#89200 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:48 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21) scottduncan2 Dear Friends - Continuing from #88793 1.9(12-16) (cy: #88829, #88907 #89007): CSCD Mu.t.thassacca~nca asampaja~n~na~nca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(17) Lack of mindfulness and of clear awareness. (Mu.t.thassacca~nca asampaja~n~na~nca.) Olds [ 2.17 ] Forgetfulness and lack of self-knowledge RD's [ 2.17 ]Absence of mind2.17 and want of intelligence. CSCD Sati ca sampaja~n~na~nca . Walshe DN 33.1.9(18) Mindfulness and clear awareness. (Sati ca sampaja~n~na~nca.) Olds [ 2.18 ] Remembering and self-knowledge[ 2.18 ] RD's [ 2.18 ]Mindfulness and intelligence. CSCD Indriyesu aguttadvaarataa ca bhojane amatta~n~nutaa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(19) Unguarded sense-doors and non-restraint in eating. (Indriyesu aguttadvaarataa ca bhojane amatta~n~nutaa ca.) Olds [ 2.19 ] Lack of Authority[ 2.19 ] over and guarding of the sense doors and immoderate eating RD's [ 2.19 ]Unguardedness of faculties 2.19 and intemperance in diet. CSCD Indriyesu guttadvaarataa ca bhojane matta~n~nutaa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(20) Guarded sense-doors and restraint in eating. (Indriyesu guttadvaarataa ca bhojane matta~n~nutaa ca.) Olds [ 2.20 ] Authority over and guarding of the sense doors and moderate eating RDs [ 2.20 ]Guardedness of faculties and temperance in diet. CSCD Pa.tisa'nkhaanabala~nca [pa.tisandhaanabala~nca (syaa.)] bhaavanaabala~nca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(21) Powers of reflection and mental development. (Pa.tisa'nkhaanabala~nca [pa.tisandhaanabala~nca (syaa.)] bhaavanaabala~nca.) Olds [ 2.21 ] The Power (bala~n) of Examining the Details[ 2.21 ] and The Power of Development RD's [ 2.21 ]The powers of judging and of cultivation. Sincerely, Scott/connie. #89201 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream abhidhammika Dear Howard, Herman, Colette and other theists Thank you, Howard, for further explanation of a Judaic concept of God. When you have spare time, please tell me more about a Judaic concept of God. You still have not told me if this God was a Creator. For example, is this Judaic God the same Bloke in the Old Testament who was believed to have created the world? And, is this Judaic concept of God a Self, a Soul, a Holy Spirit, or a Holy Ghost? By the way, Hindus are also rather evasive about their concept of God. It is as though the fate of God were in the hands of Hindu interpreters and commentators. Depending on who or what you read, the meaning of God changes. What is the Judaic concept of God acceptable to all the Jewish believers? What is the mainstream non-revisionist concept of God taught by the Jewish priests to preserve Jewish identity among the Jewish people? For example, do these Jewish priests accept their God as a Creator, a Self, a Soul, a Holy Spirit, a Holy Ghost etc? Do these Jewish priests use a form of Bible like Christians do? What is this? In this Jewish Bible, what is the original Judaic concept of God? At this stage, I am not interested in later revisionist interpretations, which are usually influenced by various circumstances. If you have spare time, I do care to hear. Cheers! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #89202 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream egberdina Hello Suan, 2008/8/19 abhidhammika : > > Dear Howard, Herman, Colette and other theists > You may like to revise the list of theists that you keep, if you are interested in the way things are. Herman is not a theist. Oh, by the way, how are the devas today? Should I put you down as a devist? Cheers Herman #89203 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:37 am Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasat... upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Connie) - In a message dated 8/19/2008 1:01:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Is this possibly another case where a well-known word is arbitrarily being redefined? When I refer to craving, I refer to the common meaning of wanting what is absent (in a range of degrees). I agree with Howard that craving is unpleasant. And I would add that it is sating of craving that is what is pleasant. What do you mean by craving? =========================== Exactly. :-) With metta, Howard #89204 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream upasaka_howard Hi, Suan - In a message dated 8/19/2008 8:11:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, suanluzaw@... writes: Dear Howard, Herman, Colette and other theists Thank you, Howard, for further explanation of a Judaic concept of God. When you have spare time, please tell me more about a Judaic concept of God. You still have not told me if this God was a Creator. For example, is this Judaic God the same Bloke in the Old Testament who was believed to have created the world? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: It depends on what the Judaic source is. Generally, yes - a creator, but in the mystical branches of Judaism, it is an ongoing creation that is more in the way of an appearing/manifesting (by means of a filtering or blocking off or distorting) as a multiplicity that is also sometimes thought of as an ongoing sustaining rather like a lifeforce which if withdrawn would leave nothing at all of "the world" rather than a one-time, intentional creation by a being who wants company" LOL!. There ARE similarities with Vedanta. ------------------------------------------------- And, is this Judaic concept of God a Self, a Soul, a Holy Spirit, or a Holy Ghost? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's never described as such. -------------------------------------------------- By the way, Hindus are also rather evasive about their concept of God. It is as though the fate of God were in the hands of Hindu interpreters and commentators. Depending on who or what you read, the meaning of God changes. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nibbana isn't so clearly and unambiguously explicated either, Suan. ---------------------------------------------------- What is the Judaic concept of God acceptable to all the Jewish believers? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I know of none. ------------------------------------------------------ What is the mainstream non-revisionist concept of God taught by the Jewish priests to preserve Jewish identity among the Jewish people? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: There are no Jewish priests. There are rabbis, which means "teachers". BTW, sometimes Jews as a whole are referred to as "A Nation of Priests." ------------------------------------------------------ For example, do these Jewish priests accept their God as a Creator, a Self, a Soul, a Holy Spirit, a Holy Ghost etc? Do these Jewish priests use a form of Bible like Christians do? What is this? In this Jewish Bible, what is the original Judaic concept of God? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not very interested in going into such detail. A proper answer would take up all the list activity! Moreover, while a brief foray into a discussion of another religion is occasionally okay, it's not proper, IMO, to go beyond that here. ----------------------------------------------------- At this stage, I am not interested in later revisionist interpretations, which are usually influenced by various circumstances. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Everything, including religious belief and practice, changes. For me, some of what is best in Judaism came in relatively recent times, in Chassidic philosophy, because it is there that there is much commonality with the Dhamma. So, if that is "revisionism," then I'm a revisionist. ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ If you have spare time, I do care to hear. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Thanks. :-) But for the moment I think I'll leave this discussion as is. ------------------------------------------------------ Cheers! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org ========================= With metta, Howard #89205 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: samvega, Was: (some) Avijja & Conceit scottduncan2 Dear Herman (Nina), H: "...Impermanence as a being, then a not being of anything, whether it be dhammas or souls, qualifies as an annihilationist view IMO." Scott: Mixing 'being' or 'not being' with understanding impermanence *is* the basis of uccheda-di.t.thi. Nyanatiloka notes: "...Annihilation-belief (uccheda-di.t.thi) on the other hand, is the belief in the existence of an ego-entity or personality as being more or less identical with those physical and mental processes, and which therefore, at the dissolution at death, will come to be annihilated..." Scott: Atthasaalinii (p.70): "The 'theories of becoming,' of 'eternalism,' 'non-becoming,' and 'annihilation' refer respectively to the fact of renewed life, eternal life, extinction, and annihilation of life. The process-theories of eternalism, annihilationism, infinity, and finity refer respectively to the views that the soul and the world are eternal, will be annihilated, are infinite, are finite." Scott: Impermanence relates to conditioned dhammas, otherwise the following would not have been taught: SN 22 102(10) Perception of Impermanence At Saavatthi. "Bhikkhus, when the perception of impermanence (aniccasa~n~naa) is developed and cultivated, it eliminates all sensual lust, it eliminates all lust for existence, it eliminates all ignorance, it uproots all conceit 'I am'... "And how, bhikkhus, is the perception or impermanence developed and cultivated so that it eliminates all sensual lust, eliminates all lust for existence, eliminates all ignorance, and uproots the conceit 'I am'? (*) 'Such is form, such is its origin, such is its passing away; such is feeling...such is perception...such are volitional formations... such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away'; that is how the perception of impermanence is developed and cultivated so that it eliminates all sensual lust, eliminates all lust for existence, eliminates all ignorance, and uproots all conceit 'I am.'" *"...Iti ruupa.m iti ruupassa samudayo iti ruupassa atthagamo, iti vedanaa iti vedanaaya samudayo iti veda naaya atthagamo iti sa~n~naa iti sa~n~nassa samudayo iti sa~n~nassa atthagamo Iti sa"nkhaaraa iti sa.nkhaarassa samudayo iti sa"nkhaarassa atthagamo, iti vi~n~naa.na.m iti vi~n~naa.nassa samudayo iti vi~n~naa.nassa atthagamoti. Eva.m bhaavitaa kho bhikkhave, aniccasa~n~naa eva.m bahulikataa sabba.m kaamaraaga.m pariyaadiyataa, sabba.m ruuparaaga.m pariyaadiyati, sabba.m bhavaraaga.m pariyaadiyati, sabba.m avijja.m pariyaadiyati, sabba.m asmimaana.m pariyaadiyati, samuuhantiiti." Scott: Last word to you, Herman. We rarely converge (except on music from time to time). Sincerely, Scott. #89206 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:38 am Subject: Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... nichiconn Good morning, Herman, > What do you mean by craving? > > c: Lust, hope, want, clinging, liking, covetousness, attachment, etc.; all lobha. The same thing that usually motivates me to put the next bite in my mouth, take a walk, keep looking at something pleasant or even to breathe. Herman: Thanks for that clarification. So do you maintain that needing the next breath is pleasant? c: I maintain that the feeling accompanying lobha is either indifferent or pleasant. As far as my guessing that breathing is probably conditioned by lobha, I might learn to keep spur of the moment comments to myself someday, but no time soon, I'm sure. Do be sure though, that I regretted not having said "probably even to breathe" even as the message was on it's way. And maybe the answer you're really asking me for is "No, Herman, when I think about it, there's not much point to living at all." Maybe at this point I should ask what breath actually is... according to the texts does it differ from how our mystery man in the streets thinks about it? peace, connie #89207 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body truth_aerator Hi Howard, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi Alex - > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: >I agree that the overall pattern has a good degree of stability, ? >ith the changes subtle - often to subtle to notice until >they have accumulated. > ---------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I think that change at all levels is the fact, I believe that too. >I think that macro-change is easier to observe and that the >realization of it certainly turns one's mind towards matters of >what is important and what is not. However, I believe >that it is the realization of change at the finest level that is >truly liberating. This is one thing that Goenka emphasizes that I >agree with. I do think that emphasis on literal birth, aging and death is what the Buddha has intended. While it is true that every split second there are various changes happening, I don't think that they are as samvega producing as literal aging, sickness, death, rebirth, suffering. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't disagree that phenomena can be distinguished. Sights >certainly are different from sounds. Yet there is nothing that >has "own nature" or even "own being", because nothing exists or >arises on its own, and also, as I see it, nothing remains exactly >the same for even an instant, and, in a way, that implies that >there are no real entities at all. (My definition of samsara: >"The appearance realm of separate things") > ----------------------------------------------------- The important thing is to be clear on what "own being" and such precisely means. Vague and ambiguous concepts are great at producing concrete arguments and heated debates. Personally, to me, it appears that the Buddha didn't emphasize such dualities as "existence/non-existence" but tried to instead turn to "stress & its cessation" pragmatic teaching. My definition of Samsara: 5 Aggregates + stress. Best wishes, Alex #89208 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 8/19/2008 9:39:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi Alex - > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: >I agree that the overall pattern has a good degree of stability, ? >ith the changes subtle - often to subtle to notice until >they have accumulated. > ---------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I think that change at all levels is the fact, I believe that too. >I think that macro-change is easier to observe and that the >realization of it certainly turns one's mind towards matters of >what is important and what is not. However, I believe >that it is the realization of change at the finest level that is >truly liberating. This is one thing that Goenka emphasizes that I >agree with. I do think that emphasis on literal birth, aging and death is what the Buddha has intended. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I believe that was an important part of the teaching. ------------------------------------------------- While it is true that every split second there are various changes happening, I don't think that they are as samvega producing as literal aging, sickness, death, rebirth, suffering. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I think that is so. But what little bit of "progress" I've made seems to have largely emerged from seeing a more instantaneous, fine level of change (at a Goenka retreat). So, as to a sense of urgency, I quite agree with you, but as for transforming insight, I think it is a finer, more elementary level of insight that does that transforming. ------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't disagree that phenomena can be distinguished. Sights >certainly are different from sounds. Yet there is nothing that >has "own nature" or even "own being", because nothing exists or >arises on its own, and also, as I see it, nothing remains exactly >the same for even an instant, and, in a way, that implies that >there are no real entities at all. (My definition of samsara: >"The appearance realm of separate things") > ----------------------------------------------------- The important thing is to be clear on what "own being" and such precisely means. Vague and ambiguous concepts are great at producing concrete arguments and heated debates. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: True. ---------------------------------------------------- Personally, to me, it appears that the Buddha didn't emphasize such dualities as "existence/non-existence" but tried to instead turn to "stress & its cessation" pragmatic teaching. My definition of Samsara: 5 Aggregates + stress. Best wishes, Alex ============================= With metta, Howard #89209 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:13 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... nidive Hi Tep & Alex, > Never, brahman, have I seen or heard of such an avowal, such a view > as yours. Pray, how can one step onwards, step back and say: There > is no self-agency, there is no other-agency? [AN.6.38] > > T: This sutta is a great education : there are a few different > meanings of atta (self); What do you understand by "other-agency"? What is the difference between "self-agency" and "other-agency"? I ask this because I do not know what is the meaning of "other- agency" as opposed to "self-agency". Swee Boon #89210 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body nidive Hi Howard, > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is > all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. > There is no place without the Presence/ > > (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) I assume that this quote comes along with your post. Just curious, what is the relevance of this quote with respect to Buddhism? Swee Boon #89211 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream nidive Hi Herman, > You may like to revise the list of theists that you keep, if you are > interested in the way things are. Herman is not a theist. > > Oh, by the way, how are the devas today? Should I put you down as a > devist? But Herman, how did you know that Suan communicated with the devas while in his dreams? I mean, that was totally unexpected! Swee Boon #89212 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:46 am Subject: Re: Melatonin vs. Seratonin, now that's a conflict huh? nichiconn Dear colette, Nice to see you this morning, too. colette: One thing that's struck me very heavily is: "The insecurity of life. Our hidden karma." So, can this mean that: Insecurity of Life = Hidden Karma? Is karma something other than hidden? How can karma be hidden? ======= connie: In part, I suppose, our present kamma is hidden to the extent that we don't understanding what motivates our behaviour and it's implications. Past kamma, by not remembering... and again, not really understanding what we do recall. Sound fair as far as it goes? You know, though, that kamma is only one factor among many. Here's a bit from the Questions of Milinda (pp192-3) that really strikes me: << 'If, O king, all diseases were really derived from Karma then there would be no characteristic marks by which they could be distinguished one from the other. When the wind is disturbed, it is so in one or other of ten ways--by cold, or by heat, or by hunger, or by thirst, or by over eating, or by standing too long, or by over exertion, or by walking too fast, or by medical treatment, or as the result of Karma. Of these ten, nine do not act in a past life or in a future life, but in one's present existence. Therefore it is not right to say that all pain is due to Karma. When the bile, O king, is deranged it is so in one or other of three ways--by cold, or by heat, or by improper food. When the phlegm is disturbed it is so by cold, or by heat, or by food and drink. When either of these three humours are disturbed or mixed, it brings about its own special, distinctive pain. Then there are the special pains arising from variations in temperature, avoidance of dissimilarities, and external agency. And there is the act that has Karma as its fruit, and the pain so brought about arising from the act done. So what arises as the fruit of Karma is much less than that which arises from other causes. And the ignorant go too far when they say that every pain is produced as the fruit of Karma. No one without a Buddha's insight can fix the extent of the action of Karma.' >> I think people talk about the insecurity of life as in there being no certainty that it will continue or what will come up next as long as it does. colette: Ahhhhh, "Transmigration", now there's a heretical word in the Christian doctrine if I ever heard one. Slow down, are you suggesting that Christianity has nothing to do with Buddhism simply because a mere half of the world practices it? Do you mean to go so far as defending those charlattans in the Christian main frame that operate their robots as a means of protecting yourself within your nice secure world of Buddhism? If so, John Lennon proceeded me: "Instant karma's gonna get you", no? connie: I heard a story before about this guy called John the Baptist. I don't remember the exact words now, but if you want to look it up, it seems he might be talking about some kind of "reincarnation" or whatever. I'm afraid I'm one of those people the Christians don't really claim as one of theirs... something of a lost cause to them & while they're probably right that I'm destined to hell, the reasons behind the agreement aren't the same. As far as I'm concerned, the way things stand, we're all poor fellers in the long run... call it destiny if you like. take care, colette. connie #89213 From: "rinzeee" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:09 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Dear Tep > Hello Rinze (Sukin, KenH, Alex, Herman, Sarah and Scott), - > It refreshed me and relieved me from "accumulated > frustrations" (akusala citta) after having heard so often that right > understanding of 'anatta' means "no-one practices the Dhamma". But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma! > > >Rinze: In the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness, Lord Buddha speaks of > Kaya Anupassana first. Why? Because it is the most gross factor, > readily seen by the wise. Only thereafter, does He expose the subtle > nature of the Dhamma, such as Impermanence, Suffering and Not self. > It's not everybody, who would understand to the point of being > motivated, to investigate such subtle nature of the Dhamma, at the > outset. > > T: What, you said "first" ?! Are you talking about sequential, step- > by-step practicing and developing of mindfulness? But I have often > been told by the prominent DSG members that such is a WRONG idea. > Furthermore, they say that seeing 'not self' is all it takes for > right understanding to accumulate; anatta does not come AFTER seeing > anicca and dukkha. > > Tep > === What did you mean by "sequential step by step practicing and developing of mindfulness"? May all beings be Happy Rinze #89214 From: mlnease@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:09 am Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... m_nease Hi Connie, > c: I maintain that the feeling accompanying lobha is > either indifferent or pleasant. I think I wrote earlier that lobha is always accompanied by pleasant feeling. What I was getting at was that it certainly is not accompanied--in any form--by unpleasant feeling, but your note about indifferent feeling rings a bell. Have any citations at hand? Thanks in advance. mike #89215 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:18 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream abhidhammika Dear Herman, Howard, colette I do not keep a list of theists, Herman. :-) I merely invited any hidden theists who might be reading our exchanges of this subject. So, please do not be offended by my careless addressing. Herman declared: "Herman is not a theist." Welcome to the free world of atheists. As atheists following the Buddha's teachings, we are in control of our future. We have nothing to fear. Our destiny is in our hands. To be a Buddhist atheist is to become a responsible individual who trusts one's actions (kamma) and their results (vipaaka) in a non-deterministic way. Herman also wrote: "Oh, by the way, how are the devas today? Should I put you down as a devist?" We humans and Devas have the same level of consciousness called Kaamaavacaramahaakusala ñaa.nasampayutta cittam. They are like our cousins consciousnesswise. Many of these Devas who are exposed to the Buddha's teachings are Buddhist atheists. We humans and Devas as Buddhist atheists have the same goal of getting out of Samsaara. Being followers of the Buddha, we and Devas are dhamma friends as well. Cheers! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #89216 From: "rinzeee" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:19 am Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: Dear Swee Boon > Hi Rinzeee, > >> But I have one more question to clarify. > > What is the difference between "Cessation of Perception & Feeling > Proper" vs "Fruition Consciousness"? "Cessation of Perception & Feeling Proper" is the suspension of consciousness and therefore no perception and feeling altogether. Fruition Consciousness is the consciousness that `follows' path consciousness. There is no suspension of consciousness as such. > Is there consciousness and perception present when one enters > "Fruition Consciousness"? Yes. > Swee Boon > May all beings be Happy Rinze #89217 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:36 am Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel nidive Hi Rinze, > "Cessation of Perception & Feeling Proper" is the suspension of > consciousness and therefore no perception and feeling altogether. > Fruition Consciousness is the consciousness that `follows' path > consciousness. There is no suspension of consciousness as such. Thank you once again for your agreeable reply. If you may pardon my greediness, let me ask you another 2 questions. Previously you said that arahants could enjoy Fruition Consciousness whenever they advert their minds to it, and that the Buddha abided in this "voidness" whenever he wanted. Is animitta cetosamadhi in DN 16 (signless concentration of mind) the same as Fruition Consciousness? ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html "Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind (animitta cetosamadhi), that his body is more comfortable. ----------------------------------------------------------------- It is interesting that the Buddha said that only certain and not all feelings are ceased while in animitta cetosamadhi. Also, do the following sutta passages describe Fruition Consciousness? ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/ likefire/2-1.html Ananda: In what way, lord, might a monk attain concentration of such a form that he would have neither the perception of earth with regard to earth, nor of water with regard to water, nor of fire... wind... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception... this world... nor of the next world with regard to the next world, and yet he would still be percipient? The Buddha: There is the case, Ananda, where he would be percipient of this: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all mental processes; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; stopping; nibbana.' — A X.6 [Ananda puts the same question to Sariputta, who responds that he himself once had experienced such a concentration.] Ananda: But what were you percipient of at that time? Sariputta: 'The stopping of becoming — nibbana — the stopping of becoming — nibbana': One perception arose in me as another perception stopped. Just as in a blazing woodchip fire, one flame arises as another flame disappears, even so, 'The stopping of becoming — nibbana — the stopping of becoming — nibbana': One perception arose in me as another one stopped. I was percipient of the stopping of becoming — nibbana. — A X.7 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Swee Boon #89218 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:37 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... nichiconn Hey mike - > c: I maintain that the feeling accompanying lobha is > either indifferent or pleasant. I think I wrote earlier that lobha is always accompanied by pleasant feeling. What I was getting at was that it certainly is not accompanied--in any form--by unpleasant feeling, but your note about indifferent feeling rings a bell. Have any citations at hand? Thanks in advance. c: I'm rat-holed away with just ADL right now, but if that's acceptable, see ch.4. The 8 types of lobha-muula-citta are listed on page 43 in my 1999 Zolag edition. Of the 8, 4 arise accompanied by pleasant feeling and 4 by indifferent feeling; then they are also classified as to with & without wrong view and being either prompted or unprompted. By the way, I'd also thought stinginess and envy were forms of lobha. One of the easier to swallow doses of the Good Medicine! peace, connie #89219 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/19/2008 10:21:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is > all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. > There is no place without the Presence/ > > (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) I assume that this quote comes along with your post. Just curious, what is the relevance of this quote with respect to Buddhism? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm surprised that you don't see that. Reality is right here. Though some circumstances are more conducive to progress than others, ultimately there is no need to go to special places, because namas and rupas arise right now, right here. And with a mind properly cultivated, nibbana can be immediately realized. ----------------------------------------------- Swee Boon ======================== With metta, Howard P. S. Of course, anyone has the right to use whatever signature lines they wish, whether deemed relevant to others or not, so long, of course, as they do not slander anyone or any tradition, and do not offend by harsh or offensive language. Messages 89217 - 89219 of 89219 Yahoo!My Yahoo!Mail Search: #89220 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body nidive Hi Howard, > > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent > > is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely > > places. There is no place without the Presence./ > I'm surprised that you don't see that. Reality is right here. > Though some circumstances are more conducive to progress than > others, ultimately there is no need to go to special places, > because namas and rupas arise right now, right here. And with a > mind properly cultivated, nibbana can be immediately realized. Thank you for your explanation. But still, I could not figure out the meaning of "There is no place without the Presence." in your context. Does the "Presence" refer to the "mind properly cultivated", or does it refer to nibbana? I guess it refers to both, since without a properly cultivated mind, nibbana cannot be realized. > P. S. Of course, anyone has the right to use whatever signature > lines they wish, whether deemed relevant to others or not, so long, > of course, as they do not slander anyone or any tradition, and do > not offend by harsh or offensive language. I agree. Swee Boon #89221 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:59 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni.. nichiconn sorry, mike, make that (#89218) p.43 of the 1990 Chuan Press edition of Abhidhamma in Daily Life for the 8 lobha muula cittas. peace, connie #89222 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:01 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... truth_aerator Dear Swee, Sarah, Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Tep & Alex, > > > Never, brahman, have I seen or heard of such an avowal, such a >view > > as yours. Pray, how can one step onwards, step back and say: There > > is no self-agency, there is no other-agency? [AN.6.38] > > > > T: This sutta is a great education : there are a few different > > meanings of atta (self); > > What do you understand by "other-agency"? What is the difference > between "self-agency" and "other-agency"? > > I ask this because I do not know what is the meaning of "other- > agency" as opposed to "self-agency". > > Swee Boon "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden." A burden indeed are the five aggregates, and the carrier of the burden is the person. Taking up the burden in the world is stressful. Casting off the burden is bliss. Having cast off the heavy burden and not taking on another, pulling up craving, along with its root, one is free from hunger, totally unbound. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html ================================================== And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html#1 ========= A1. "Now, householders, of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'In acting or getting others to act, in mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in torturing or getting others to torture... one does no evil... Through generosity, self- control, restraint, and truthful speech there is no merit from that cause, no coming of merit' — it can be expected that, shunning these three skillful activities — good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable brahmans & contemplatives do not see, in unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing. A2. "Because there actually is action, the view of one who thinks, 'There is no next action' is his wrong view. Because there actually is action, when he is resolved that 'There is no action,' that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is action, when he speaks the statement, 'There is no action,' that is his wrong speech. Because there actually is action, when he is says that 'There is no action,' he makes himself an opponent to those arahants who teach action. Because there actually is action, when he persuades another that 'There is no action,' that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others. Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, exaltation of self, & disparagement of others: These many evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong view. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html ================================== Best wishes, Alex #89223 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:12 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream indriyabala Dear Sukin, - In the message #89158 you wrote : >Dear Tep, >I wasn't looking to start a discussion about anything. The main point I wanted to make was that the attitude some of us have with regards to the Dhamma which you happen to perceive as being similar to the position held by those coming from a kind of `wrong view' who then state to the effect "only this is true", this does not have to be so. That the Buddha's Path being the "One and Only Way" would also sound somewhat similar, but to "outsiders", who after all don't take into account the truth about nama and rupa, conditionality and the Tilakkhana, but instead do so exactly due to sanna, citta and `ditthi' vipallasa. T: Thanks for lettting me know what concerns you. I appreciate this opportunity for us to correct any error. Although I am not hopeful. In general we may say, in the eye of a beholder there are always similarities in this world. But it all depends on who is perceiving what. Different [wrong]views do stem from "sanna, citta and ditthi vipallasa" of those who lack the Dhamma Eye. The Buddha rightly proclaimed that the middle way was the Path and that the N8FP (or equivalently the Satipatthana) was the One and Only Way of practice for the cessation of dukkha. He was right because He got the Knowledge and Vision. But those among us, who insistently imply "only this is true" in regard to their viewpoint, do not yet possess of the Dhamma Eye. In order to avoid such a mistake, they should more often refer to the Buddha's and the arahants' words in the suttas, and be less dependent on their "intellectual" understanding. .............. >Suk: You state in the end of your post: > Secondly, as to putting forward my understanding of the Dhamma, I > have already been doing exactly that. I know that you have been doing this and my other point was that only by way of making a statement of and about the Truth / Dhamma, will it ever be useful to anyone. Certainly just throwing around characterizations especially those which may in fact be mischaracterization, doesn't help; not that I don't often do so myself. T: If you do believe that what you just said also applies to yourself, then you should from now on stop discussing the Dhamma with anybody. But I have much more confidence in putting forward my understanding of the Dhamma than you, since it has been better supported by the words of the Buddha and the arahants. Also, my experience of the Dhamma application adds value to the statements I have carefully made. It is not a surprise to me that you think any statement I have made is not useful to anyone. But that is already a mischaracterization, since how can you speak for others about the uselessness of Tep's statements of and about the Truth/Dhamma? BTW In your opinion, who among us is qualified to make "a statement of and about the Truth / Dhamma" that will "ever be useful" to everyone? >Suk: But if you are really interested in starting a discussion about the development of Right View, something that you commented upon, we can go ahead. Let me know. Metta, Sukin. T: Quite contrary to what you wrote, Sukin, it is obvious that the only interest you have in mind is to talk about your understanding about the development of Right View, not a discussion with me. Again, the hidden motivation is that same old ditthi: 'Only this is right'. 'Only this is useful'. Sincerely, Tep === #89224 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:17 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream truth_aerator Dear Rinze, and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rinzeee" wrote: > But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma! The Blessed One said, "And which is the burden? 'The five clinging- aggregates,' it should be said. Which five? Form as a clinging- aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a clinging- aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. This, monks, is called the burden. "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden. "And which is the taking up of the burden? The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. This is called the taking up of the burden. "And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving. This is called the casting off of the burden." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html =================================================== Notice what the Buddha has said about Puggala (Person). Best wishes, Alex #89225 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:24 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream .. Feeling like a fool ... indriyabala Dear Rinze, - I felt like a fool who fell in love with a wrong girl ! > Tep: > > It refreshed me and relieved me from "accumulated > > frustrations" (akusala citta) after having heard so often that > right > > understanding of 'anatta' means "no-one practices the Dhamma". > Rinze: > But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma! > T: Sorry, Rinze. I foolishly misunderstood you. ;-) > > > > >Rinze: In the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness, Lord Buddha speaks of > > Kaya Anupassana first. Why? Because it is the most gross factor, > > readily seen by the wise. Only thereafter, does He expose the > subtle > > nature of the Dhamma, such as Impermanence, Suffering and Not > self. > > It's not everybody, who would understand to the point of being > > motivated, to investigate such subtle nature of the Dhamma, at the > > outset. > > > > T: What, you said "first" ?! Are you talking about sequential, > step- > > by-step practicing and developing of mindfulness? But I have often > > been told by the prominent DSG members that such is a WRONG idea. > > Furthermore, they say that seeing 'not self' is all it takes for > > right understanding to accumulate; anatta does not come AFTER > seeing > > anicca and dukkha. === > Rinze: > What did you mean by "sequential step by step practicing and > developing of mindfulness"? > T: Again, another mistake. Sorry x 2. Tep === #89226 From: "nichiconn" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body nichiconn to no one in particular: > > > P. S. Of course, anyone has the right to use whatever signature > > lines they wish, whether deemed relevant to others or not, so long, > > of course, as they do not slander anyone or any tradition, and do > > not offend by harsh or offensive language. > > I agree. > c: ah, yes, another hob-goblin with no ultimate existence: "human rights". c. #89227 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Now: Body upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/19/2008 11:52:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent > > is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely > > places. There is no place without the Presence./ > I'm surprised that you don't see that. Reality is right here. > Though some circumstances are more conducive to progress than > others, ultimately there is no need to go to special places, > because namas and rupas arise right now, right here. And with a > mind properly cultivated, nibbana can be immediately realized. Thank you for your explanation. But still, I could not figure out the meaning of "There is no place without the Presence." in your context. Does the "Presence" refer to the "mind properly cultivated", or does it refer to nibbana? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, of course, this comes from a Judaic tradition, and there it traditionally means the presence of God in (or as) the world, which implies the opportunity of encountering that "sole reality". In trying to make a correspondence within Buddhism, the closest would be in referring to nibbana (or its realization). Mystical Judaism, like Vedanta but perhaps also Mahayana and even some streams within Theravada, seems to view all things, both "good" and "evil", as inseparable facets of a single, seamless reality that are typically misperceived as separate and self-existent. So, reality itself can be awakened to anywhere and at any time. ----------------------------------------------- I guess it refers to both, since without a properly cultivated mind, nibbana cannot be realized. > P. S. Of course, anyone has the right to use whatever signature > lines they wish, whether deemed relevant to others or not, so long, > of course, as they do not slander anyone or any tradition, and do > not offend by harsh or offensive language. I agree. --------------------------------------------- Howard: :-) ------------------------------------------- Swee Boon ========================== With metta, Howard #89228 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:46 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... indriyabala Hi Swee and Alex, - Thank you very much for this conversation, Swee. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: Hi Tep & Alex, > Never, brahman, have I seen or heard of such an avowal, such a view > as yours. Pray, how can one step onwards, step back and say: There > is no self-agency, there is no other-agency? [AN.6.38] > > T: This sutta is a great education : there are a few different > meanings of atta (self); What do you understand by "other-agency"? What is the difference between "self-agency" and "other-agency"? I ask this because I do not know what is the meaning of "other- agency" as opposed to "self-agency". Swee Boon ..................... T: You're right, the wordings are not clear. Let's compare the Bodhi's translation with version at the Mettanet Website. Anguttara Nikaya 4. Devatavaggo. 8. Attakaari Sutta http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara4/6-chakkanipata/004-devatavaggo-e.html A certain Brahmin approached The Blessed One exchanged friendly greetings, sat on a side and said: "Good Gotama I am of this view and say: Nothing is done by the self, nothing is done by others." "Brahmin, I have not seen or heard of such a view: How could someone by himself approaching and receding say `Nothing is done by the self, nothing is done by others.' ... " Now it is clear to me as follows. 'Self agency' means 'by the self' or through the self as an agent. 'Other agency' means 'by others' or through others, i.e. by any agents besides the self(atta). Is it a little clearer now? Pali Background: The Pali title is 'Attakaari'. Atta is 'self', and kaarin is 'doing'. Attakaara means 'individual self, fixed individuality, oneself'. Tep === #89229 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:53 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Sangiiti sutta: Lack of mindfulness and of clear awareness. (Mu.t.thassacca~nca asampaja~n~na~nca.) ----- Co : As to lack of mindfulness or muddleheadedness, the Co refers to the dha.sa. 1349. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1356): ------- Co: Mu.t.thassaccanti sativippavaaso, yathaaha ‘‘tattha katama.m mu.t.thassacca.m? Yaa asati ananussati appa.tissati assara.nataa adhaara.nataa pilaapanataa sammussanataa, ida.m vuccati mu.t.thassacca.m’’ (dha. sa. 1356). --------- N: At the moments of forgetfulness it is not possible to develop any kind of kusala. When there is an opportunity to listen to the Dhamma, one may attend the Dhamma session, but when there is forgetfulness, one does not bear in mind the Dhamma one has heard. This means that there are no conditions to develop understanding of the reality that appears through one of the six doorways. ---------- As to lack of clear comprehension, asampaja~n~na, the co: refers to dha.sa. 1350. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1357): --------- Co: Asampaja~n~nanti, ‘‘tattha katama.m asampaja~n~na.m? Ya.m a~n~naa.na.m adassana.m avijjaala"ngii moho akusalamuula’’nti eva.m vuttaa avijjaayeva. ------- N: The Tiika explains that just as ignorance, avijjaa, is the opposite of wisdom, vijjaa, so is lack of clear comprehension (asampaja~n~na) the oppsite of clear comprehension (sampaja~n~na). It is just ignorance, it states. Each akusala citta has the root of ignorance. Ignorance is a barrier, it prevents kusala, the development of wisdom, liberation from the cycle of birth and death. ----------- Sutta: Mindfulness and clear comprehension (Sati ca sampaja~n~na~nca.) Sati is the opposite of forgetfulness and sampaja~n~na is wisdom (`naa.na.m). We read in the “Atthasaalinii” (Book I, Part IV, Discourse on the Section of Exposition, 147): < Mindfulness is called ‘bearing in mind’ from its nature of bearing in mind a lesson heard or learnt.; ‘non-superficiality’ (in the sense of diving or entering into the object) is the state of not letting the object float away. N: Many different objects present themselves all day long through the six doors, but usually we let them ‘float away’. at such moments there is no interest to develop understanding. It is essential to know the difference between the moments of forgetfulness and the moments with sati. When there are conditions for sati it can arise and be aware of just one dhamma at a time. --------- As to sampaja~n~na, we read in the dha.sa. Pali 1352, that this is non-delusion (amoho), investigation of the dhamma (dhammavicayo), right view (sammaadi.t.thi). ----------- In the development of satipa.t.thaana, sati sampaja~n~na is needed, that is, sati and pa~n~naa. When sati is mindful of a reality pa~n~naa can at that moment understand its characteristic, it can understand it as a naama or a ruupa. When insight has been developed in stages, pa~n~naa can penetrate the general characteristics of realities: impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. --------- Nina. #89230 From: mlnease Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:02 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... m_nease Hi Connie, Thanks, Pal--knew it sounded familiar. mike #89231 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:06 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream nichiconn Dear Alex, Howard, Herman, "And which is the taking up of the burden? The craving that makes for further becoming - accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there - i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. This is called the taking up of the burden. "And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving. This is called the casting off of the burden." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html =================================================== Notice what the Buddha has said about Puggala (Person). c: You might notice, too, that it is not only abhidhamma texts and commentaries that say craving is accompanied by pleasant feeling. I suppose the suttas are up for rejection as well, though, so to each their own. Thanks for the quote, Alex. peace, connie CDB p.1331: "... you should train yourselves thus: [304] 'We will be possessed of confirmed confidence in the Buddha thus: "The Blessed One is an arahant, perfectly enlightened, accomplished in true knowledge and conduct, fortunate, knower of the world, unsurpassed leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, the Enlightened One, the Blessed One." "'We will be possessed of confirmed confidence in the Dhamma thus: "The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise." "'We will be possessed of confirmed confidence in the Sa"ngha thus: "The Sa"ngha of the Blessed One's disciples is practising the good way, practising the straight way, practising the true way, practising the proper way; that is, the four pairs of persons, the eight types of individuals - this Sa"ngha of the Blessed One's disciples is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, the unsurpassed field of merit for the world." "Whatever there may be in our family that can be given away, all that we will share ureservedly with the virtuous ones who are of good character.' It is in such a way that you should train yourselves." #89232 From: mlnease Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:15 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni.. m_nease Hi Connie, No problem. Page 35 in the ADL, Table 1.2: The Unwholesome Cittas--right, four (lobhamuula) accompanied by joy, four by equanimity. Thanks again, mike connie wrote: > > > sorry, mike, > make that (#89218) p.43 of the 1990 Chuan Press edition of Abhidhamma in > Daily Life for the 8 lobha muula cittas. > peace, > connie #89233 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:21 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni.. nilovg Dear Mike and Connie, Op 19-aug-2008, om 17:59 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > make that (#89218) p.43 of the 1990 Chuan Press edition of > Abhidhamma in Daily Life for the 8 lobha muula cittas. -------- N: I think Mike needs some examples. You take up a glass of water, and this may be with indifferent feeling, the water is not so delicious as a sweet. The whole day we want to take hold of this thing or that thing, but do not particularly like it. Indifferent feeling. When thinking does not have as objective dana, sila or bhavana, akusala cittas think. Often with indifferent feeling, when it is not thinking about interesting or delightful matters. Lobhamulacittas with indifferent feeling are bound to arise very, very often. Nina. #89234 From: mlnease Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:52 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni.. m_nease Hi Nina, Yes, of course--like Rob K.'s example of staring at a blank wall. mike Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > Dear Mike and Connie, > Op 19-aug-2008, om 17:59 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > >> make that (#89218) p.43 of the 1990 Chuan Press edition of >> Abhidhamma in Daily Life for the 8 lobha muula cittas. > -------- > N: I think Mike needs some examples. You take up a glass of water, > and this may be with indifferent feeling, the water is not so > delicious as a sweet. The whole day we want to take hold of this > thing or that thing, but do not particularly like it. Indifferent > feeling. When thinking does not have as objective dana, sila or > bhavana, akusala cittas think. Often with indifferent feeling, when > it is not thinking about interesting or delightful matters. > Lobhamulacittas with indifferent feeling are bound to arise very, > very often. > Nina. #89235 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and Alex & Herman) - In a message dated 8/19/2008 2:07:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Alex, Howard, Herman, "And which is the taking up of the burden? The craving that makes for further becoming - accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there - i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. This is called the taking up of the burden. "And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving. This is called the casting off of the burden." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html =================================================== Notice what the Buddha has said about Puggala (Person). c: You might notice, too, that it is not only abhidhamma texts and commentaries that say craving is accompanied by pleasant feeling. I suppose the suttas are up for rejection as well, though, so to each their own. Thanks for the quote, Alex. peace, connie ================================= Craving *is* accompanied by passion & delight, because we think of something pleasant, something delightful, and we then immediately crave it. Precisely because it is delightful, we crave it. But the craving itself is NOT delightful - it is torturous. It is in tanha that the primary source of dukkha is to be found. That is exactly why the end of craving is peace!!! We experience that each time we obtain what was desired. It is more the temporary ending of that torturous desire than the attaining of what was desired that is the reason for a reaction of joy. And when the very root source of craving is finally uprooted, that is ultimate and lasting joy. With metta, Howard #89236 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:24 pm Subject: Re:Craving truth_aerator Dear Connie, Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >Craving *is* accompanied by passion & delight, because we think of >something pleasant, something delightful, and we then immediately >crave it. Precisely because it is delightful, we crave it. But the >craving itself is NOT delightful - it is torturous. Craving (due to delusion) itself is an expression of lack, lack of something, "imperfection", lack of possesion. It is a dissatisfaction with the present moment and a typical tendency to act and believe that by getting something extra, one will find happiness. If one through wisdom be totally content, then craving would not arise. Best wishes, Alex #89237 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:12 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Suan), ---------- <. . .> KH: > > Hmmm, that is a discussion topic on its own. But I will delete my comments (about Buddhists and non-Buddhists) :-) Howard: > No, go right ahead, Ken. ------------ OK then! :-) As you probably know, I believe the Dhamma teaches us to understand the realities of the present moment. For this reason, I like to understand the word 'Buddhist' in terms of momentary realities rather than in terms of concepts (people). So, for me, a Buddhist would be kusala citta with saddha, confidence in the Dhamma, and so on. It would not be a Ken H. (Or even a Howard.) :-) I have made the mistake of expressing that understanding once or twice here at DSG. I say "mistake" because it was bound to be used against me one day. And, this week, sure enough, I have been described on DSG as a self-confessed non-Buddhist. :-) C'est la vie! Also on the same topic: it is interesting to see what makes a 'Buddhist' and a what makes 'non-Buddhist' - in various people's opinions. Sticking as closely as possible to the original Theravada texts seems to make one a 'non-Buddhist' while rejecting and maligning the texts wherever it suits seems to make a 'Buddhist' who is 'doing the good work.' Interesting! -------------------------- <. . .> H: > Say what you will, Ken, but it remains the fact that the Buddha instructed his followers in actions to take. BTW, you never seem to reply to the business of listening to, reading, discussing and considering teachings being conventional activities. --------------------------- No, I am sure you are wrong about this. I am sure I have, on many occasions, said to you and others that *everything* - INCLUDING THE FOUR FACTORS LEADING TO ENLIGHTENMENT - was to be seen in terms of momentary conditioned dhammas. That means 'association with wise friends' 'hearing the true Dhamma' 'considering the true Dhamma' and 'applying the true Dhamma to the present moment' are all to be understood as, in the ultimate sense, taking place in a single fleeting moment of conditioned namas and rupas. Ken H #89238 From: "colette" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:51 am Subject: Does "Consequentialism" actually equal Prasangika? ksheri3 "The sight of a touch. The scent of a sound." Moody Blues Good Morning Group, I am so honored to have the chance to return the graciousness that has been extended to me! <.....> A key factor in the study and practice of what I do, from the Shamanistic perspective, is that there certainly are knowns and unknowns. A monumental Unknown has been breeched or passed through: a television commerial from either Sherwin-Williams or Benjamin Moore Paint Companies manifested a commerical for distribution that clearly began showing an empty home for sale before the words entered the picture sayiing: "Do you see emptiness or do you see possibilities?" <....