about awareness now of seeing and visible object, reminders about being lost in stories and a dream-world and so on, there were no more tears, no more grief at all. We know that death can come anytime, depending on kamma. In Alan's case he showed us great friendship in sharing the Dhamma and we also had opportunities to offer him a lot of support which I know he appreciated a lot, including the opportunities to listen to A.Sujin on trips (such as in Sri Lanka or India). It's a reminder to me to not only develop understanding now, but also to share with others and assist our good friends, while we have the chance. As it happens, the other day, Jon was sorting out some personal papers and came across the original manuscript of "Be Here Now" in Alan's fine hand-writing. He had left various papers and books with Jon, so we often come across reminders of his. Sometimes I come across a Vinaya passage with a note of his in the margin, for example. We think we grieve for someone else, but actually, it's our own pleasant feeling we're so attached to and our own unpleasant feeling we are so disturbed by. The Dhamma is the only medicine. Please share anything you come across of interest, Lukas. Metta, Sarah ========= #88309 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:36 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > ... > Dear Jon and KenH > > May I butt in and suggest that it may be to the benefit of all on DSG > if you persist with this discussion? > Hi Andrew and Jon, I'll do my best, but it's only going to be more of the same. ------------- Andrew: > Please correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that KenH disapproves of expressions like "santati", "streams of consciousness" and "patterns" because he has taken mind-moment theorising to its natural conclusion and these expressions he feels are indicative of grasping at something outside the entirely momentary 5 khandhas i.e. self-view. Hence, the fabled "act of dana" is problematical to Ken H because it necessarily goes beyond the mind moment and is therefore "not real" merely conceptual - and as the Buddha's teaching is necessarily and entirely "ultimate" (a term that only makes sense in the mind moment), such concepts have no place in the Dhamma. If we "do an act of dana" in the conceptual sense, Ken H argues that we do it simply because that is what society presently does. It has nought to do with Dhamma. -------------- I don't think any of us disapproves of the word "santati (continuity)." It refers to the way one citta follows on from another, doesn't it? It doesn't mean "persisting" or "permanent" in any way. I think 'stream of consciousness' means the same thing (at least when Jon uses it). 'Pattern' might be a different kind of word. It would seem to refer to a concept, not to a paramattha dhamma. I assume 'walking' and 'eating' would be patterns. I don't have anything against those things either. :-) (Except when they are said to be realities). :-( As for the "act of dana" (another pattern?) being a problem for me, I don't think I have a *major* misunderstanding in that regard. But, yes, there are a few wrinkles I have to iron out. I'll get around to them as soon as I've finished my Visudhimagga thread. :-) --------------------- A: > I have tried previously to raise 2 questions about Ken H's views. The first was to the purpose of Abhidhamma: was it meant as a literal explanation of reality to be repeated and recited like the Catholic prayers of my youth with people frowning upon any departure from established terminology and formulations? Or is it a model (a raft?) with all the limitations of a model? ---------------------- Given those alternatives, I would definitely vote for the former. You know what I think of Thanissaro's "Anatta as strategy" theory. "Abhidhamma as model" and "Abhidhamma as raft" sound dangerously similar. ---------------------------- A: > The second question <. . .> ---------------------------- I now have a better idea of your second question. You wrote to Connie: > We are constantly told to "understand the present realities". Wouldn't it be good to know if that is a reference to a plurality or singularity of realities? DSG 101! > KH: I have no doubt that it refers to the present realities. (Strictly speaking, it refers to *one* of the present realities). And that is the case no matter what plurality (concept) we might have in mind. Whether we have in mind the concept of spinning on the wheel of samsara or just the concept of walking to the shop, there are always, ultimately, only the presently arisen dhammas. Ken H #88310 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:47 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 2. The Buddha taught any different ways of kusala and one of these ways is dåna, generosity. We should cultivate generosity, but do we know when there is true generosity? Generosity does not last. There is no mind or soul which is generous. There is no mind, there are only fleeting moments of consciousness which change all the time. Citta, consciousness, which arises falls away immediately, and then it is succeeded by the next citta. Many different types of citta arise and fall away, succeeding one another. Generosity arises with kusala citta, wholesome consciousness, and this does not stay, it falls away immediately, to be succeeded by the next citta. Akusala citta, unwholesome consciousness, may follow shortly after the kusala citta, but we do not notice this. Akusala citta cannot arise at the same time as kusala citta, because only one citta can arise at a time. Attachment or clinging, which is unwholesome, and generosity cannot arise at the same time, but attachment may follow shortly after generosity has fallen away. There is very little generosity in a day. From the time we are waking up until we go to sleep we are getting things for ourselves and how few are the moments we are giving things instead of getting them. Do we know exactly at which moment there is generosity? We may take for generosity what is actually attachment. Do we know when attachment arises to the person who receives our gift, attachment to the thing we give, attachment to our wholesome deed? We cling to the pleasant feeling we derive from giving and we do not even notice that there is clinging. We may cling to an idea of “my giving”, we take kusala for “self”. There are many more moments of attachment than we ever thought. We may think that attachment arises only when we want to possess things, when we are greedy. But there are many forms of attachment, some of which are gross and some more subtle. Isn’t there very often, after we have seen something, clinging to what we have seen? Do we cling to seeing or to our eyes? We would not want to part with an eye or lose the ability to see. That shows that there is attachment. There is bound to be attachment after we have seen, heard, smelt, tasted, and experienced objects through the bodysense, and also when we experience objects through the mind-door. One may wonder what the term “door” means. A door is the means through which citta experiences an object. Seeing experiences visible object through the eye-door. The eye-door is the eyesense, a physical phenomenon, rúpa, which is capable of receiving visible object. Eyesense itself does not see but it is a condition for seeing. There are six doors of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. There is no self who experiences objects through these doorways. There are only different cittas, succeeding one another, which experience an object through one of the six doors. ****** Nina. #88311 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Dhammadharo nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 24-jul-2008, om 9:24 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > As it happens, the other day, Jon was sorting out some personal > papers and came across the original manuscript of "Be Here Now" in > Alan's fine hand-writing. He had left various papers and books with > Jon, so we often come across reminders of his. Sometimes I come > across a Vinaya passage with a note of his in the margin, for example. ------- N: When you have time, would you share some reminders from his papers, I think Lukas would like that too. Also from the Vinaya. I also had a written copy of Be here now, but I understood this was written down by one of the friends in Adelaid? Nina. #88312 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:52 am Subject: Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 284, 285 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 284, 285 Intro: As we have seen, the Dependent Origination has been taught by way of twelve links: ignorance, formations, consciousness, naama- ruupa, the sixfold base, contact, feeling, craving, clinging, becoming, birth, and the twelfth link consisting of old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. In the following section it is explained that the cycle of birth and death can be seen under two aspects, that is as two parts: one part going back to the past, beginning with ignorance and ending with feeling, and one part continuing into the future, beginning with craving and ending with sorrow, etc. It is said that there are two roots of the cycle, namely ignorance and craving. --------- Text Visuddhimagga: [(ii) The Three Times] 284. After knowing this, again: Its roots are ignorance and craving; Its times are three as past and so on, To which there properly belong Two, eight, and two, from its [twelve] factors. Text Vis. 285: The two things, ignorance and craving, should be understood as the root of this Wheel of Becoming. Of the derivation from the past, ignorance is the root and feeling the end. -------- N: The Tiika adds: as to the division that goes back to the past, this produces vipaaka at the present time. This is one Wheel of Becoming with the delimitation of feeling as the ending. ------------ Text Vis.: And of the continuation into the future, craving is the root and ageing-and-death the end. It is twofold in this way. ------- N: Feeling conditions craving. When we take the second part of the Wheel that continues into the future, this begins with craving, and craving is always associated with ignorance. Thus, also this link that is craving is not without ignorance. The Tiika states that because of feeling there is ignorance that is associated with craving and that kamma-formations are bound up with ignorance. Thus, the Wheel of Becoming is complete with feeling as ending. Ignorance and craving can be taken as the roots of the Wheel of Becoming, there is no contradiction. The Tiika adds that because of kamma-formations there is becoming, because of consciousness etc, there are ageing and death. When sorrow etc. are considered there is also feeling as ending and thus the Wheel of Becoming has been applied with craving as root. N: Sorrow is actually unhappy feeling, and in this way feeling can also be seen as the ending. ------- Conclusion: Craving is one of the roots, and craving is always accompanied by ignorance. Ignorance conceals the danger of akusala. We read about craving : Text Vis. 235: When visible-data craving occurs, enjoying with sense-desire enjoyment a visible datum as object that has come into the focus of the eye, it is called craving for sense desires. But when [that same visible-data craving] occurs along with the eternity view that assumes that same object to be lasting and eternal, it is called craving for becoming; for it is the greed accompanying the eternity view that is called craving for becoming. When it occurs along with the annihilation view that assumes that same object to break up and be destroyed, it is called craving for non-becoming. The Wheel ends with sorrow: As we read: ‘ Sorrow, grief and despair are inseparable from ignorance’. Whenever sorrow arises, the citta is akusala citta and each akusala citta is accompanied by ignorance. The canker of sense desire leads to sorrow and since sorrow is accompanied by ignorance, ignorance is established, it is accumulated. We are reminded of the extent of our defilements, we learn that ignorance is very powerful, that it permeates our whole life. It arises with each akusala citta, even now. We have craving for all objects that can be experienced through the six doors and thus we accumulate craving and ignorance time and again. It is urgent to develop wisdom, vijjaa, so that ignorance, avijjaa, can be eliminated. ----------- Nina. #88313 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: continuity and anatta, was: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 23-jul-2008, om 23:08 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > The part I was thinking of is 925 above. Is the KenH viewpoint > a "broken continuity" viewpoint? > > I raise this for open discussion. Herman has already made the > interesting comment that "continuity" meets his own definition of > a "self". It seems to me that KenH has difficulty reconciling the > teaching of anatta with the teaching of continuity. Do others see > this as problematical? Why? Why not? ------- N: Let us not think of others' viewpoints, like Ken's, but of our own understanding. What Connie quoted we may understand in theory, but what about direct understanding of conditions at this moment? At the second stage of insight this can be realized directly. But if we read the following text we can have some understanding of cause and fruit. We can understand that seeing is vipaaka, produced by past kamma, and that it does not belong to us. But, do we really, really understand, or is there some idea of "I see" that we may not notice off hand? Those are things we should ask ourselves. The only remedy is being aware now of whatever reality appears, one at a time. Nina. #88314 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 24-jul-2008, om 8:43 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > Yes, I do see a problem - the "time" you are talking about lasts for a > trillionth of a second. > So when we approach conventional language like "don't worry about > doing > or not doing, just understand the presently arising realities in our > daily lives", how are we to digest that advice? ------ N: Not thinking of trillionth of a second, but just attending to any characteristic, now, just now. Is nothing appearing? Tell me what is appearing now. ------- > > A:Is it useful advice to we worldlings? ------ N: Yes, excellent advice. It is a must. If we worry about doing or not doing, we are thinking all the time of a self who is doing or not doing. Useless. ------- > > A: Would you care to say something about Buddhaghosa's commentary > (kindly > posted by Connie) and the possibility of incorrect understanding of > teachings about citta leading to various wrong views? Do you not agree > that knowledge of those pitfalls is important? ------ N: But beware to stay on the level of thinking, too much thinking about this or that pitfall. Better realize: what is a pitfall just now. Our lobha? Do we desire for a quick result, for the stages of insight to arise soon? ------ Nina. #88315 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pariyatti, was; Each presently arisen state nilovg Dear Alex and Sukin, Sukin answered you on this. I may add something. Op 23-jul-2008, om 17:19 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > N: pariyatti is not just book study, although it may begin that > >way. > > Is pariyatti suttamayapanna? ------- N: While one listens there can at that moment be also considering the dhamma appearing at that moment, like sound, hearing, thinking. That is pariyatti. -------- > > A: > Actually it is already considering the reality appearing now, > > This sounds more like cittamayapanna. -------- N: Cintamayapa~n~naa: yes, considering what one hears. considering the present moment. I cannot make sharp divisions, listening and considering can go together. And there are different levels of them. ------- > > A:Please describe the Bhavanamayapanna and how it differs from the > above two. ------- N: This is the actual development of understanding in being aware of nama and rupa. As Sukin rightly says: cintamayapanna > bhavanamayapanna and pariyatti > patipatti > pativedha have some overlap, but they do not correspond exactly. Suttamayapanna and cintamayapanna would both come under Pariyatti. On the opposite end, I believe that Bhavanamayapanna covers both patipatti and pativedha> I like what Sukin writes: N: Never say: O, pariyatti is just intellectual understanding. Sukin, I appreciate your post. Now I quote from your former post that I kept in my files: One important aspect of pariyatti is that it points to the dhamma arising in the present moment. Also it is not something that a `self' can decide to use in practice as one would do with other conventional knowledge and activities. It is after all a fleeting conditioned dhamma, which when arisen, falls away instantly. When for example, it is pointed out that `seeing' is a reality, and that this experiences `visible object', one's attention is bent towards this very phenomena. The level of understanding may not be such that the characteristic of seeing or visible object appears to panna. However, there is a lower level of panna which understands this intellectually and with some confidence. At such beginning level, there is already a planting the seed of understanding which relates to the development of satipatthana. One knows that it is *this* that needs to be understood through direct experience. The understanding becomes firmer as such kind of study happens more and more. And along the way when patipatti also arises, then this can reach the level of sacca ñana. The theory has been verified through experience to the extent that one is firm about the object to be studied and that the practice is all about this very moment, and not some other time, place or activity. To repeat, this is the way, in my opinion, that the development of wisdom takes place. The understanding that it is all about presently arisen dhammas, with the support of the other sobhana cetasikas bends the mind to the present moment. In the beginning the understanding is weak; perhaps one has had little experience of one `world' at a time, that only intellectual appreciation can arise. However I think that it is by the same kind of conditioning factor that moments of actual experience arises, not by will, but by accumulated understanding. And this leads to greater understanding of the six worlds separately. Pativedha is when the insight knowledge arises, but this can only happen with the kind of practice which does not move away from the presently arisen dhamma to a more idealized situation or object. Therefore I think it is crucial to have a correct appreciation of pariyatti and what it is really about. Otherwise doubt and other unwholesome dhammas will lead us the wrong way, because we think that theory is just that, and involving only thinking and sanna. In other words we "seek to practice" precisely because we don't have the correct intellectual understanding and hence real appreciation for it. ;-) (end quote) ---------- Nina. #88316 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:19 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo szmicio Dear Sarah, I've missed you. All your ansewers helps me so much. >S: I recently transcribed some parts of our discussion with A.Sujin >at his funeral in Bangkok following the terrible car-accident. If >you search on the homepage under 'Alan Driver's funeral', you'll >find these extracts which I think you'll find interesting. I'd be >glad to discuss any of them with you further (and I know Nina would >too). Yes, I am. >S: I too felt shocked and unhappy when I first heard he'd died. >You'll see in one of the messages how I recall arriving at the >funeral in tears. L: What to do if such thinking and feelings appear? >S: However, after A.Sujin's reminders about the clinging to one's >own feelings, reminders about awareness now of seeing and visible >object, reminders about being lost in stories and a dream-world and >so on, there were no more tears, no more grief at all. L: But if we stays in dream-world the whole day? Is it OK? Can we do anything about this? >S: We know that death can come anytime, depending on kamma. L: Yes, but it is a little bit frightening. I feel a depresion about that I can die even now or tommorow. I am afraid that I can lost my Path(Dhamma). I am afraid of pain. There was a time when I was feeling pain as diffrent rupas. But usualy when I feel bodily pain I think that is my heart, or liver.or if i hear anything about blood, then.. ...black out. Sarah it is very important what you write about venerable Dhammadharo. I dont know why but i like him very much. hHe was really great Dhamma teacher. If you have any materials about him please share with me. Lukas #88317 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Dhammadharo szmicio --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > Op 24-jul-2008, om 9:24 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > > As it happens, the other day, Jon was sorting out some personal > > papers and came across the original manuscript of "Be Here Now" in > > Alan's fine hand-writing. He had left various papers and books with > > Jon, so we often come across reminders of his. Sometimes I come > > across a Vinaya passage with a note of his in the margin, for example. > ------- > N: When you have time, would you share some reminders from his > papers, I think Lukas would like that too. Yes, of course ;> #88318 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta egberdina Hi KenH, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > H: > As far as I can tell you are stepping outside your own > boundaries here in order to make your argument. If there are only > dhammas, then illusion, fact, rationality, irrationality, concern, > sentience, beings are all there, as are your question and my answer. > If there are only dhammas, nothing changes, KenH, Everything will > still be just however it is experienced. > --------------- > > Well that's interesting! So if I experience heat as cold, or black as > white, or good as evil, or non-sentience as sentience, then that is > the way those things are! Is that what you are trying to tell me? > The experience of heat, black etc is the experience of heat, black etc, what else could it possibly be?? You seem to be saying that it is possible to be mistaken about the qualities of dhammas. If so, by what means is a false dhamma differentiated from a true dhamma? Cheers Herman #88319 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 jonoabb Hi Connie Appreciating all your quotes from the texts, including this one: > Expositor, p.38 [(SN v 12) Padesavihaarasutta] 'by whatever mode of life I lived after I first attained Buddhahood, I have [these two weeks] lived by that mode of living' This he expanded: There are ten positions: of the aggregates, the field of sense, the elements, the Truths, the controlling powers, the causal signs, applications of mindfulness, jhaana, mind and states. Of these the Teacher at the foot of the great Wisdom Tree intuited the five aggregates fully; ... I'm interested in the "ten positions", and am wondering what the Pali for "positions" is. Any idea? Thanks in advance. Jon #88320 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:41 am Subject: Re: Accepting Bhaavanaa Means Accepting Development Of Samatha And Vipassana jonoabb Hi Suan Thanks for including me in this message > Bhaavanaa without any context is merely the action of causing or > development. But, in the context of samatha and vipassanaa being > developed in line with the Buddha's teachings, formal development is > a better unambiguous technical term. Not necessarily, a literal > translation. I think simply "development" is the best translation for "bhavana", in the absence of any commentarial texts to the contrary, for the simple reason that "formal development" suggests that bhavana can only occur during formal practice of some kind. Jon #88321 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:55 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Herman > > > Are realms realities? > > That would of course depend on one's definition of "realities"! And > I have no idea what your definition of that term might be. All definitions come from realities. Realities are "things" that cannot be defined in terms of other things, they can only be referred to. Realities can only be experienced. > To my understanding of the texts, realities ("dhammas") are anything > having an identifying characteristic that can be directly known, in > the sense of being experienced by consciousness accompanied by panna. > > They are classified in various ways, including as khandhas, ayatanas, > dhatus, satipatthana. > > The following are examples of dhammas as so defined and classified: > - seeing consciousness and visible object; > - hearing consciousness and sound; > - body-door consciousness and the objects experienced through the > body-door > - mind-door consciousness that "thinks about" what has been seen, > heard, etc, or about ideas (but not the "thoughts" themselves that > are the object of discursive thinking); > - the mental factors that accompany the different kinds of > consciousness. > > How does this compare with your own definition of "a reality". > I am quite happy to proceed using your definition, which is almost identical to mine. But the curious thing is that there are items in your definition which are quite incongruous with the gist of your definition. Definitions and classifications notwithstanding, what is lacking is the consciousness that experiences consciousness. What would it's name be, Jon? But more to the point, I think you are asking me to assume from what you have written that realms are not real? Cheers Herman #88322 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:04 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state egberdina Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Andrew > > > By spreading understanding over multiple mind moments, do you not > > immediately make that understanding conventional? Can you explain > > what you mean by it not just being a single moment of a dhamma? > > Understanding is always momentary, but that does not necessarily mean > one moment of understanding one (kind of) dhamma is followed by one > moment of understanding another, different (kind of) dhamma. It can > just as well mean multiple moments of understanding of the same (kind > of) dhamma. > > Also, an understanding of rise and fall (as single-moment > understanding of different dhammas would seem to imply) is one of the > stages of insight development. > Your whole agenda is laid bare by what you include and exclude. What you miss, and very obviously so, is the understanding of multiple different moments. That understanding knows a pattern. Cheers Herman #88323 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Ken) - In a message dated 7/24/2008 6:30:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi KenH, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > H: > As far as I can tell you are stepping outside your own > boundaries here in order to make your argument. If there are only > dhammas, then illusion, fact, rationality, irrationality, concern, > sentience, beings are all there, as are your question and my answer. > If there are only dhammas, nothing changes, KenH, Everything will > still be just however it is experienced. > --------------- > > Well that's interesting! So if I experience heat as cold, or black as > white, or good as evil, or non-sentience as sentience, then that is > the way those things are! Is that what you are trying to tell me? > The experience of heat, black etc is the experience of heat, black etc, what else could it possibly be?? You seem to be saying that it is possible to be mistaken about the qualities of dhammas. If so, by what means is a false dhamma differentiated from a true dhamma? Cheers Herman ============================ Herman, the premise on which this post is based is the same as that on which phenomenalism is based, namely that all that can be known is the content of experience. There is no knowing of something experienced that lies outside experience. With metta, Howard #88324 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:13 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Andrew, Regarding: A: "...It seems to me that KenH has difficulty reconciling the teaching of anatta with the teaching of continuity. Do others see this as problematical? Why? Why not?" Scott: I think anatta is a quality of single dhammas. I think santati refers to causal connections. A causal connection is not a dhamma and a causal connection does not create an entity of the two causally connected elements. A: "PS in 926, Buddhaghosa refers to "a law by their respective natures". In modern English, we could call this a "pattern", couldn't we?" Scott: I think a 'pattern' is a concept - seeing a pattern literally would be a function of 'perception' rooted in ignorance. I think that to see a 'pattern' is to imagine a connection between separate aspects and, in the process, to create a whole thereby. Sincerely, Scott. #88325 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:17 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: predictability, was Bhikkhu Dhammadharo egberdina Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > ------ > N: You speak about several actions that ensure predictability, and to > a certain degree they do work, agreed. When life goes smoothly, > unless... We can make beautiful plans, but it depends on conditions, > beyond our control, whether these come true. We receive warnings in > life, they are messengers. Sickness and death of dear people may > quite unexpectantly come along and hit us very hard. They can turn > our life completely upside down. This can cause us to see that after > all there is not as much control over events as we would have thought. > The messengers of old age, sickness and death can teach us about the > truth of life. > Thus far we were speaking about thinking of the alarmclock, many > outward actions that we plan, but now we should consider the many > different cittas that do such planning. We should turn to our life > inwardly. There are countless cittas arising and falling away, > sometimes we plan with attachment, sometimes with aversion, and at > times with kusala citta when we are concerned for others. When anger > arises, it does so before we have time to realize that there is > anger. Can we control it? In a certain way, when we see the > disadvantage of it and this is a condition for kusala citta instead > of anger. But we cannot say that we are master of the countless > cittas that arise extremely rapidly one after the other. There simply > is no time to direct them. I do not deny that right understanding is > a controlling factor, but at the same time let us not forget that it > is a cetasika that can arise only when there are the proper > conditions for its arising. I agree with everything you have said. Whatever arises arises. And if intention and action were identical, we could just leave it there. But intention and action are not identical. I agree that whatever arises with the ringing of the alarm clock, arises. Nothing can control it, nothing can be done about it. We can go further, however. The ringing of the alarm clock is just sound, and only sound. Sound cannot make me get up out of bed. If sound could make me do anything then vipaka would be the cause of kamma. That would be called determinism, and that would be the end of Dhamma. Cheers Herman #88326 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 nilovg Dear Jon, Op 24-jul-2008, om 12:33 heeft jonoabb het volgende geschreven: > I'm interested in the "ten positions", and am wondering what the Pali > for "positions" is. Any idea? ------ N: Padesa: range, location. I think that is the term. Nina. #88327 From: "Egbert" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:34 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > The part I was thinking of is 925 above. Is the KenH viewpoint > a "broken continuity" viewpoint? > > I raise this for open discussion. Herman has already made the > interesting comment that "continuity" meets his own definition of > a "self". It seems to me that KenH has difficulty reconciling the > teaching of anatta with the teaching of continuity. Do others see > this as problematical? Why? Why not? > > A good point to clear up, don't you think? > I agree, it is a good point to clear up. It will be a bitter pill to swallow for some, and resisted as such, but 5th century BC anatta does not equate to a 5th century AD theory of momentariness. Take this snippet from the somewhere around 100 BC "Questions of King Milinda". 'Now what do you think, O king? You were once a baby, a tender thing, and small in size, lying flat on your back. Was that the same as you who are now grown up?' 'No. That child was one, I am another.' 'If you are not that child, it will follow that you have had neither mother nor father, no! nor teacher. You cannot have been taught either learning, or behaviour, or wisdom. What, great king! is the mother of the embryo in the first stage different from the mother of the embryo in the second stage, or the third, or the fourth? Is the mother of the baby a different person from the mother of the grown-up man? Is the person who goes to school one, and the same when he has finished his schooling another? Is it one who commits a crime, another who is punished by having his hands or feet cut off?' 