> Do not tell me that I am giberish! Do not tell me that your knowledge and applications are the best and most efficacious: I will attack your "Promise To Pay" according to your Zone Improvement Plan or ZIP Code. I can easily see my friends in Hong Kong and China grasp the totality of what I'm sying here since these neophytes seem to accept the label of DIVINE WIND or Kammikazi based on their lack of knowledge. This is another honor I'm greatful for. <...> I am honored to have the pleasure of COGNIZING such phenominal realities from Candrakiirti's, and Nargarjuna's past. I look forward to further realizations and applications of THE WHEEL in our present day and age instead of the Past day and age (see 3 Kayas). toodles, colette #89239 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:41 pm Subject: Momentary Monks & People. truth_aerator Dearest Ken, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > OK then! :-) As you probably know, I believe the Dhamma teaches > us to understand the realities of the present moment. For this > reason, I like to understand the word 'Buddhist' in terms of > momentary realities rather than in terms of concepts (people). So, > for me, a Buddhist would be kusala citta with saddha, confidence in > the Dhamma, and so on. It would not be a Ken H. (Or even a > Howard.) :-) "Monks who are arahants, whose mental fermentations are ended, who have reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who are released through right gnosis: I don't say of them that they have work to do with heedfulness. Why is that? They have done their task with heedfulness. They are incapable of being heedless. But as for monks in higher training, who have not yet reached their hearts' goal, who still aspire for the unexcelled freedom from bondage: I say of them that they have a task to do with heedfulness. Why is that? [I think:] 'Perhaps these venerable ones, when making use of suitable resting places, associating with admirable friends, balancing their [mental] faculties,3 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 themselves in the here & now.' Envisioning this fruit of heedfulness for these monks, I say that they have a task to do with heedfulness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html ================================================= Venerable sir, it is not surprising, when I invite the bhikkhus the gods approach me and tell- `Householder, this bhikkhu is released bothwise. This one is released through faith, this one is a body witness, this one has attined right view, this one is released through faith, this one walks in the Teaching. this one lives with faith, is virtuous, this one is unvirtuous with evil things. Venerable sir, when I attend on the Community it does not occur to me, -this one should be given a little, this one should be given more. I give with the same frame of mind. This is the sixth wonderful and surprising thing, evident in me. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara5/8-atthakanipata/003-gahapativaggo-e.html ======================= Please explain. No disrespect but, between your conception of "Buddhism" and Buddhist Suttas, I take Buddhist suttas. Best wishes, Alex #89240 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:23 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/19/2008 5:12:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Suan), ---------- <. . .> KH: > > Hmmm, that is a discussion topic on its own. But I will delete my comments (about Buddhists and non-Buddhists) :-) Howard: > No, go right ahead, Ken. ------------ OK then! :-) As you probably know, I believe the Dhamma teaches us to understand the realities of the present moment. For this reason, I like to understand the word 'Buddhist' in terms of momentary realities rather than in terms of concepts (people). So, for me, a Buddhist would be kusala citta with saddha, confidence in the Dhamma, and so on. It would not be a Ken H. (Or even a Howard.) :-) I have made the mistake of expressing that understanding once or twice here at DSG. I say "mistake" because it was bound to be used against me one day. And, this week, sure enough, I have been described on DSG as a self-confessed non-Buddhist. :-) C'est la vie! ------------------------------------------------ Howard: LOLOL! I don't think your definition goes far enough, but that reaction is, I must admit, rather funny! ------------------------------------------------- Also on the same topic: it is interesting to see what makes a 'Buddhist' and a what makes 'non-Buddhist' - in various people's opinions. Sticking as closely as possible to the original Theravada texts seems to make one a 'non-Buddhist' while rejecting and maligning the texts wherever it suits seems to make a 'Buddhist' who is 'doing the good work.' Interesting! -------------------------- <. . .> H: > Say what you will, Ken, but it remains the fact that the Buddha instructed his followers in actions to take. BTW, you never seem to reply to the business of listening to, reading, discussing and considering teachings being conventional activities. --------------------------- No, I am sure you are wrong about this. I am sure I have, on many occasions, said to you and others that *everything* - INCLUDING THE FOUR FACTORS LEADING TO ENLIGHTENMENT - was to be seen in terms of momentary conditioned dhammas. That means 'association with wise friends' 'hearing the true Dhamma' 'considering the true Dhamma' and 'applying the true Dhamma to the present moment' are all to be understood as, in the ultimate sense, taking place in a single fleeting moment of conditioned namas and rupas. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Argh! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- Ken H ======================= With metta, Howard #89241 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... egberdina Hi connie, 2008/8/19 connie : > Good morning, Herman, > >> What do you mean by craving? >> >> c: Lust, hope, want, clinging, liking, covetousness, attachment, etc.; all > lobha. The same thing that usually motivates me to put the next bite in my > mouth, take a walk, keep looking at something pleasant or even to breathe. > > Herman: Thanks for that clarification. So do you maintain that needing the > next breath is pleasant? > > c: I maintain that the feeling accompanying lobha is either indifferent or pleasant. As far as my guessing that breathing is probably conditioned by lobha, I might learn to keep spur of the moment comments to myself someday, but no time soon, I'm sure. Do be sure though, that I regretted not having said "probably even to breathe" even as the message was on it's way. You've lost me, I'm afraid, connie. > c: And maybe the answer you're really asking me for is "No, Herman, when I think about it, there's not much point to living at all." No, the question I asked was if the need for the next breath is pleasant. The question could have been about hunger, thirst or any other craving that conditions human behaviour. It is an open question, and you are free to answer how you see fit. And you have replied in the way that you have. And I am still in the dark. Reading between the lines, I'm thinking that you believe greed and craving to be synonymous, but that is my inference, not your statement. And if you did believe that, I would politely disagree, because craving is one thing, and greed is another. > c: Maybe at this point I should ask what breath actually is... according to the texts does it differ from how our mystery man in the streets thinks about it? You are free to paralyse yourself with analysis, if you like. You could also hold your breath for a minute, and let craving do the talking for a wee bit :-) Cheers Herman #89242 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:46 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream nichiconn Dear Howard, H: Craving *is* accompanied by passion & delight, because we think of something pleasant, something delightful, and we then immediately crave it. Precisely because it is delightful, we crave it. But the craving itself is NOT delightful - it is torturous. It is in tanha that the primary source of dukkha is to be found. That is exactly why the end of craving is peace!!! We experience that each time we obtain what was desired. It is more the temporary ending of that torturous desire than the attaining of what was desired that is the reason for a reaction of joy. And when the very root source of craving is finally uprooted, that is ultimate and lasting joy. c: Sure, the whole of conditioned reality is dukkha or "Whatever is felt is included in suffering" but that doesn't change the fact that we often experience it as pleasant; it's just the nature of perversion. No matter how we Think about craving, that isn't going to change the nature of the feelings accompanying it. If the feeling you experience is torturous, which I take to mean painful, it is definitely not the feeling accompanying lobha. Nor, to my thinking, is worldly satisfaction any kind of real peace. By the way, isn't that 'satisfaction = peace' thing another of TB's teachings? I'm more inclined to think that following the satisfaction of any recognized desire, we move on to the kind of dukkha that is due to the change in pleasant feeling. Maybe that satisfaction even reinforces any tendencies towards thinking we're in control. Anyway, I think I have a better idea of where you're coming from, so thanks for the discussion. peace, connie "Theoretical knowledge is not very deep; it cannot eradicate the concept of self." - Nina van Gorkom #89243 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream egberdina Hi Swee Boon, 2008/8/20 nidive : > Hi Herman, > >> You may like to revise the list of theists that you keep, if you are >> interested in the way things are. Herman is not a theist. >> >> Oh, by the way, how are the devas today? Should I put you down as a >> devist? > > But Herman, how did you know that Suan communicated with the devas > while in his dreams? I didn't know it. I didn't intend to convey the meaning you read. Sorry about any confusion. Cheers Herman #89244 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream egberdina Hi Suan, 2008/8/20 abhidhammika : > > > Dear Herman, Howard, colette > > I do not keep a list of theists, Herman. :-) > > I merely invited any hidden theists who might be reading our > exchanges of this subject. So, please do not be offended by my > careless addressing. > No worries, maaaate :-) (I also very much enjoyed your use of the word Bloke recently) Cheers Herman #89245 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:01 pm Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/8/13 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > >> But I would still like to talk about patterns, and that it is not > very >> useful or sincere to just define them away :-) > > I'm quite happy to talk about patterns. From my perspective, the > problem to date is that I've not been given a clear explanation of > how you're using that term. > I did say to you that every letter, every word, every sentence of my previous email was an example of a pattern, and you seemed to understand that, Now it seems that you do not. Do you understand the difference between data and information? If not, then I will accept that it is beyond my capacity to teach you what a pattern is. Which in no way will change the fact that everything you do and say is patterned. Cheers Herman #89246 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:07 