'Certainly not. But what would you, Sir, say to that? ' The Elder replied: 'I should say that I am the same person, now I am grown up, as I was when I was a tender tiny baby, flat on my back. For all these states are included in one by means of this body.' Does it need to be clearer? Cheers Herman #88328 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Andrew) - In a message dated 7/24/2008 9:13:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Andrew, Regarding: A: "...It seems to me that KenH has difficulty reconciling the teaching of anatta with the teaching of continuity. Do others see this as problematical? Why? Why not?" Scott: I think anatta is a quality of single dhammas. I think santati refers to causal connections. A causal connection is not a dhamma and a causal connection does not create an entity of the two causally connected elements. A: "PS in 926, Buddhaghosa refers to "a law by their respective natures". In modern English, we could call this a "pattern", couldn't we?" Scott: I think a 'pattern' is a concept - seeing a pattern literally would be a function of 'perception' rooted in ignorance. I think that to see a 'pattern' is to imagine a connection between separate aspects and, in the process, to create a whole thereby. Sincerely, Scott. ================================= A widely occurring pattern is branching. We see it in trees, in rivers branching into rivulets, and those into streams, in branching networks within the circulatory system, in and heirarchical organizations and structures such as the tipitaka spawning commentaries, and those spawning sub-commentaries, and so on, and in the development of schools and sub-schools of Buddhism. Thinking of any of these patterned structures as individuals/entities is error, but not recognizing patterns such as branching as aspects of reality is a wearing of blinders and is the opposite of being aware of the way things are, it seems to me. Without the recognition of patterns, we are reduced to the level of a single-cell animal, if not a rock. With metta, Howard #88329 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:36 am Subject: Cremation sukinderpal Dear Nina, Lodewijk, Sarah, Jon, Azita, I just came back from the cremation of K. Butsabong, K. Weera's wife. As you all know, she suddenly fell very ill during the group's trip to India earlier this year. When they came back to Bangkok she was diagnosed as suffering from cancer of the intestines, late stage and the doctor gave her a few months to live. This Sunday K. Sujin received a call that K. Butsabong was in critical condition, so canceling her talk at the Foundation, she rushed to the hospital to be by K. Butsabong's side. I was told that all this while K. Butsabong preferred to be at home and refused morphine or any such drug and bravely put up with the pain. She continued to listen to and consider the Dhamma till the last minute and passed away while holding A. Sujin's hand and talking about the Dhamma with her. On Monday some of us attended the funeral and today Robert joined us for the cremation after driving full speed from after his lecture in Pathumthani and taking less than an hour to reach the temple in Bangkok . Previously K. Weera appeared till now very disturbed, but seeing him these two days, I think he is coping with the situation quite well. Metta, Sukin #88330 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cremation nilovg Dear Sukinder, I am deeply touched by your report on Kh Butsabong's dying. It is wonderful that she had this ending of her life. I was thinking of her and wanted to write to you asking how she was. I often hear her voice on my Thai tapes. Thank you for writing about this. Do you have Kh Weera's Email address? Nina. Op 24-jul-2008, om 16:36 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > I just came back from the cremation of K. Butsabong, K. Weera's wife. #88331 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 nichiconn Dear Jon, Nina, > I'm interested in the "ten positions", and am wondering what the Pali > for "positions" is. Any idea? ------ N: Padesa: range, location. I think that is the term. c: Just to confirm Nina's answer: Dasavidho hi padeso naama - peace, connie #88332 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:18 am Subject: Re: Cremation sukinderpal Dear Nina, > I am deeply touched by your report on Kh Butsabong's dying. It is > wonderful that she had this ending of her life. I was thinking of her > and wanted to write to you asking how she was. I often hear her voice > on my Thai tapes. Thank you for writing about this. > Do you have Kh Weera's Email address? > Nina. Yes, I also heard that she was very active in asking questions and giving explanations that benefited many people. K. Weera's email address is: weera_phlawadana@... Metta, sukin #88333 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:26 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear KenH, I don't think any of us disapproves of the word "santati (continuity)." It refers to the way one citta follows on from another, doesn't it? It doesn't mean "persisting" or "permanent" in any way. I think 'stream of consciousness' means the same thing (at least when Jon uses it). (cut) --------------------- A: > I have tried previously to raise 2 questions about Ken H's views. The first was to the purpose of Abhidhamma: was it meant as a literal explanation of reality to be repeated and recited like the Catholic prayers of my youth with people frowning upon any departure from established terminology and formulations? Or is it a model (a raft?) with all the limitations of a model? ---------------------- KenH: Given those alternatives, I would definitely vote for the former. You know what I think of Thanissaro's "Anatta as strategy" theory. "Abhidhamma as model" and "Abhidhamma as raft" sound dangerously similar. ---------------------------- c: OK! Catechism it is then. Expositor, p.27 << and the third, i.e., Abhidhamma-Pi.taka, instructs, according to states, those persons who imagine a self in the ultimate sense in mere collocations of things, saying, 'This is I; that is mine,' and is called instruction given in accordance with states. >> what's a raft anyway? but to the earlier question: citta's santati? - Expositor, p,.84, after expanding a bit on the defining devices (lakkha.na.m, rasa, paccupa.t.thaana, pada.t.thaana.m) goes on: << By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. Or, inasmuch as this work 'consciousness' is common to all states or cleasses of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness,' because it arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of appercepteion in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. Moreover, all (four classes) are termed 'consciousness' because they are variegated (citra) according to circumstance. The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of producing a variety or diversity of effects. >> peace, connie #88334 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:45 pm Subject: Re: Retreats (was, response to hate mail etc) truth_aerator Dear Jon, Sukinder, and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Hi Alex > > I have never heard of such a general rule. Do you have any >authority > (sutta or otherwise) for this? Anapanasati is one such sutta: "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Savatthi in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migara's mother, together with many well-known elder disciples — with Ven. Sariputta, Ven. Maha Moggallana, Ven. Maha Kassapa, Ven. Maha Kaccana, Ven. Maha Kotthita, Ven. Maha Kappina, Ven. Maha Cunda, Ven. Revata, Ven. Ananda, and other well-known elder disciples. On that occasion the elder monks were teaching & instructing. Some elder monks were teaching & instructing ten monks, some were teaching & instructing twenty monks, some were teaching & instructing thirty monks, some were teaching & instructing forty monks. The new monks, being taught & instructed by the elder monks, were discerning grand, successive distinctions. " - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html > > Here is another of your general statements (i.e., For most persons, > retreats are required for the development of the path) that I would > like to see some sutta (or other textual) authority for. > If you can develop skillful states on the level of vipassana jhanas & nanas without retreats - GOOD FOR YOU. Tell me, out of four character types - what do the majority of people today fall into? Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya, Padaparama. http://www.triplegem.plus.com/individu.htm If one is in the highest two categories, then extensive practice isn't required. You hear a phrase or two, and !boom! - A sotopanna or even an Arhat. You can be a householder, and become an ariya instantly. However I am sure that if such people still exist, they are a minority. For weaker types of puggalas, intensive cultivation is required. Regarding retreats: There are many cases in SN where a monk asks the Buddha for "instruction" in brief so that he can "dwell alone, withdrawn, secluded, and resolute", then the monk runs into the woods and "in no long time achieves the goal for which clansmen rightly go forth from homelife into homelessness". Regarding laypeople & retreats, retreats are like temporary "seclusion". > DN2 (which you cite) describes one particular scenario; it does not > establish a general rule. > > Jon Jon, the scenario is repeated in many suttas found in DN and MN! Almost 1/3 of DN features this path outline. 1) Conscience & concern 2) Purity of conduct 3)Restraint of the senses 4) Moderation in eating 5) Wakefulness 6)Mindfulness & alertness 7) Abandoning the hindrances 8) The four jhanas 9) The three knowledges DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 Best wishes, Alex #88335 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:56 pm Subject: [dsg] What is a question? truth_aerator Hi Jon, Sukinder and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > When you say detachment from the 5 senses and the mind, what kind >of detachment are you referring to? The best detachment is the one that is forever and irrevesible. Complete eradication of roots of attachment. > Absolute detachment - in the sense of the eradication of >attachment - from the 5 senses and mind, comes only from the >development of > insight into the true nature of dhammas. It does not come from > developing more of the temporary kind of detachment. True. But if one cannot even temporarily detach from X, then how does one expect to be able to permanently detach? > Unless and until the appropriate level of insight is attained, and > the underlying tendency to attachment is eradicated, there will > always be the potential for that tendency to arise, no matter how > much calm or concentration has been developed. Of course the sammadhi is aimed toward relinquishment of all attachments. For example in anapanasati sutta this is mention in the last 4 steps. > > > Yes, agreed that we are talking about bhavana. But I don't think > > > there's any sutta that defines or describes bhavana > > > as "meditation". "Meditation" as a translation of "bhavana" > > >literally, "development") is found only in relatively recent > times, > > >o my knowledge. OK. So lets use "bhavana" then. You are being to pedantic and hairspliting with words, rough and inflexible. You redifine the meaning of the words so as to make them a strawman and shoot it down. > I think you are saying that you don't mind dropping "meditation" and using "development" instead, as long as it can be understood to mean > "formal" development ;-)) > > And by "formal development" you mean the kind of development > described in MN125, involving a life dedicated to the attainment of > jhana (as well as vipassana). > > There are a number of suttas that mention roots of trees, etc as in > MN 125. However,there is no textual basis for regarding bhavana as > necessarily involving a life dedicated to the attainment of jhana. > > Jon > If you aren't of those types that have super sharp faculties, one who is lucky to meet the Buddha, then "Pleasant & quick" mode of progress is most likely ain't yours (or mine). Again, the often mentioned outline is this: 1) Conscience & concern 2) Purity of conduct 3)Restraint of the senses 4) Moderation in eating 5) Wakefulness 6)Mindfulness & alertness 7) Abandoning the hindrances 8) The four jhanas 9) The 1-3 higher knowledges (if not all 6) With the knowledge of Liberation. Arhatship. DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 > > =========== MN125 =============== > > "And when, Aggivessana, the ariyan disciple is possessed of > > mindfulness and clear consciousness, then the Tathagata disciplines > > him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, choose a remote lodging in a > > forest, at the root of a tree, on a mountain slope, in a > wilderness, > > in a hill-cave, a cemetery, a forest haunt, in the open or on a > heap > > of straw.' He chooses a remote lodging in the forest... or on a > heap > > of straw. Returning from alms-gathering, after the meal, he sits > down > > cross-legged, holding the back erect, having made mindfulness rise > up > > in front of him, he, by getting rid of coveting for the world, > dwells > > with a mind devoid of coveting, he purifies the mind of coveting. > By > > getting rid of the taint of ill-will, he dwells benevolent in mind, > > compassionate for the welfare of all creatures and beings, he > > purifies the mind of the taint of ill-will. By getting rid of sloth > > and torpor, he dwells devoid of sloth and torpor; perceiving the > > light, mindful, clearly conscious, he purifies the mind of sloth > and > > torpor. By getting rid of restlessness and worry, he dwells calmly > > the mind subjectively tranquilized, he purifies the mind of > > restlessness and worry. By getting rid of doubt, he dwells doubt- > > crossed, unperplexed as to the states that are skillful, he > purifies > > the mind of doubt. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.125.horn.html > > =============================== > Best wishes, Alex #88336 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:06 pm Subject: Just studying... truth_aerator Dear Sukin, Nina, Phil, Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Alex, Nina, Phil and all, > I've not read > any literature about any of this, but from what I gleaned listening > to A. Sujin and reading DSG, here is my understanding / > misunderstanding: > > The Buddha spoke, Before we proceed: How many suttas have you read? How many KS writings have you read? Do you speak for KS interpretation of "what the Buddha taught" or the bare suttas? > This "doing it" is what I see as being the problem with so called > meditators. This I see as being due to not having really had right > intellectual understanding of the Dhamma. And for whom are you speaking? This doesn't apply to the meditations that I read about. > One important feature of this is that growing more firm with > suttamayapanna, one comes back to the present moment with increased > conviction of this being the only true object of knowledge and > insight. Many other traditions say this. Just read the Bhagavat Gita, The Bible, Quran, Talmud, Torah, Zohar, Talmud Eser Sfirot, and everything will follow. BULL. "read with intention and the Ohr Makif from Ein Sof will drop toward Malhut and open the spiritual vision in thee" ... I've heard it before... Yeh, sweet dreams... Best wishes, Alex #88337 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:54 pm Subject: Re: pariyatti, was; Each presently arisen state truth_aerator Dear Nina, Sukin and all, Nina, thank you very much for your detailed post. From it I can see that it is quite far away from what the suttas typically say. Panna in the suttas is most oftenly defined as seeing 4NT, or DO. In your post I don't see ANY mention toward 4 Noble Truths, a heart of Buddhist path. You did talk about advanced Talmud like matters... But how does this matter? Even a child has "seeing, hearing, sensing, cognizing". How does one remove the kilesas? Remember, Buddha awakened to Jhana. ==============Pañcalacanda Sutta================================= At Savatthi. As he was standing to one side, Pañcalacanda the deva's son recited this verse in the Blessed One's presence: Truly in a confining place, he found an opening — the one of extensive wisdom, the awakened one who awakened to jhana,1 the chief bull, withdrawn, the sage. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn02/sn02.007.than.html "Now what, my friend, is the confining place? What is the attaining of an opening in the confining place?" [Ven. Ananda:] "The five strings of sensuality, my friend, are described by the Blessed One as a confining place... "Now there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Even this much is described by the Blessed One as the attaining of an opening in a confining place, though followed by a sequel. For even there there's a confining place. What is the confining place there? Just that directed thought & evaluation have not ceased. This is the confining place there... [goes through rupa jhanas and aruppas] "Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental fermentations are completely ended. Even this much is described by the Blessed One as the attaining of an opening in a confining place, without a sequel." Pancala Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: This is the actual development of understanding in being aware > > When for example, it is pointed out that `seeing' is a reality, and that > this experiences `visible object', one's attention is bent towards > this very > phenomena. The level of understanding may not be such that the > characteristic of seeing or visible object appears to panna. However, > there is a lower level of panna which understands this intellectually > and > with some confidence. At such beginning level, there is already a > planting the seed of understanding which relates to the development of > satipatthana. One knows that it is *this* that needs to be understood > through direct experience. > #88338 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/24 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> It will forever be true that you wrote this post, Jon. And it will > be >> forever true that you did not abstain from doing so. Denial of >> action/inaction IS your action, Jon, it is what makes you you. > > Yes, that is the conventional take on the matter. But I think the > message from the teachings is that it is the underlying intention > (the dhamma/reality that is cetana cetasika) that determines the > moral quality, and the efficacy, of an action. > > If you don't see it that way, then by what measure, in your view, is > an action to be assessed or evaluated (for example, as being kusala > or akusala, or in whatever way you consider to be useful/important)? There is, in my opinion, no useful way to evaluate intentions. Because intentions have no consequences. There is no harm or benefit, progress or regress in only intending. But most importantly, no amount of evaluating past intentions, by whatever doubtful standard, will alter the quality of future intentions. On the other hand, actions can be evaluated, because they do have consequences. One can usefully evaluate the consequences of one's deeds. One can usefully ask about one's acts whether they are causing harm or benefit, whether they are bringing one closer or further away from an intended goal. The evaluation of actions can and does result in actions being aborted, altered or continued. Cheers Herman #88339 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:32 pm Subject: Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Herman (& Ken H), > > --- On Sun, 20/7/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > > >K: If (as we were saying) there are only dhammas then there is no > > problem. > > > >> Isn't that logically correct? If there is nothing (no one) apart > > from dhammas then no one is being hurt by those dhammas. > **** > > H:> Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he >could no > longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full >well > there is no-one being hurt. But the simple fact remains that a > realisation of anatta does nothing to end suffering. Pain is still > pain if it is not "your pain". Ven Channa was an Arahat, BTW. > **** > S: Yes, he developed all insights and became an arahat in those >brief moments after cutting his throat: > > B.Bodhi quotes the commentary notes to this sutta: > > "MA: He cut his throat, and just at that moment the fear of death > descended on him and the sign of future rebirth appeared. >Recognising > that he was still an ordinary person, >>>> How could he be an ordinary person if his discription of Knowledge was of an Ariyan? How could he not be an Arahant if a) Channa declared to be an Arahant b) Buddha approved the statement? ========================================================= Channa: Friend Sàriputta, it is not that I'm in want of suitable nourishment, or suitable medical requisites, or a suitable attendant, yet my duties by the Teacher are done long ago, with pleasure and not with displeasure. Channa: Friend Sàriputta, for a disciple who has done his duties by the Teacher pleasantly, there is nothing wrong if he takes a weapon to end life, remember it as that.û ======== here Channa declares his Arahatship to Sariputta. The terrible punch line is that Sariputta (not only time) fails to see that Channa is an Arahant and answers in a way that an Arahant would do (total disenchantment with 18 elements). Buddha: "Sàriputta, wasn't the faultlessness of the bhikkhu Channa declared in your presence?" http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/144-channovada-e.html Here the Buddha is telling Sariputta that Ven. Channa was faultless WHILE SARIPUTTA SEEN CHANNA (in other words Ven. Channa was Arahat even while being alive and seeing Ven. Sariputta). >he was aroused and developed > insight. Comprehending the formations, he attained arahantship just > before he expired." > **** > H: 'Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye- >consciousness and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, >eye, eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness >are not me, I'm not in them and they are not self. > ***** > S: No mention of roots of trees or jhanas here. >>> No mention of his years of practice, the fact that he wore robes and had father & a mother either. You simply can't mention EVERYTHING in every single sutta. If the Buddha would say "Jhana is not required for Arahatship, I've taught N7fold path". then you could say that. Admit it, the MN144 tells in straitforward manner that Ven. Channa a) Declared his blamelesness (Arhatship). b) Buddha approved it. c) But Sariputta couldn't see it. "Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly" - MN144 #88340 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/24 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> I hope you guys enjoy your trip to Australia. Please let me know if >> you were able to get there without doing anything. > > Getting to another country without doing anything would hardly be > possible. But then, that's life as we (and rest of the world) know > it, isn't it? It all depends on what self one assumes. > > According to the teachings, the reality of the present moment is > other than "Australia" or "doing something". I always love the way you assume your myopic understanding to be "the teachings". But as I said above, the present reality depends on what self one assumes. With the assuming of a gross self, travelling to Australia, going to work, eating, drinking and being merry are the order of the day. In the "lower" jhanas, the subtle self does not travel to Australia, but is variously the qualities of bliss, equanimity etc . In the higher jhanas, the immaterial self does not travel to Australia, is not blissful or equanimous, but approaches as close as is possible to nothingness. Still, there is the assumption of a self. Let me reaffirm, the present reality is dependent on which self is assumed. There are "realities" > arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, > and it is these realties that are to be the object of insight > knowledge. > There is no insight when, having assumed a gross self, there is speech and thinking in terms of a subtle or immaterial self, while all realities corresponding to those selves are absent. > So conventional doing or not-doing is of no real significance. There is no insight when the presently assumed self and its corresponding reality is being denied. Cheers Herman #88341 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:53 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi again Sukin And I'll just quickly add before I leave for the airport something that I found myself thinking about for some strange reason in the middle of the night. Sukin, you say that you have only read a few suttas. That's nuts, my friend! It's fine to question our ability to understand them, but to fail to read them and reflect on them is nuts! Nuts, I say! Compelled by metta to quickly write this, Phil #88342 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:14 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state philofillet Hi again And I'll add that if your friends in Bangkok/at AS gatherings fail to tell you what I told you below because of some "no control" doctrine, they are failing you as Dhamma friends! Again, with metta, Phil #88343 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Adhamma, illogic, Atta egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/7/24 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman (& Ken H), > > > H:> Tell that to Ven Channa (MN144) who killed himself because he could no > longer stand the pain of his illness. Ven Channa understood full well > there is no-one being hurt. But the simple fact remains that a > realisation of anatta does nothing to end suffering. Pain is still > pain if it is not "your pain". Ven Channa was an Arahat, BTW. > **** > S: Yes, he developed all insights and became an arahat in those brief moments after cutting his throat: > > B.Bodhi quotes the commentary notes to this sutta: > > "MA: He cut his throat, and just at that moment the fear of death > descended on him and the sign of future rebirth appeared. Recognising > that he was still an ordinary person, he was aroused and developed > insight. Comprehending the formations, he attained arahantship just > before he expired." > **** If a sutta says one thing, and a commentary says another, I ignore the commentary. > H: 'Friend, Sariputta seeing the cessation of the eye, eye-consciousness > and things cognizable by eye-consciousness I realized, eye, > eye-consciousness and things cognizable by eye consciousness are not > me, I'm not in them and they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, seeing > the cessation of ear, ear-consciousness and things cognizable by > ear-consciousness I realized, ear, ear-consciousness and things > cognizable by ear consciousness are not me, I'm not in them and they > are not self.<....> > ***** > S: No mention of roots of trees or jhanas here. No mention of his mother either. I still assume he had one, though. :-) >Whatever the time, place or occasion, even if (as in Channa's case) it is a desperate act, the >path remains the understanding of realities, such as eye-consciousness and visible object, >as "not me, I'm not in them and they are not self". There's no other way, no other method to >attaining enlightenment. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. In the absence of an enlightened being to consult on the matter, I feel much safer in consulting the early texts, rather than reading what others, who are no different to me, have had to say over time. Cheers Herman #88344 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi connie, 2008/7/25 connie : > Dear KenH, > c: OK! Catechism it is then. Expositor, p.27 << and the third, i.e., Abhidhamma-Pi.taka, instructs, according to states, those persons who imagine a self in the ultimate sense in mere collocations of things, saying, 'This is I; that is mine,' and is called instruction given in accordance with states. >> > > what's a raft anyway? A raft becomes a raft by virtue of being used as a raft. Poles tied together with rope, sitting on the shore, are not rafts. Commentaries and catechisms are not rafts either. But they sure help pass the time of day. Cheers Herman #88345 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:51 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Connie, -------- <. . .> C: > OK! Catechism it is then. -------- Um, thanks, Connie; just what I've always wanted. :-) -------------- C: > Expositor, p.27 << and the third, i.e., Abhidhamma-Pi.taka, instructs, according to states, those persons who imagine a self in the ultimate sense in mere collocations of things, saying, 'This is I; that is mine,' and is called instruction given in accordance with states. >> -------------- As I understand that quote, people who tend to see permanence in concepts are taught about realities (paramattha dhammas). Those people would include all beginners, wouldn't they? So we can say that Abhidhamma instruction comes first. The other method of teaching (in terms of mere collations of things) would be for the advanced students - people who already know there are ultimately only "things" (dhammas). Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real. ----------------------- C: > what's a raft anyway? ----------------------- There are no rhetorical questions on DSG! Traditionally, a raft is something that is clung to for dear life. But, in the ultimate sense (of crossing the flood) there no traveller. So the raft that crosses the flood can't possibly be clung to. -------------------------------- C: > but to the earlier question: citta's santati? - Expositor, p,.84, after expanding a bit on the defining devices (lakkha.na.m, rasa, paccupa.t.thaana, pada.t.thaana.m) goes on: << By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. Or, inasmuch as this work 'consciousness' is common to all states or classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness,' because it arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. Moreover, all (four classes) are termed 'consciousness' because they are variegated (citra) according to circumstance. The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of producing a variety or diversity of effects. >> --------------------------------- Interesting, thanks, Connie. 'It arranges itself in a series (or its own series) by way of apperception in a process of thought.' I think I see what that means. Don't ask me though. :-) Ken H #88346 From: "dsgmods" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:13 pm Subject: Re: Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2 dsgmods Hi Nina and Connie Many thanks to you both. (According to DPPN, 'padesa' is also the name given to 2 suttas in SN - see below.) Jon DPPN extract: 1. Padesa Sutta A conversation between SÄ?riputta, Anuruddha and MoggallÄ?na in the Ketakivana in SÄ?keta, regarding the meaning of the word "sekha." A sekha is one who has only partially cultivated the four satipatthÄ?nas. S.v.174f. 2. Padesa Sutta Whoever cultivates psychic power, partially, can only do so by cultivating and developing the four bases of psychic power (iddhi-pÄ?dÄ?). S.v.255. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Jon, Nina, > > > I'm interested in the "ten positions", and am wondering what the Pali > > for "positions" is. Any idea? > ------ > N: Padesa: range, location. I think that is the term. > > c: Just to confirm Nina's answer: Dasavidho hi padeso naama - > peace, > connie #88347 From: "dsgmods" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:37 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dsgmods Hi Alex > I was going over AN suttas again and did find that kayagatasati is > required for stream entry and later stages. The term "kayagatasati" is, to my understanding, used synonymously with the term mindfulness of the body, which of course is the first of the 4 satipatthanas in the Satipatthana Sutta. So we should not be surprised to find it being described as necessary for enlightenment ;-)) At the same time, however, vipassana bhavana includes all 4 foundations of mindfulness, and so it is not a matter of one or other of the 4 being developed to the exclusion of any of the others. To my understanding, the Buddha was not recommending selecting mindfulness of the body in particular for "practice"; as you will know from your extensive study of the suttas, at different times he pointed to the importance of the development of one or other of the 4. > Also, Jhana can be > practiced with kayagatasati? A person who is developing samatha can also develop vipassana,and vice versa. But neither is given as a pre-requisite for the other. And the person developing both can have no control over the rate of "progress" of either. > ============================================================= > 390. If the bhikkhu abides reflecting the body in the body mindful > and aware to dispel greed and displeasure for the world, for the > fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana, has done his > duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a > debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful. This passage seems to suggest that at a moment of mindfulness the concentration can be considered to be a kind of jhana. How do you read it? Jon > 469. If he develops mindfulness of in and out breathing, for the > fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. Has done his > duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a > debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful > > 471. If he develops mindfulness of the body, for the fraction of a > second, it is said he abides in jhana. Has done his duties by the > Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a debt. If he makes > much of that, it would be more gainful > > > 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made > much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the > stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not > returning, and fruits of worthiness > AN 1 ekanipata 016 Ekadhamma > > http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- > Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html > ======== > > Best wishes, > > Alex #88348 From: "dsgmods" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:54 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. dsgmods Hi Andrew > May I butt in and suggest that it may be to the benefit of all on DSG > if you persist with this discussion? Thanks for butting in. I'll do my best to keep it going (I see KenH has already responded further, but I've not yet read that far). > Please correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that KenH > disapproves of expressions like "santati", "streams of consciousness" > and "patterns" because he has taken mind-moment theorising to its > natural conclusion and these expressions he feels are indicative of > grasping at something outside the entirely momentary 5 khandhas i.e. > self-view. Well, KenH himself would be the best person to say whether this accurately summarises his position. (I'm not aware that he disapproves of the use of the expressions per se, but perhaps that he considers such used to be discussion in the realm of concepts. Let's wait and see what he says.) > Hence, the fabled "act of dana" is problematical to Ken H > because it necessarily goes beyond the mind moment and is > therefore "not real" merely conceptual - and as the Buddha's teaching > is necessarily and entirely "ultimate" (a term that only makes sense > in the mind moment), such concepts have no place in the Dhamma. If > we "do an act of dana" in the conceptual sense, Ken H argues that we > do it simply because that is what society presently does. It has > nought to do with Dhamma. Over to KenH on this! > I have tried previously to raise 2 questions about Ken H's views. > The first was to the purpose of Abhidhamma: was it meant as a literal > explanation of reality to be repeated and recited like the Catholic > prayers of my youth with people frowning upon any departure from > established terminology and formulations? Or is it a model (a raft?) > with all the limitations of a model? Or neither, perhaps;-)) I would say the purpose of the Abhidhamma is the same as the purpose of the rest of the Tipitaka: to help others see the truth about reality, the way things really are. > The second question I thought would have been of great interest on > DSG but not a soul (sorry!) took it up! And that was a warning given > by Buddhaghosa in a commentary! Unfortunately, I have not been able > to find a translation of these passages to post on DSG for > discussion. Perhaps someone else could oblige? The reference is > Vibhanga-atthakatha 198-199. If someone can post these passages, may > I suggest that we all examine them to see if Ken H's views could > possibly be a form of nihilism outside Dhamma. > > I am open to all possibilities, yeah or nay. What do you think? Both (yeah and nay). Like Nina, I'm dubious of the value of discussing a third party's views. But I do encourage you to come in on any post of KenH's (past or future) and raise points with him for discussion, in which event others may well join in ;-)) Thanks for the interesting comments. Jon #88350 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state TGrand458@... Hi Phil and Sukin Phil is right on! Suttas, the Four Great Nikayas, need to be read repetitively for many years in order to potentially be able to penetrate them. I can't think of a more important practice. TG In a message dated 7/24/2008 7:59:20 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi again Sukin And I'll just quickly add before I leave for the airport something that I found myself thinking about for some strange reason in the middle of the night. Sukin, you say that you have only read a few suttas. That's nuts, my friend! It's fine to question our ability to understand them, but to fail to read them and reflect on them is nuts! Nuts, I say! Compelled by metta to quickly write this, Phil #88351 From: "dsgmods" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state dsgmods Hi Phil > Yes, I gues my example above was a pretty extreme awareness to > mention. But what you called my "trouble with satipatthana" (or > words to that effect to get at my doubts re satipatthana in daily > life) continues. Today as I was walking I was pondering seeing and > visible object. I can believe in a moment of awareness of a moment > of seeing *and* visible object together, which isn't of course a > single dhamma, but the characteristic of seeing on its own, the > characteristic of visible object on its own? No, I'm not there. But > that's ok. Yes, that's OK (and no different, I'm sure to the experience of the rest of us). For some the moments of awareness of seeing consciosness or visible object (only) come sooner than for others, but this is where patience and courage (and confidence) come it. There is no point in trying to make it happen sooner! The intellectual knowledge of the teachings will always be ahead of the confirmation by direct experience. > Ph: oh, ok..but... the oft-heard phrase "presently arisen > realities" certainly sounds like it would be "a single moment of > such." And what you say above "a presently aring nama or rupa is > seen as being just a nama or rupa" but...not a single moment of > such...? I can't wrap my head around this but that's ok. Yes, again OK! > I'm in a good place with the Dhamma these days, by the way. > Carrying on with my intentional practices (wrong view laden, no > doubt) but also doing fairly diligent book study. I think pariyatti > *should* be book study because if we try to lift it out of the book > its all about lobha or something. Anyways, nice touching bases... Same here, Phil. Have a good journey. Jon #88352 From: "dsgmods" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:22 pm Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state dsgmods Hi Phil > Come to think of it, I don't believe in seeing "visible object" > either, though I know of course it is correct theory. But even this much is a level of understanding. Because it is known to be correct theory by virtue of relating it to one's present-moment experience, and not because of any appeal to reasoning, etc. > I see trees, > cars, not visible object, as far as my awareness can experience it. And so does everyone. But there is some level of appreciation, based on one's limited understanding to date, that trees and cars are not the whole story. A person who has not heard the teachings cannot have any inkling of there being a reality of visible object. > ... I am still wondering (now and > then) whether the "visible form" of ayatanas in suttas is not in > fact referring to things like cars, women etc rather than the > visible object of abhidhamma. For example, the Buddha says "no form > is more like to cause lust" or however he puts it than a woman, no > sound, no smell, no taste, etc. He's talking about women, baby, hot > blooded sweet smelling sexy lay-dees! Not visible object etc... But when you think about it, the Buddha is perhaps pointing out how there is no single experience that is the experience of "a woman"; it is really a multitude of different experiences (that are taken as one). Jon #88353 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:26 pm Subject: Re: Cremation rjkjp1 Thank you for writing this Sukinder. General(colonel?) Weera and Khun Butsabong are long time friends of my family and she always made a fuss of my chidren and they liked her so much. It was a very nice cremation and I could listen to the monks chanting clearly in Pali about the five khandas. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > Dear Nina, Lodewijk, Sarah, Jon, Azita, > > I just came back from the cremation of K. Butsabong, K. Weera's wife. > As you all know, she suddenly fell very ill during the group's trip to > India earlier this year. When they came back to Bangkok she was > diagnosed as suffering from cancer of the intestines, late stage and the > doctor gave her a few months to live. This Sunday K. Sujin received a > call that K. Butsabong was in critical condition, so canceling her talk > at the Foundation, she rushed to the hospital to be by K. Butsabong's side. > > I was told that all this while K. Butsabong preferred to be at home and > refused morphine or any such drug and bravely put up with the pain. She > continued to listen to and consider the Dhamma till the last minute and > passed away while holding A. Sujin's hand and talking about the Dhamma > with her. On Monday some of us attended the funeral and today Robert > joined us for the cremation after driving full speed from after his > lecture in Pathumthani and taking less than an hour to reach the temple > in Bangkok . > > Previously K. Weera appeared till now very disturbed, but seeing him > these two days, I think he is coping with the situation quite well. > > Metta, > > Sukin > #88354 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Ken and Connie, Op 25-jul-2008, om 6:51 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > Interesting, thanks, Connie. 'It arranges itself in a series (or its > own series) by way of apperception in a process of thought.' I think > I see what that means. Don't ask me though. :-) ------- apperception stands for javana. N: I quote from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, Ch 9: link: http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para4.htm As we read in the “Atthasåliní” about citta: <... Or, inasmuch as this word citta is common to all states or classes of citta, that which is known as mundane: kusala, akusala or mahå-kiriya, is termed citta, because it arranges itself in its own series or continuity by way of javana (impulsion), in a process of citta. In order to understand the aspect of citta as that which arranges itself in its own series or continuity by way of javana, we should remember that cittas arise and fall away, succeeding one another very rapidly and that wholesome and unwholesome qualities, cetasikas, which accompany citta and fall away with the citta, are accumulated from one moment of citta to the next moment of citta. When citta arises and sees what appears through the eyes, hears sound through the ears or experiences another sense object, it is usually not known that such experiences are a characteristic of citta. We are more likely to notice citta when it is unhappy, sad or annoyed, when it is happy or pleased, when there is citta with anger or loving kindness, when there is the inclination to help someone else or to treat him with affection. Each citta which arises and falls away very rapidly is succeeded by the next citta and therefore the accumulations of the preceding citta are going on to the next citta. No matter whether the citta is kusala citta or akusala citta, each citta which arises and falls away conditions the next citta which immediately succeeds it. That is why inclinations accumulated in the preceding citta can go on to the next citta and so it continues all the time. We can notice that everybody has different inclinations, a different character, and this is so because all the different inclinations have been accumulated in the citta, and these are going on from one citta to the next citta. Some people are inclined to perform wholesome deeds and they are able to do so because kusala citta which, in the past, arose and fell away, was succeeded by the next citta which accumulated the inclination of wholesomeness; thus, conditions have been created for the arising of kusala citta later on. It is the same in the case of akusala citta, be it akusala citta rooted in attachment, in aversion or in ignorance. When the akusala citta falls away it conditions the arising of the succeeding citta and thus the inclination to akusala accumulated in the preceding citta goes on to the succeeding citta and in this way there are conditions for the arising of akusala citta in the future. The fact that cittas succeed one another is due to contiguity-condition, anantara-paccaya: each citta is anantara-paccaya for the following citta; this means that the preceding citta conditions the arising of the next citta which immediately succeeds it, as soon as the preceding citta has fallen away.> Nina. #88355 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:29 pm Subject: Not from the moderators, but from me! jonoabb Hi All Apologies for the series of posts sent from the 'dsgmods' address (I'm in the unfamiliar situation of posting direct to the website, using Sarah's laptop). Please read them all as from me! Thanks. Jon #88356 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cremation nilovg Dear Robert, Could you tell a little more? Speakers? Was there a booklet? Nina. Op 25-jul-2008, om 8:26 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > It was a very nice cremation and I could listen to the monks chanting > clearly in Pali about the five khandas. #88357 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:24 am Subject: [dsg] Re: continuity and anatta, was: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Let us not think of others' viewpoints, like Ken's, but of our own > understanding. Hi Nina Indeed! There *are* no others like KenH - just impersonal fleeting dhammas. Thanks for your replies. Best wishes Andrew #88358 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Cremation rjkjp1 Dear Nina I got there fairly late but I heard there were several speakers including A. Sujin. There were books handed out and also a dvd with khun Busborn's photo while she was in India on the cover. I haven't had a chance to view it yet. I commented to Sukinder that I thought if I was dieing of cancer I would probably accept the morphine if offered, do you have thoughts about that? Amazing that khun Busaborn was awake and talking about Dhamma till practically the last moment. with respect Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Robert, > Could you tell a little more? Speakers? Was there a booklet? > Nina. > Op 25-jul-2008, om 8:26 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > > > It was a very nice cremation and I could listen to the monks chanting > > clearly in Pali about the five khandas. > #88359 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: But beware to stay on the level of thinking, too much thinking > about this or that pitfall. Better realize: what is a pitfall just > now. Our lobha? Do we desire for a quick result, for the stages of > insight to arise soon? Hi Nina ... and asking what is a pitfall just now is thinking too. Best wishes Andrew #88360 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pariyatti, was; Each presently arisen state nilovg Dear Alex and friends, I will be away, from tomorrow until Wednesday and cannot answer mails. Op 24-jul-2008, om 22:54 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > Nina, thank you very much for your detailed post. From it I can see > that it is quite far away from what the suttas typically say. ------- N: In many suttas we read: seeing an object with the eye, hearing a sound with the ear... and then it is said that attachment comes in when not aware. But in being aware and having right understanding kilesas will be eliminated. -------- > > A: Panna in the suttas is most oftenly defined as seeing 4NT, or DO. -------- N: How does one come to understand the four noble Truths? By being aware and develop understanding of the four Applications of Mindfulness which contain all namas and rupas. Not only jhanacitta but also akusala citta. The truth of dukkha: what arises and falls away is dukkha. Seeing arises and falls away, it is dukkha. But to begin with, do we know what seeing is? Do we confuse it with: seeing a car, a woman? That is not seeing, the experience of visible object. There must be a beginning first in order eventually to reach the realization of the four noble Truths at enlightenment. ------- > > A: In your post I don't see ANY mention toward 4 Noble Truths, a heart > of Buddhist path. You did talk about advanced Talmud like > matters... But how does this matter? Even a child has "seeing, > hearing, sensing, cognizing". How does one remove the kilesas? ------- N: A good remark. We all see, hear, think, all day long. But one may not understand them as just elements, devoid of self. They each arise because of their own conditions, and they do not belong to anybody. In being aware of them when they appear, now, they can be known as they truly are: impermanent, dukkha, anattaa. -------- > > A:Remember, Buddha awakened to Jhana. ------ N: I will not answer this, because you can guess what I will say :-)) Nina. #88361 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:29 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > ... and asking what is a pitfall just now is thinking too. ------- N: But it is thinking with regard to the present moment. Considering the lobha that appears now. Nina. #88362 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cremation nilovg Dear Robert, thank you for your post. Can you remember what A. Sujin said? It was in Thai, but perhaps there is a way to tell us? Could someone save a book for me if it is not too much trouble? Nobody can tell beforehand what he would do as to morphine. this is really conditioned. I am also very impressed that she talked about Dhamma until the last moment. Nina. Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:28 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > I got there fairly late but I heard there were several speakers > including > A. Sujin. There were books handed out and also a dvd with khun > Busborn's photo while she was in India on the cover. I haven't had a > chance to view it yet. > I commented to Sukinder that I thought if I was dieing of cancer I > would > probably accept the morphine if offered, do you have thoughts about > that? Amazing that khun Busaborn was awake and talking about > Dhamma till practically the last moment. > with respect #88363 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:45 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 Hi Scott --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > Scott: I think anatta is a quality of single dhammas. I think > santati refers to causal connections. A causal connection is not a > dhamma and a causal connection does not create an entity of the two > causally connected elements. Yes, Scott, I agree and this is exactly why it is a non sequitur to tell people that studying causal connections involves self-view. It doesn't necessarily follow! People who use this line as a debating tactic should stop doing so. > Scott: I think a 'pattern' is a concept - seeing a pattern literally > would be a function of 'perception' rooted in ignorance. I think that > to see a 'pattern' is to imagine a connection between separate aspects > and, in the process, to create a whole thereby. Yes, of course, a pattern is a concept - just like a Buddha, an ariyan, a DSG member. I am not sure I understand why you say all pattern-seeing is rooted in ignorance. Take the first 2 verses of the Dhammapada: akusala gives rise to akusala, kusala gives rise to kusala. That meets my definition of a "law" or "pattern". Why is it rooted in ignorance? Regards Andrew #88364 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cremation egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/7/25 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear Robert, > thank you for your post. Can you remember what A. Sujin said? It was > in Thai, but perhaps there is a way to tell us? Could someone save a > book for me if it is not too much trouble? Is there not a pitfall in craving for the unheard words of A. Sujin? Cheers Herman #88365 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:50 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Interesting, thanks, Connie. 'It arranges itself in a series (or its > own series) by way of apperception in a process of thought.' I think > I see what that means. Don't ask me though. :-) > > Ken H Hi Ken H If Connie won't ask you, may I? ;-)) Andrew #88366 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:53 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 Hi Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dsgmods" wrote: Like Nina, I'm dubious of the value of > discussing a third party's views. Well, there *are* no third parties, only fleeting dhammas. We may as well be consistent on this, don't you think? Best wishes Andrew #88367 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:29 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > > > ... and asking what is a pitfall just now is thinking too. > ------- > N: But it is thinking with regard to the present moment. Considering > the lobha that appears now. Hi Nina From my reading of your books, the present moment and the lobha you are talking about is already gone. Correct? Best wishes Andrew #88368 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cremation sarahprocter... Dear Sukin, Thank you so much for sharing the news about Khun Bong's passing away. I was rather startled to hear the news, but so very glad to hear about the circumstances. K. Bong was very brave and had so much confidence in the Dhamma. (For others, she was a very lively and colourful Thai lady of Jon's age. She always made everyone very welcome and had a very keen interest in the Dhamma, always helping others by raising their questions. I felt very close to her. I suspected there was something wrong on our last trip with her to India, but of course had no idea it would be the last time we'd see her. K.Sujin must have been at the bedside of many, many friends now as they've passed away, giving gentle dhamma reminders, helping to dispel any lingering fears. When there is loving kindness, compassion and detachment, there is no opportunity for grief or thoughts of oneself or one's lost friends. May we all be brave and steadfast in the Dhamma as she was and be good friends to those we can assist in times of sickness and death. Our best wishes to K.Weera and her friends in Bangkok. Metta, Sarah --- On Thu, 24/7/08, Sukinder wrote: came back from the cremation of K. Butsabong, K. Weera's wife. As you all know, she suddenly fell very ill during the group's trip to India earlier this year. When they came back to Bangkok she was diagnosed as suffering from cancer of the intestines, late stage and the doctor gave her a few months to live. This Sunday K. Sujin received a call that K. Butsabong was in critical condition, so canceling her talk at the Foundation, she rushed to the hospital to be by K. Butsabong's side. .... #88369 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:11 am Subject: Collations, Individuals, Grasping, and Relinquishment (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Connie) - In a message dated 7/25/2008 12:51:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: The other method of teaching (in terms of mere collations of things) would be for the advanced students - people who already know there are ultimately only "things" (dhammas). Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real. ============================ Ken, and Connie, the following isn't intended to begin a debate. It is just some thoughts of mine for you to consider. I know, Ken, that it is contrary to your current perspective. I put it forward merely for you to consider - nothing more. Ken you say "Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real." They are, of course, real collations! ;-) I'm inclined to observe that they are called "mere collations," because they are not single phenomena u ncomposed of parts. Likewise, the single phenomena we seem to experience may be called "mere conditioned dhammas," because they are radically impermanent and lack independent existence. I would like to add that this business of "mere this or that" is a matter of degree of dependence of status, even as regards dependence on parts. Even "single phenomena" are not entirely such. One's body is certainly a mere collection of sensations - a mere collation. But also, as supported by the commentaries, any bodily sensation - pressure or warmth, for example - is also in a way composed of parts, of stages (to be precise), with the sensation building, leveling off, and subsiding (like a wave), making it not entirely an in-dividual [hyphenation intentional]. It is a convention to consider all three stages of a rupa - it's growth, stasis, and decline - to be one single rupa instead of three rupas. Moreover, the growth and decline stages obviously involve change over time. So, a rupa is not so simple, and is not independent of convention. At every level, there is nothing to be found that is a separate, self-existent entity. Rather than straining to see discrete, self-existent realities, supporting our tendency to cling, we are better off seeing the radical emptiness and ungraspable character of all aspects of experience, supporting relinquishment. With metta, Howard P. S. Bhikkhu Bodhi quotes the Buddha saying "Just as in the great ocean there is but one taste — the taste of salt — so in this Doctrine and Discipline (dhammavinaya) there is but one taste — the taste of freedom" That freedom isn't a cessation of imposition from without by things and people but is the internal freedom attained by disengagement (or non-grasping) and relinquishment. #88370 From: "connie" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:10 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear Andrew, Sorry - I said the next page in Expositor when it's Dispeller of Delusion. > Vol.1, p.244 > << > 931 Therefore, practising for his own and others' benefit and happiness, and abandoning other duties, > Let the wise man, ever mindful, > so practise that he here may find > A footing in the deeps, so manifold, > of the Dependent Origin. Andrew: I confess that the above passages aren't self-explanatory to me. c: Yep, praise difficulty. The passage I skipped (Dispeller 930) quotes the sutta passage beginning 'Profound, Aananda, is this dependent origination and profound it appears' - this being the Paccayaakaaravibha"nga after all. The Suttanta Division, preamble - 598 << Now in the Classification of the Dependent Origination next to that, the text is set forth in the way beginning avijjaapaccayaa sa"nkhaaraa <135.1> ("with ignorance as condition formations [arise]"). Its meaning should be commented on by one who keeps within the circle of the Vibhajjavaadins, who does not misrepresent the teachers, who does not launch out into his own opinions, who does not quarrel with others' opinions, who does not distort suttas, who is in agreement with the Vinaya, who has regard for the Principal Authorities, who illustrates the Law, who takes up the meaning and who describes that same meaning refashioning it by means of other presentations. And it is inherently difficult to comment on the Dependent Origination, as the Ancients have said: "The truth, a being, rebirth-linking, and the structure of conditions Are four things that are hard to see, and likewise difficult to teach". >> Then, DO teachings are said to be fourfold "like four creeper-gatherers' ways of seizing a creeper" and Disp. 609: << Of these, the teaching set forth here should be understood as that stated in forward order starting from the beginning for the purpose of showing, to people susceptible to teaching who are confused about the reasons for the process [of existence], that the process [occurs] for its proper reasons, and for the purpose of showing [them] the order of arising >>. Sounds simple enough, though, doesn't it? "Just say Do(h)!"? We get a couple more warnings in this early section on : that craving for existence and ignorance, respectively, . Dispeller 915 <<["As to prevention"] The clause "with ignorance as condition, formations" prevents seeing a maker; the clause "with formations as condition, consciousness" prevents seeing the transmigration of a self; the clause "with consciousness as condition, mentality-materiality" prevents the perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of the basis conjectured to be self; the clauses beginning with "with mentality-materiality as condition, the sixfold base" prevent the seeing of a self that sees, etc., cognises, touches, feels, craves, clings, exists, is born, ages and dies. Therefore this Wheel of Existence should be known accordingly "as to prevention" of wrong seeing. >> As usual, I'm wandering off-thread, so- peace, connie #88371 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Connie and Andrew, Connie, I like the collections of texts you make here. As to Dispeller 915, this is the same as Vis. XVII, 302, and we shall come to it, with Tiika, later on. I liked the dialogue between you two: Andrew: I confess that the above passages aren't self-explanatory to me. c: Yep, praise difficulty. N: K Sujin said the same, we praise the Buddha's wisdom when we say: how difficult. And: something that is difficult cannot be made into something that is easy. Andrew, please keep posting, I like your remarks. Nina. Op 25-jul-2008, om 15:10 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > Dispeller 915 <<["As to prevention"] The clause "with ignorance as > condition, formations" prevents seeing a maker; the clause "with > formations as condition, consciousness" prevents seeing the > transmigration of a self; the clause "with consciousness as > condition, mentality-materiality" prevents the perception of > compactness because it shows the analysis of the basis conjectured > to be self; the clauses beginning with "with mentality-materiality > as condition, the sixfold base" prevent the seeing of a self that > sees, etc., cognises, touches, feels, craves, clings, exists, is > born, ages and dies. Therefore this Wheel of Existence should be > known accordingly "as to prevention" of wrong seeing. >> #88372 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:56 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > From my reading of your books, the present moment and the lobha you > are > talking about is already gone. Correct? ---------- N: You touch here on a difficult subject, that of how present the present moment is. Before we had discussions on nimitta, sign, and how what is experienced now has just fallen away. I quote from what I wrote before: < It is useful to learn about nimitta because we realize that as soon as a dhamma appears it has fallen away already. Say, sound appears, but in reality that sound has gone already. Another sound impinges again on the earsense and who knows which one appears? It does not matter. No need to think all the time: it is a nimitta. or, the reality has fallen away. There are different characteristics appearing and is this not enough ?> Thus, lobha has just fallen away, but its characteristic, for all practical purposes, can still appear and be object of awareness. Perhaps we can discuss more after I am back, I would like to. Nina. #88373 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cremation nilovg Dear Sarah (and Lukas), thank you for your words. It made me have some thought on death. If you can write more about death it is always useful. I am thinking about Lukas' questions on death and loss. Op 25-jul-2008, om 12:16 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > K.Sujin must have been at the bedside of many, many friends now as > they've passed away, giving gentle dhamma reminders, helping to > dispel any lingering fears. When there is loving kindness, > compassion and detachment, there is no opportunity for grief or > thoughts of oneself or one's lost friends. > > May we all be brave and steadfast in the Dhamma as she was and be > good friends to those we can assist in times of sickness and death. --------- N: I heard a Thai tape this morning, where Kh Suri asked about intoxication about life, as we read in the Suttas, and how to be cured of it. Kh sujin brought her back to this moment and asked whether there is no intoxication about life (beinbg drunk: maw chiwit) now. If we do not realize it now it can never be eradicated. How we cling to life. I requote from a dialogue I had before with Kh Sujin: < Kh S: Each day dhamma is dhamma. We have dear people, people who are close to us, but dhamma arises and then falls away. Seeing has fallen away and there is nothing left. Thinking, all dhammas fall away completely. This is not different from the moment a dear person dies. We are thinking about a dear person but thinking falls away completely. Everything is dhamma now. Understanding depends on conditions. We are inclined to think of concepts, about people and events. If there are conditions for the arising of sati it can know the characteristics of realities. There can be right understanding that all dhammas are anatta. N: It is so difficult. Kh S: Surely, but pa~n~naa can arise and it can accumulate. It is not a matter of ‘doing something’ but of understanding. Everyone would like to have pa~n~naa, but the moment of understanding is pa~n~naa. When a reality appears pa~n~naa can know the truth. Do not try to have it. At this moment it can be known to what extent pa~n~naa has developed. ****** Nina. #88374 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:28 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Attachment, aversion and ignorance can arise on account of what is experienced through each of the six doors. Often we take citta for kusala citta when it is in fact akusala citta. For example, I was helping someone to get buckets of water for an old lady. While I was helping I talked about the Dhamma, but there were many moments of attachment to “my kusala”. When people in the temple wished me well and showed their appreciation of kusala, I appreciated their generosity, but I was immediately attached to them and to “my kusala”. Since different cittas succeed one another so rapidly, it is extremely difficult to know precisely when the citta is kusala and when akusala. It is the function of paññå, wisdom, to know this. We are so ignorant, and ignorance covers up the truth. When the citta is kusala, there is no attachment, no aversion and no ignorance. When we come to know ourselves more, we learn that even kusala such as dåna can condition attachment. We can learn when we cling to a pleasant result of our good deed, such as a happy rebirth. Or we may realize when conceit arises about our good deed: we may think ourselves better than other people. One has to develop right understanding in order to know the difference between kusala and akusala. Right understanding or wisdom does not always accompany kusala citta. For example, one may help others because it is one’s nature to do so, without there being right understanding with the kusala citta. One may not know precisely when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta. Someone may offer food to the monks or offer flowers in the temple because these are good traditions he was taught to observe, but there may not be right understanding with the kusala citta. Kusala citta does not stay. It falls away and then there is bound to be akusala citta. When there is no right understandiong of kusala and akusala, one may not realize this. Someone may think that there are kusala cittas all the time when he is in the temple or when he is helping others, but in reality many moments of akusala cittas arise without our knowing it. During the sessions we spoke about mettå, loving kindness, and karuna, compassion. We may think that there is pure loving kindness while there are actually many moments of attachment to people. Are we sure when there is true compassion? We may take for compassion what is aversion. For example, when we see someone kicking a dog, aversion is bound to arise. When there is true compassion, there cannot be aversion at the same time. The kusala citta with compassion is without attachment and without aversion. Phra Dhammadhara said that it is a “healthy shock” to see that there is more often akusala than kusala. More knowledge of the truth about ourselves shakes us up and it reminds us to develop right understanding in order to know more precisely when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta. ******** Nina. #88375 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cremation nilovg Hi Herman, Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:48 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Is there not a pitfall in craving for the unheard words of A. Sujin? ------ N: And what about your citta when writing this? Are there not plenty of pittfalls all the time, also when writing this or that sentence? This is a rhetorical question that does not need to be answered. Nina. #88376 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > Op 25-jul-2008, om 11:56 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > > > From my reading of your books, the present moment and the lobha you > > are > > talking about is already gone. Correct? > ---------- > N: You touch here on a difficult subject, that of how present the > present moment is. > Before we had discussions on nimitta, sign, and how what is > experienced now has just fallen away. > I quote from what I wrote before: < It is useful to learn about > nimitta because we realize that as soon as a dhamma appears it has > fallen away already. Say, sound appears, but in reality that sound > has gone already. Another sound impinges again on the earsense and > who knows which one appears? It does not matter. No need to think all > the time: it is a nimitta. or, the reality has fallen away. There are > different characteristics appearing and is this not enough ?> > Thus, lobha has just fallen away, but its characteristic, for all > practical purposes, can still appear and be object of awareness. > Perhaps we can discuss more after I am back, I would like to. > Nina. Hi Nina You are very kind. Have a good trip! Just a brief comment before I leave: When we talk about the present applicable to ultimate realities, we are talking about a mind moment (maybe up to 17 for rupa). Unimaginably fast! When I say "I am having breakfast now", I am referring to a conventional present. I think it is very beneficial to study ultimate reality in its unimaginably fast timeframe. I think this can give some form of intellectual understanding ... and it cautions us not to be so sure that we are aware of the motivations behind our conventional actions. However, I am very dubious about trying to force an ultimate timeframe upon conventional reality. The shoe doesn't fit! I feel a niggling discomfort when we talk about (and build a scheme of thinking based upon) a "present" that is - at our level of development - a "past". To me, "daily life" connotes the conventional world of beings and doings - and the conventional timeframe. I do not feel that the ultimate teachings have, as one of their purposes, the debunking of conventional truth. Some DSG members, it seems to me, have set out to wage a war of ultimate reality versus conventional reality. I am not in the least convinced that this is a necessary or fruitful exercise. It may even be harmful. To begin with, it drops "an act of dana" down into a void of meaninglessness. I have decided to leave DSG now for further pastures. During my time here, I have learned many wise and useful things. Thank you all for sharing your insights. May all beings be happy! Andrew #88377 From: "connie" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:12 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Cheers, Herman, All. c: "what's a raft anyway?" Were you thinking of the Paa.tali villagers again, too? Ud 8:6 - << Then the Gracious One, having understood the significance of it, on that occasion uttered this exalted utterance: "Those who cross over a sea or a lake, (Do so) after making a bridge, and leaving the pond behind. (While) people are still binding together a raft, Intelligent people have crossed over." >> The Commentary mentions that << the gate of that city through which the Lord emerged did become known as "Gotama's Gate". But since he did not descend (into the water) in order to cross over the Ganges, (the supposed crossing-point) failed to become known as "Gotama's Crossing-point". >> and pretty much agrees with you: << A float (u.lumpa.m): that which is made for the purpose of going to the far shore by hammering in pegs after conjoining pieces of wood. A raft (kulla.m): that which is made by binding bamboos and reeds and so on with creepers and so forth. >> c: hammering in pegs? summoner? creepers. drifting off again, connie #88378 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:56 pm Subject: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi, Sarah (Alex and others), - In your post #88148, 7/16/2008, SN 35:153 was quoted in order to answer Alex's question below: > > Sarah: <...>It is panna, right understanding > >that understands dhammas more and more clearly. > > > A: <...> >How does one clearly sees the above, what's the method? T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering it - can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being’) for attainment of arahantship as follows: "And what is that method of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: ‘There is lust, hatred, or delusion internally’; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally, he understands: “There is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally.’ " [Repeat for having heard a sound with the ear.... having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind.] T: And you quickly drew a conclusion : S: It all comes down to the understanding of seeing, visible object, attachment and other dhammas when they appear as mere dhammas. No self to do anything at all. T: I do not see that it is so easy to develop such understanding which when it arises, the bhikkhu "can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being’" as stated in the sutta quote you gave. But I possibly can misunderstand you. So please allow me to ask you some questions for clarification purpose. 1.) In your concluding remark, are you talking about the understanding of someone who is ready to declare that his/her "holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done", or is your remark applicable only to ordinary people and has nothing to do with the above sutta quote? 2.) What are the supporting conditions for such understanding in the sutta [i.e. knowing and seeing rightly whether or not there is lobha, dosa, moha internally, after having seen a visible form, ..., having cognized a dhamma with the mind]? 3.) How long (days, months, years, eons) do you think such "method of exposition" may take before someone can delare that stage of "final knowledge"? Regards, Tep === #88379 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:54 pm Subject: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Tep and all, As I understand it, the awareness must be ultra sharp. Before "greed" arises, what exact steps are present? Can you name and spot a dozen of subtle actions that happen (even during a second) that cause greed/anger/delusion to arise? Can you see them? For example in a long retreat that I had, sometimes I noticed a "machine gun like" broken movements of the foot. Can one notice the same with mind states? Super mindfulness is required for that, and long retreats may be required for most of us, as ordinary mindfulness is too blunt and slow. ===== Furthermore === The typical anatta teaching: Is "X" permanent or impermanent? Here we have anicca sanna or perhaps udaybbaya nana. Is "X" pleasure or stress? Here we have dukkha sanna. Perhaps knowledge of fearfulness, misery & disgust. Seeing X, a monk becomes revulsed (nibbida), disspasioned (viraga) and liberated from (vimutti) form/feeling/perc/vol/consc . He knows, I am "liberated". Here we have final ~nanas. So as you see, a simple "anatta lakhanna" teaching may be a cryptic description of vipassana ~nanas (or call them as you will). Generally speaking, they may require quite some time in secluded retreat setting. === Another equally valid approach is in MN64. In the Jhana or immeadetely after it, with a hindrance free mind, bright, pliable and malleable one can see: "the bhikkhu secluding the mind thoroughly, by dispelling things of demerit, removes all bodily transgressions that bring remorse. Then secluding the mind, from sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of seclusion abides in the first jhana. Established in it he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction*1). With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. ânanda, this too is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual world. " http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima2/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.html ========= Notice how impermanence, stressfulness, not self is seen. After or during JHANA. Appeasement of all determinations and such may be another word for sankharaupekkha nana. The "he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self." sounds pretty nana-like to me. Best wishes, Alex #88380 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:05 pm Subject: kayagatasati truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dsgmods" wrote: > Hi Alex > > To my understanding, the Buddha was not recommending selecting > mindfulness of the body in particular for "practice"; as you will know > from your extensive study of the suttas, at different times he pointed > to the importance of the development of one or other of the 4. > 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and fruits of worthiness 607. Bhikkhus, those that have not practised mindfulness of the body, have not practised deathlessness and they that have practised mindfulness of the body, have practised deathlessness. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html Also I suggest you re-read MN119 "Monks, for one in whom mindfulness immersed in the body is cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken, these ten benefits can be expected." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Of course some people may need 3 other satipatthanas, or those 3 other satipatthanas are something that can be developed even if one's primary focus is kayagatasati. Best wishes, Alex #88381 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:48 pm Subject: Re: Cremation gazita2002 Hello Sukin and other friends, I did not know her personally but of course I have met K.Weera. It was only this morning that I was telling my younger daughter [as I drove her to the airport after her holiday from UAE,] about the woman who went weeping to the Buddha bec. she had lost some of her family. He instructed her to go around all the houses in the village and bring back a mustard seed from anyone who had NOT lost a loved one. She apparently returned empty handed. Abby appreciated the story and we were still both sad when she left. I added that sadness is real too. May all beings be happy, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > Dear Nina, Lodewijk, Sarah, Jon, Azita, > > I just came back from the cremation of K. Butsabong, K. Weera's wife. #88382 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:22 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Andrew, Thanks for the reply. Me: I think anatta is a quality of single dhammas. I think santati refers to causal connections. A causal connection is not a dhamma and a causal connection does not create an entity of the two causally connected elements. A: "Yes, Scott, I agree and this is exactly why it is a non sequitur to tell people that studying causal connections involves self-view. It doesn't necessarily follow!.." Scott: True, I guess it doesn't necessary follow that studying causal connections involves self-view. Conditional relations is about the causality which there is. It does often seem to follow that there is much confusion regarding the way in which causally connected dhammas are construed, however. I tend to make theoretical use of the idea of paramattha dhammas when considering things. For me, since I see the existence of multiply and variably conditioned paramattha dhammas as a lawful or 'patterned' sort of thing, I always consider 'normal' perception in the light of ultimate reality - that is, not what it seems. It is, to me, the way it is, and to be known by the wise, as the saying goes. Me: "I think a 'pattern' is a concept - seeing a pattern literally would be a function of 'perception' rooted in ignorance. I think that to see a 'pattern' is to imagine a connection between separate aspects and, in the process, to create a whole thereby. A: "...I am not sure I understand why you say all pattern-seeing is rooted in ignorance. Take the first 2 verses of the Dhammapada: akusala gives rise to akusala, kusala gives rise to kusala. That meets my definition of a 'law' or 'pattern'. Why is it rooted in ignorance?" Scott: I'm glad for the clarification above. I'd say the 'patterns' were quite complex since akusala can condition kusala and vice versa as well, but I think I see where you are coming from. I guess it makes it clearer for me why I think the term 'pattern' might be misleading. But also what you might be suggesting. Here you seem to be saying that the 'pattern' is in the ways certain dhammas can lead to certain other dhammas in a lawful way. This, to me, is a description of the method of Conditional Relations. I might have more clearly suggested that the idea that the 'pattern' is the reality is erroneous. And I was referring to 'perception', while you refer, correctly, to the sequence of arising. Ignorance creates the illusion of wholes, patterns, trees, etc, when, without it, there is just seeing in the ultimate sense - again, for the wise. This wouldn't, in my view, negate the 'seeing' of wholes, patterns, trees, etc, but it would know that there is only causally sequential dhammas in reality. Sincerely, Scott. #88383 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, please do not leave yet. You make good points and when back I like to continue the dialogue with you. No question of war fare, though some people may have the impression. Important point! NIna. Op 26-jul-2008, om 1:10 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > I have decided to leave DSG now for further pastures. During my time > here, I have learned many wise and useful things. #88384 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. sarahprocter... Dear Andrew & all, --- On Sat, 26/7/08, Andrew wrote: >However, I am very dubious about trying to force an ultimate timeframe upon conventional reality. The shoe doesn't fit! .... S: As you say, we live in a world of conventional realities. It's not a question of forcing 'an ultimate timeframe' on this, but a question of understanding slowly developing in order to come closer and closer to the actual realities whilst having breakfast, shopping or whatever other activities we're engaged in. .... >I feel a niggling discomfort when we talk about (and build a scheme of thinking based upon) a "present" that is - at our level of development - a "past". To me, "daily life" connotes the conventional world of beings and doings - and the conventional timeframe. .... S: This is true for all of us, but slowly we really can learn that it is only visible object that's seen, it is only sound that's heard and the rest is thinking - long stories about beings and doings, timeframes and so on. Slowly coming closer and closer to the truth in such understanding, we begin to really appreciate the Buddha's teaching about dhammas as anatta. I know this just sounds like a repetition of the catechism to you, but deep-down, you have enough appreciation of the Abhidhamma to see the value in understanding dhammas which appear now. No need to get hung up on 17 rupas, processes, past and present....just what appears now! ... >I do not feel that the ultimate teachings have, as one of their purposes, the debunking of conventional truth. .... S: No, I agree. There is no question of 'debunking of converntional truth'. However, the Buddha taught us to see conventional truth as just that - conventional, not ultimate truth. The conventional truth remains the same - we still have breakfast and go shopping. The difference is in the understanding at such times. .... >Some DSG members, it seems to me, have set out to wage a war of ultimate reality versus conventional reality. I am not in the least convinced that this is a necessary or fruitful exercise. It may even be harmful. To begin with, it drops "an act of dana" down into a void of meaninglessness. .... S: I think there may be some misunderstanding here. I don't think there's any conflict between the ultimate and conventional realities. An act of dana remains meaningful, but perhaps the question was about the actual cittas and intentions during such an act? Han quoted a long series on dana, including some passages of Lily de Silva's, in which this very topic (motives and so on) was discussed. (See Dana3-Motives in U.P.) We could re-open this topic. ... >I have decided to leave DSG now for further pastures. During my time here, I have learned many wise and useful things. Thank you all for sharing your insights. .... S: I'm sad to read this. As Azita just reminded us, sadness is a reality too! Just to say we've really enjoyed all your recent discussions (and old ones of course), including the one-liners:-) Just as you were encouraging Jon and Ken H to persist with a discussion, I would (of course!)like to encourage you to persist with your line of enquiry with Jon, Scott, Nina and anyone else....I think we all learn and benefit a lot from having our comments challenged and you always have a very perceptive approach. Anyway, no hurry......just anytime you're in the mood to persist, we'll always be glad to see you around. There is no party-line to follow as Howard always reminds everyone. Different approaches and view-points are more than welcome, they are what make DSG the list it is. Just as we always say to Phil, we'd much rather have any of his tirades than not hear from him at all:-). Best wishes meantime, Metta, Sarah ======= #88385 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cremation sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- On Fri, 25/7/08, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >If > you can write more about death it is always useful. I am > thinking > about Lukas' questions on death and loss. .... S: Yes, I've been reflecting on death and giving comfort to those who are dying or experiencing loss. As it happens, a very close family friend died last week in England too. I'm thinking of 'just like now'. We all have fears about dying, loss and so on, but usually forget that death is just another moment, just like now. Just as there is seeing and hearing now conditioned by attachment and ignorance in the past, so there will continue to be seeing and hearing. Just as we live mostly in a dream world, lost in stories of conventional realities, so will we continue to live in such a world in future, on and on. Just as now, there is only the present moment, only the present object appearing, so it will be in future. Just as now, we don't own anything, whatever we have will be left behind, from moment to moment, so it will be in future. Just as we forget so many details, so many friends, so in future will everything and everyone we cling to now be forgotten. Just realities rolling on. Actually, there's nothing to fear at all because death is just another moment, like now. It's just like sleeping and waking up again to more sense experiences and thinking about them. No self involved at all. I always like the Salla sutta in Sutta Nipata about how everyone sooner or later is overcome by death. While relatives weep, one by one passes away. The grieving is futile. Here we are, from Sn 3.8,Salla Sutta (The Arrow), transl by John Ireland: "The young and old, the foolish and the wise, all are stopped short by the power of death, all finally end in death. Of those overcome by death and passing to another world, a father cannot hold back his son, nor relatives a relation. See! While the relatives are looking on and weeping, one by one each mortal is led away like an ox to slaughter. "In this manner the world is afflicted by death and decay. But the wise do not grieve, having realized the nature of the world. You do not know the path by which they came or departed. Not seeing either end you lament in vain. If any benefit is gained by lamenting, the wise would do it. Only a fool would harm himself. Yet through weeping and sorrowing the mind does not become calm, but still more suffering is produced, the body is harmed and one becomes lean and pale, one merely hurts oneself. One cannot protect a departed one (peta) by that means. To grieve is in vain." **** S: As Azita said, there will always be sadness (while there's attachment), but at least it too can be known for what it is, a conditioned dhamma, not belonging to anyone. .... S:> When there is loving kindness, > > compassion and detachment, there is no opportunity for > grief or thoughts of oneself or one's lost friends. > > > > May we all be brave and steadfast in the Dhamma as she > was and be good friends to those we can assist in times of > sickness and death. ... S: Yes, following on from this, it takes a lot of metta, compassion and equanimity to really help those who are suffering and in pain with the dhamma at such times, without thinking of oneself, ones own feelings of loss and so on. Of course, as now, our cittas are always mixed, but it's so very helpful to know what is useful and what is useless in life. As you said to Robert, we don't know at any time how we'll respond, whether we'll take medication or not. It all depends on conditions and accumulations at the time and there's no rule at all - otherwise we're lost in a story of 'shoulds' again, instead of understanding the present realities. I remember when I had shingles a year or so ago, I was taking pain-killers every few hours as the pain was so unbearable. I wouldn't have had any idea in advance. Even then, there can be awareness. Any time, any place, any occasion if there has been the right considering and reflecting on dhammas. .... > N: It is so difficult. > > Kh S: Surely, but pa~n~naa can arise and it can accumulate. > It is not > a matter of ‘doing something’ but of understanding. > Everyone would > like to have pa~n~naa, but the moment of understanding is > pa~n~naa. > When a reality appears pa~n~naa can know the truth. Do not > try to > have it. At this moment it can be known to what extent > pa~n~naa has > developed. .... S: I think these are the best reminders. It's never "a matter of 'doing something' but of understanding.......At this moment it can be known to what extent pa~n~naa has developed." It always comes back to this moment and whether or not there is any understanding now. Have a good trip! Metta, Sarah p.s Greatly enjoying re-reading 'Pilgrimage to Sri Lanka'. It brings back wonderful memories. It was so fortunate that you encouraged me to join you. ===== #88386 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? sarahprocter... Hi Tep, Alex & all, This is just a holding reply to apologise for long delays in my replies to several of your messages. As we were travelling last week, I got behind. Hope to catch up with all this week. Meanwhile, thank you for all your posts and various discussions with others too. Sarah (in Sydney) ================ #88387 From: Sukinder Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cremation sukinderpal Dear Azita, Nina, Sarah and all, I need to correct what I wrote in that other post after having paid better attention today, to what K. Sujin had to say about the incident. And thanks to Robert for bringing it up. First, K. Butsawong did not 'refuse' morphine. The fact is that she was not experiencing the pain to 'need' the drug. Second, she was not talking with A. Sujin till the last moment. A. Sujin sat close to her holding her hands and spoke very little.What else happened, is that K. Butsawong was listening to Dhamma talk on MP3 like she often did before that time. Sorry for providing information that was misleading. Metta, Sukin #88391 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Andrew I've seen your 'farewell' message and I respect your decision to leave the discussions here. However, I'd still like to reply to your outstanding posts to me, as your concerns may be the concerns of others too (please feel to reply to me off-list if you wish). > I hope you don't mind me posing some questions below: Not at all. Very glad you have raised these points. > There are "realities" > > arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, > > You seem to be saying that there is absolutely no connection between > realities and conventional circumstances. Take, for example, a > conventional circumstance strange to me - that of "being > handsome/attractive". Do not the teachings cover the conditioning > relationship between realities and that conventional circumstance? > Why the insistence on separateness between ultimate and conventional? When I said that there are "realities" arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, I simply meant that whatever the conventional circumstances may be, the realities are just seeing and visible object, hearing and sound, (and so on for the rest of the 5 sense-doors) and mind-door consciousness accompanied by feeling and other mental factors. So whether we are travelling, at work, on the computer at home, or whatever, there are basically the same (relatively few) dhammas arising and falling away. And it is these dhammas that are to be known as they truly are, not the conventional circumstances. > Would not a more accurate statement of the traditional Theravadan > outlook be that conventional truth and ultimate truth are different > views of the same phenomena (both true)? As you know, it is insight into ultimate truths (concerning dhammas), not conventional truths (concerning concepts), that leads to enlightenment. Of course, the teachings do contain explanations in conventional terms of conventional circumstances (for example, the appearance and disappearance of world systems), but as far as the development of insight is concerned these do not play a significant role, as I understand it. > > So conventional doing or not-doing is of no real significance. > > So a conventional act of dana or of hearing the true Dhamma is not of > significance in the Buddhadhamma? I am clearly missing or > misconstruing something here. Perhaps you can help me put my finger > on it? A conventional act of dana encompasses many, many mind moments, some of which must be kusala but others of which will be vipaka and perhaps akusala too. And as mentioned above, there are basically the same set of dhammas involved in an act of dana as for any other span of moments. In terms of the development of insight, it is not the occurrence of a conventional act of dana, but rather the presently arising dhammas, that are of most direct relevance. Jon #88392 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:03 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) jonoabb Hi Herman > I am quite happy to proceed using your definition, which is almost > identical to mine. But the curious thing is that there are items in > your definition which are quite incongruous with the gist of your > definition. Definitions and classifications notwithstanding, what is > lacking is the consciousness that experiences consciousness. What > would it's name be, Jon? It would help if you could give an example of what you mean by "the consciousness that experiences consciousness". > But more to the point, I think you are asking me to assume from what > you have written that realms are not real? The question you originally raised was whether realms were realities. As I said then, the answer will depend on one's definition of "realities". Among the "dhammas" spoken of and classified in the texts, there is no dhamma called "realm" (or "human realm" or any particular type of realm). On the other hand, if you're asking me whether I believe in different realms, I'd say that the only ones I can be sure about are the human and animal ones. Jon #88393 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:05 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state jonoabb Hi Herman > Your whole agenda is laid bare by what you include and exclude. What > you miss, and very obviously so, is the understanding of multiple > different moments. That understanding knows a pattern. The topic under discussion with Andrew was the understanding of multiple moments, so I'm not sure in what sense I "missed" that! Would you mind giving an example of what you mean by understanding of multiple moments knowing a pattern? Thanks. Jon #88394 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:52 am Subject: Re: Retreats (was, response to hate mail etc) jonoabb Hi Alex > Anapanasati is one such sutta: > > "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at > Savatthi in the Eastern Monastery, the palace of Migara's mother, > together with many well-known elder disciples ... On that occasion the > elder monks were teaching & instructing. ... Yes, in this sutta it says that the elder monks were teaching and instructing. And no doubt that happened quite extensively. But there is no general rule to the effect that *reclusive monks who intensively engaged in bhavana for a week or two achieved Arahatship* (and then were busy helping new comers). > If you can develop skillful states on the level of vipassana jhanas & > nanas without retreats - GOOD FOR YOU. It's not a question of what I can or can't do, but whether it was said by the Buddha. Because regardless of our personal views, if it wasn't laid down in the teachings then it's not necessary. > Regarding retreats: > There are many cases in SN where a monk asks the Buddha > for "instruction" in brief so that he can "dwell alone, withdrawn, > secluded, and resolute", then the monk runs into the woods and "in no > long time achieves the goal for which clansmen rightly go forth from > homelife into homelessness". But "many cases" do not make it a requirement laid down by the Buddha or even a general rule. > Jon, the scenario is repeated in many suttas found in DN and MN! > Almost 1/3 of DN features this path outline. > > 1) Conscience & concern > 2) Purity of conduct > 3)Restraint of the senses > 4) Moderation in eating > 5) Wakefulness > 6)Mindfulness & alertness > 7) Abandoning the hindrances > 8) The four jhanas > 9) The three knowledges > > DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 > MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 Well I haven't done an analysis, but assuming you're correct about the prevalence of this "scenario", you are really just drawing an inference from the numbers. However, unless the Buddha specified this "scenario" as a required one, it would be wrong to make such an assumption. Jon #88395 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Alex > The best detachment is the one that is forever and irrevesible. > Complete eradication of roots of attachment. Good, we at least agree on this! > True. But if one cannot even temporarily detach from X, then how does > one expect to be able to permanently detach? Well everyone has some degree of temporary detachment. But as I said in my earlier post, it is the development of insight into the true nature of things, rather than the development of more and more of the temporary kind of detachment, that leads to enlightenment and thus the complete eradication of the roots of attachment. > Of course the sammadhi is aimed toward relinquishment of all > attachments. For example in anapanasati sutta this is mention in the > last 4 steps. Again, the kind of temporary detachment developed by samatha bhavana does not lead to enlightenment and the eradication of the roots of attachment. > If you aren't of those types that have super sharp faculties, one who > is lucky to meet the Buddha, then "Pleasant & quick" mode of progress > is most likely ain't yours (or mine). > > Again, the often mentioned outline is this: > > 1) Conscience & concern > 2) Purity of conduct > 3)Restraint of the senses > 4) Moderation in eating > 5) Wakefulness > 6)Mindfulness & alertness > 7) Abandoning the hindrances > 8) The four jhanas > 9) The 1-3 higher knowledges (if not all 6) With the knowledge of > Liberation. Arhatship. > > DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 > MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 Yes, but frequent mention of a given set of circumstances does not make a general rule out of those circumstances. Jon #88396 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah & Alex) - In a message dated 7/25/2008 7:57:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi, Sarah (Alex and others), - In your post #88148, 7/16/2008, SN 35:153 was quoted in order to answer Alex's question below: > > Sarah: <...>It is panna, right understanding > >that understands dhammas more and more clearly. > > > A: <...> >How does one clearly sees the above, what's the method? T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering it - can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being’) for attainment of arahantship as follows: "And what is that method of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: ‘There is lust, hatred, or delusion internally’; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally, he understands: “There is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally.’ " [Repeat for having heard a sound with the ear.... having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind.] ============================== I'm confused. On ATI I find the following: __________________________________ SN 35.153 Indriya Sutta Faculties Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: S iv 140 CDB ii 1216 ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 2004 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 2004 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ Translator's note: This sutta is based on a play on words. In everyday Pali, the term "consummate in faculties" is used to describe a person whose beauty and health are inspiring. Here the Buddha gives a different meaning to the term. ____________________________________ Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "'Consummate in faculties, consummate in faculties,' it is said. To what extent is one consummate in faculties?" "If a monk, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the eye-faculty, becomes disenchanted with the eye-faculty; if, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the ear-faculty... the nose-faculty... the tongue-faculty... the body faculty... the intellect-faculty, he becomes disenchanted with the intellect-faculty; and, 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,' it is to this extent that one is consummate in faculties." ____________________________________ Revised: Tuesday 2007-08-14 _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.153.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.153.than.html) With metta, Howard #88397 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, - Thank you for letting me know that you have the plan to catch up with me. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep, Alex & all, > > This is just a holding reply to apologise for long delays in my replies to several of your messages. As we were travelling last week, I got behind. Hope to catch up with all this week. > > Meanwhile, thank you for all your posts and various discussions with others too. > > Sarah (in Sydney) > ================ May your travel be free from all troubles. Tep === #88398 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Herman > There is, in my opinion, no useful way to evaluate intentions. Because > intentions have no consequences. There is no harm or benefit, progress > or regress in only intending. I think you are using "intentions" here in the conventional sense of intending to do as preparatory to the actual doing. However, intention in the teachings is a mental factor that accompanies every moment of consciousness, being of the same moral quality (kusala or akusala) as the moment of consciousness it accompanies. > But most importantly, no amount of > evaluating past intentions, by whatever doubtful standard, will alter > the quality of future intentions. Agreed. But I was not talking about the evaluation of past intentions. > On the other hand, actions can be evaluated, because they do have > consequences. One can usefully evaluate the consequences of one's > deeds. One can usefully ask about one's acts whether they are causing > harm or benefit, whether they are bringing one closer or further away > from an intended goal. The evaluation of actions can and does result > in actions being aborted, altered or continued. Are your referring here to the evaluation of present actions or past actions? If the former, how are the consequences to be known? Jon #88399 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Jon & other non-volitionists ;-), In the following, I will note aspects that I consider very important and unambiguous: In a message dated 7/25/2008 10:05:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dsgmods" wrote: > Hi Alex > > To my understanding, the Buddha was not recommending selecting > mindfulness of the body in particular for "practice"; as you will know > from your extensive study of the suttas, at different times he pointed > to the importance of the development of one or other of the 4. > 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and fruits of worthiness ------------------------------------------- Howard: The following is unambiguously straightforward and very important (#607): ---------------------------------------- 607. Bhikkhus, those that have not practised mindfulness of the body, have not practised deathlessness and they that have practised mindfulness of the body, have practised deathlessness. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html Also I suggest you re-read MN119 "Monks, for one in whom mindfulness immersed in the body is cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken, these ten benefits can be expected." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html ------------------------------------------ Howard: In the foregoing, important and unambiguous are the expressions 'pursued' and 'well undertaken'. I consider it odd to attribute to these utterances of the Buddha meaning other than what any normally aware listener would understand them to mean. To pursue and well undertake mindfulness in the body is intentional human activity. This is plain speech and not code words for unobserved oddities of a theoretical conceptual scheme. It pertains to monitoring the mind - applying effort to stay present with what arises in the body, avoiding getting overcome by sloth & torpor, by excitement, and by distraction, and, when attention does slip, to note that and return attention to bodily sensations. -------------------------------------------- Of course some people may need 3 other satipatthanas, or those 3 other satipatthanas are something that can be developed even if one's primary focus is kayagatasati. Best wishes, Alex ======================= With metta, Howard