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... nichiconn Dear Herman, Yep, greed and craving are just different aspects of love as far as i'm concerned, but is there really such a thing as need? peace, #89247 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 Hindrances egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/8/15 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > > H:> If it is the citta now that counts, then what are the books for, > Sarah? Since when is the seeing of meanings in patterns of black and > white an understanding of the present moment? > ... > S: Now, seeing sees visible object. Does it? Then you are more perceptive than the Buddha. It has been quoted to death recently, without effect I must add, but one more quote from a selectively ignored sutta isn't going to hurt anyone. from MN43 "Discernment & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference between them." and "Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them." >However the visible objects seen are a condition for thinking wisely or unwisely, for ignorance >or wisdom, all depending on accumulations. The accumulation word makes me realise that you are telling me about a fifth century AD psychological theory from Sri Lanka. I understand and accept that you are very fond of this theory, but I see nothing other here than your knowledge of this theory informing the present moment. It is your understanding of your books that is making the moment be what it is. > .... > S: :-) It all just depends on different accumulations. You have no problems but also attach a lot of importance to the 'circumstances' rather than the realities, it seems. I'm more interested in the realities than the circumstances when it comes to discussing and understanding the Dhamma. You talk about accumulations as though you know them. How can you claim to be interested in realities when you talk about what is not there but somehow latent? Again, it's all just psychological theory, Sarah. You may as well be telling me about the reality of the unconscious. Cheers Herman #89248 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:27 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... egberdina HI connie, 2008/8/20 connie : > Dear Herman, > Yep, greed and craving are just different aspects of love as far as i'm concerned, but is there really such a thing as need? > peace, > You could hold your breath and find out. Cheers Herman #89249 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream sukinderpal Dear Tep, You wrote: ========= Old Sukin: >I wasn't looking to start a discussion about anything. The main point I wanted to make was that the attitude some of us have with regards to the Dhamma which you happen to perceive as being similar to the position held by those coming from a kind of `wrong view' who then state to the effect "only this is true", this does not have to be so. That the Buddha's Path being the "One and Only Way" would also sound somewhat similar, but to "outsiders", who after all don't take into account the truth about nama and rupa, conditionality and the Tilakkhana, but instead do so exactly due to sanna, citta and `ditthi' vipallasa. T: Thanks for lettting me know what concerns you. I appreciate this opportunity for us to correct any error. Although I am not hopeful. In general we may say, in the eye of a beholder there are always similarities in this world. But it all depends on who is perceiving what. Different [wrong]views do stem from "sanna, citta and ditthi vipallasa" of those who lack the Dhamma Eye. S:> To be more precise, worldlings do not experience vipallasa all the time and when there is no ditthi, it is only sanna and citta vipallasa. On the other hand, some of those who have experienced the Dhamma Eye, they still experience sanna and citta vipallasa from time to time. ========== T: The Buddha rightly proclaimed that the middle way was the Path and that the N8FP (or equivalently the Satipatthana) was the One and Only Way of practice for the cessation of dukkha. He was right because He got the Knowledge and Vision. But those among us, who insistently imply "only this is true" in regard to their viewpoint, do not yet possess of the Dhamma Eye. In order to avoid such a mistake, they should more often refer to the Buddha's and the arahants' words in the suttas, and be less dependent on their "intellectual" understanding. S:> If that is assumed, then it must also allow for the fact that the Suttas will be referred to *with* wrong understanding as well. So where do we go from here? And what if the person who is dependent on his “intellectual” understanding insists that he got this only from hearing any little that he has, from the Tipitaka and commentaries, further that he could never have arrived at the kind of understanding without that particular help? Does this not reflect his Saddha, whereas on the other hand, if someone were very learned in the Suttas and hence proficient at quoting from them, if his understanding is wrong, would you say there is much saddha there? ============ >Suk: You state in the end of your post: > Secondly, as to putting forward my understanding of the Dhamma, I > have already been doing exactly that. I know that you have been doing this and my other point was that only by way of making a statement of and about the Truth / Dhamma, will it ever be useful to anyone. Certainly just throwing around characterizations especially those which may in fact be mischaracterization, doesn't help; not that I don't often do so myself. T: If you do believe that what you just said also applies to yourself, then you should from now on stop discussing the Dhamma with anybody. S:> ? Does it follow? Perhaps this is because you are talking from the standpoint of ‘someone with characteristic extended through time’, whereas I am talking about ‘momentary’ states arisen by conditions? ============== T: But I have much more confidence in putting forward my understanding of the Dhamma than you, since it has been better supported by the words of the Buddha and the arahants. Also, my experience of the Dhamma application adds value to the statements I have carefully made. S:> I’m pretty confident too. ;-) But mine is not based on any knowledge gathered from reading the Texts and hence the ability to make reference to it, but on the understanding of there being only the Six worlds, five sense and the mind, and that the whole of the Dhamma is about and founded on the understanding of these. With regard to being informed by “experience”, I find it hard to make any clear cut statements but suffice to say, that we *all* base our convictions on what ‘we think we understand’. ;-) ============== T: It is not a surprise to me that you think any statement I have made is not useful to anyone. But that is already a mischaracterization, since how can you speak for others about the uselessness of Tep's statements of and about the Truth/Dhamma? S:> I was thinking only about some particular instances, for example: - Sarah’s “flip-flopping”. Here I thought that I understood her and saw no change of positions on her part, though I did think also, that you saw as you did as a result of wrong reading of her statements. - In the post I initially responded to where you said: “I wish that they drop the view 'Only this is right'”. Here I thought that you simply attached a statement made by the Buddha in a different situation to one that you saw existing here. And there have been other cases as well, which I don’t think necessary to cite. Apart from this however and anything else which I perceive to be ‘wrong understanding’, I do think that you have contributed positively, be this directly or indirectly. ============== T: BTW In your opinion, who among us is qualified to make "a statement of and about the Truth / Dhamma" that will "ever be useful" to everyone? S:> Is this a serious question? ;-) Seriously, I think to a lesser or greater degree, anyone on this list can. ============ >Suk: But if you are really interested in starting a discussion about the development of Right View, something that you commented upon, we can go ahead. Let me know. Metta, Sukin. T: Quite contrary to what you wrote, Sukin, it is obvious that the only interest you have in mind is to talk about your understanding about the development of Right View, not a discussion with me. Again, the hidden motivation is that same old ditthi: 'Only this is right'. 'Only this is useful'. S:> Though I will admit to being ‘eager’ to express myself at times, I think you are assuming too much. And even though it is often true that I shy away from initiating any discussion with certain members including you, this is because you and they quote many Suttas and I find this situation difficult for a few reasons: - My ability to interpret Suttas is very weak. - The Suttas can be interpreted in any number of ways depending on the view. - I consider quoting Suttas to be of value only when both sides more or less agree, in which case the person who gets to read it, his understanding then increases. However when it is used to substantiate one’s own belief and attempt to prove the other wrong, given as above that the Suttas can be interpreted in more than one way, this then becomes ineffective. - Sometimes such practice is seen as amounting to an “appeal to authority” and not on “understanding” and any reasoning based thereof. - Some Suttas refer to truths which apply to those with greater understanding, therefore sometimes when we quote it to make a point about our understanding, it does not quite apply. - Sometimes as in other’s discussions with you, what is being asked is for example, whether “panna” is not needed from the very outset. You, not believing in this but instead your so-called "sequential step by step practice” of Sila > Samadhi > Panna, by citing a Sutta which refer to panna of a higher level, namely “indriya”, make the discussions more difficult to proceed. - Often in quoting Suttas which talk about things that don’t apply to the point of discussion, the Buddha then becomes a shield against our own views being exposed and questioned. There are other reasons I think, which I can’t recall at the moment. But I hope that the above is enough to give you a better picture of my position. That said I am ready and would indeed be very happy to discuss the Dhamma with you. Though of course as you imply, I do so thinking that I’m right. But is this not how it is with everyone, and yet we do go away learning at least a little from each other? In any case, if you can at least temporarily, not refer to Suttas, I think a discussion based on certain basic premises which we both agree upon, can proceed by way of logic and reason, do you think? But I have no deep desire to convince you or anyone. Besides life is too short to be seeking out to debate and you may think the same too, so no problem if you don’t want to risk this. :-) Metta, Sukin #89250 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 Hindrances scottduncan2 Dear Herman and Sarah, S: "Now, seeing sees visible object." H: "Does it?...MN43" Scott: A knowledge of Abhidhamma would help here. "Discernment & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference between them." ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi: "Wisdom and consciousness, friend, - these states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is impossible to separate each of these states from the other in order to describe the difference between them. For what one wisely understands that one cognizes, and what one cognizes, that one wisely understands. That is why these states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is impossible to separate these states from one another in order to describe the difference between them." "Yaa caavuso pa~n~naa ya~nca vi~n~naa.na.m ime dhammaa sa.msa.t.thaa no visa.msa.t.thaa. Na ca labbhaa imesa.m dhammaana.m vinibbhujitvaa vinibbhujitvaa naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naapetu.m. Ya~ncaavuso pajaanaati ta.m vijaanaati. Ya.m vijaanaati ta.m pajaanaati. tasmaa ime dhammaa sa.msa.t.thaa no visa.msa.t.thaa. Na ca labbhaa imesa.m dhammaana.m vinibbhujitvaa vinibbhujitvaa naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naapetunti." Note 432: "MA: This statement refers to the wisdom and consciousness on the occasions of both insight and the supramundane path. The two are conjoined in that they arise and cease simultaneously and share a single sense base and object. However, the two are not inseparably conjoined since, while wisdom always requires consciousness, consciousness can occur without wisdom." Scott: The sutta is discussing conascence condition (sahajaata-paccaya). "Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them." ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi: "Feeling, perception, and consciousness, friend - these states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is impossible to separate each of these states from the others in order to describe the difference between them. For what one feels, that one perceives; and what one perceives, that one cognizes. That is why these states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is impossible to separate each of these states from the others in order to describe the difference between them." "Yaa caavuso vedanaa yaa ca sa~n~naa ya~nca vi~n~naa.na.m ime dhammaa sa.msa.t.thaa no visa.msa.t.thaa. Na ca labbhaa imesa.m dhammaana.m vinibbhujitvaa vinibbhujitvaa naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naapetu.m. Ya~ncaavuso vedeti ta.m sa~njaanaati, ya.m sa~njaanaati ta.m vijaanaati, tasmaa ime dhammaa sasa.m.t.thaa no visa.msa.t.thaa. Na ca labbhaa imesa.m dhammaana.m vinibbhujitvaa vinibbhujitvaa naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naapetunti." Note 436: "MA: Wisdom has been excluded from this exchange because the intention is to show only the states that are conjoined on every occasion of consciousness." Scott: Herman, are you forgetting that anything beyond seeing is not a function of eye-consciousness? Seeing doesn't think or conceptualise. Atthasaalinii (pp.500-501): "In the couplet of 'name-and-form' (i.e., of mind-matter), 'name' (mind) has the sense of name making, of bending (namana), of causing to bend (naamana). Four of the aggregates are 'name' in the sense of name-making. For whereas, from being named by the people, the name of king Mahaasammata was Mahaasammata, and whereas parents by acclamation make a name for their son, 'Let him be called Tissa, Phussa,' and whereas the name comes in virtue of the a quality as Preacher, Vinaya-student, such names as 'feeling' come quite otherwise. Feeling and the other [elements of consciousness], like the great earth and other elements, make their own names as they arise. When they arise their name also arises. For no one, when feeling arises, says: 'Be thou called feeling'; there is no function of name-taking: - 'Be thou called Earth;' and similarily with the world-systems, with Mt. Meru, the moon, sun, stars, - the name is just as it arises, answering to the spontaneously arising concept. The same is true for perceptions and the rest [of mind]. For feeling, whether it be in the past, future, or present, is [after all and always] feeling. And so is perception, so are mental activities, so is consciousness. But Nibbaana, though it be for all time, is always Nibbaana. Such is 'name' in the sense of name-making..." Scott: And you left out (same sutta): "The difference, friend, between wisdom and consciousness, these states that are conjoined, not disjoined, is this: wisdom is to be developed, consciousness is to be fully understood." "Yaa caavuso pa~n~naa, ya~nca vi~n~naa.na.m imesa.m dhammaana.m sa.msa.t.thaana.m no visa.msa.t.thaana.m pa~n~naa bhaavetabbaa, vi~n~naa.na.m pari~n~neyya.m. Ida.m nesa.m naanaakara.nanti." Sincerely, Scott #89251 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:00 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 7, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, We have accumulated many defilements such as attachment, aversion, ignorance, jealousy and stinginess. We have also accumulated good inclinations. Today we take an interest in the Dhamma, we like to listen to the Dhamma. Where does this interest come from? It must have conditions, we must have listened to the Dhamma in the past. What we learn is never lost. If there is a moment of mindfulness now, it conditions the arising of mindfulness later on. Each citta carries the potentials in itself for good deeds and for bad deeds. Defilements can arise very easily, because we have accumulated many defilements. It is easy to be attached, and it is difficult to be mindful. We should not be surprised about this. Mindfulness did not often arise in the past and therefore, how could it often arise today? But it can be accumulated now, at this very moment. One of our friends remarked that he used to think that only kammas, good and bad deeds, could be accumulated. He did not think that good and bad inclinations could be accumulated. It is true that good deeds and bad deeds are accumulated. When we commit a bad deed such as killing, the akusala citta has the intensity of akusala kamma. The volition or intention (kamma) which motivates that deed falls away together with the citta. But since each citta conditions the next citta, kamma, the evil volition is carried on from moment to moment. That is why deeds can produce their appropriate results later on. A bad deed can produce an unpleasant result, which may be an unhappy rebirth, or, in the course of life, an unpleasant experience through one of the senses. Good deeds which are accumulated bring pleasant results. Thus, kamma is accumulated and it can produce its result later on. Kamma is one type of condition: kamma-condition (kamma-paccaya). Kamma-condition is not the only type of condition, there are twentyfour classes of conditions. Not only kamma, also unwholesome and wholesome inclinations are accumulated in the citta. These inclinations which are carried on from moment to moment are the conditions for the arising of akusala citta and kusala citta later on. This type of condition is different from kamma-condition. When we refer to kamma-condition we speak about kamma which produces result. The way different types of conditions operate is very intricate. We can verify that not only kammas, but also our good and bad inclinations are accumulated from moment to moment. Lobha can arise at any time, and thus, it must have conditions. Sometimes there can be mindfulness and this must have conditions. ******* Nina. #89252 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 Hindrances sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Herman), Many thanks for your timely response (much more thorough than mine would have been:-)) --- On Wed, 20/8/08, Scott wrote: From: Scott >>S: "Now, seeing sees visible object." >H: "Does it?...MN43" Scott: A knowledge of Abhidhamma would help here. "Discernment & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. <....> Metta, Sarah ============== #89253 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samvega, Was: (some) Avijja & Conceit egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/8/19 Scott : > Dear Herman (Nina), > > > Scott: Mixing 'being' or 'not being' with understanding impermanence > *is* the basis of uccheda-di.t.thi. Tell that to the believers in dhammas as bearers of their sabhava. Last word to you, Scott. Cheers Herman #89254 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 Hindrances scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, S: "Many thanks for your timely response..." Scott: You're welcome. Sincerely, Scott. #89255 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: samvega, Was: (some) Avijja & Conceit scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: "Tell that to the believers in dhammas as bearers of their sabhava." Scott: Okay. Sincerely, Scott. #89256 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:54 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, sutta: Unguarded sense-doors and non-restraint in eating. (Indriyesu aguttadvaarataa ca bhojane amatta~n~nutaa ca.) ----------- As to unguarded sense-doors, the Co refers to the dha.sa. 1347. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1352): The same is said with regard to the other doorways. --------- co: Indriyesu aguttadvaarataati ‘‘tattha katamaa indriyesu aguttadvaarataa? Idhekacco cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa nimittaggaahii hotii’’tiaadinaa (dha. sa. 1352) nayena vitthaarito indriyasa.mvarabhedo. ---------- N: Seeing sees only visible object, but when sati does not arise we confuse seeing and thinking and we believe that we see a person or thing. We are taken in by the image of a person and by the details. ------- The Atthasaalinii explains (II, Suttanta Couplets, 400): < ‘Grasps the general appearance’ [nimitta], i.e. , grasps by way of lusting desire a sign such a is of the male, or female, pleasant, etc., and which is the basis of corruption.. ‘Grasps the details’, i.e., takes the various modes of hands and feet, of smiling, laughing, speaking, looking straight ahead, looking askance, which have earned the name of ‘details’ from the manifesting, the revealing of the lower nature...> --------- N: The texts mentioned above are not for academical purpose, they are to be considered and studied with mindfulness. They concern situations in daily life now. The texts remind us to face all these objects we meet in daily life with understanding of nama and rupa. --------- As to non-restraint in eating ( bhojane amatta~n~nutaa), the Co refers to the dha.sa. 1346. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1353): ------ Co: Bhojane amatta~n~nutaati ‘‘tattha katamaa bhojane amatta~n~nutaa? Idhekacco appa.tisa"nkhaa ayoniso aahaara.m aahaareti davaaya madaaya ma.n.danaaya vibhuusanaaya. Yaa tattha asantu.t.thitaa amatta~n~nutaa appa.tisa"nkhaa bhojane’’ti eva.m aagato bhojane amatta~n~nubhaavo. ---------- The subcommentary states as to without proper reflection (appa.tisa”nkhaa), that he has unwise attention and has not investigated the dangers and advantages (aadiinavaanisa.mse) in the consuming of food. N: It is dangerous to indulge in food with lobha. --------- Sutta: Guarded sense-doors and restraint in eating. (Indriyesu guttadvaarataa ca bhojane matta~n~nutaa ca.) As to guarding the door of sense-faculties and moderation in eating, the text states the opposite of what is said above about not guarding the door of sense faculties and immoderation in eating. (Anantaraduko vuttappa.tipakkhanayena veditabbo.) ------- N: We eat several times a day, each day and we usually eat with lobha-muulacittas, cittas rooted in lobha. Therefore, we accumulate clinging ever more. The monk is supposed to be moderate in eating and reflect wisely when using food, which is one of the requisites he receives. He should see food as a medicine for the body so that he can continue with the ‘divine life’, that is, developing the eightfold Path. Also laypeople can learn to see the benefit of moderation in eating. One can eat with wise attention or with unwise attention. Lobha is bound to arise, but one can learn to be mindful of whatever arises, be it lobha, flavour or hardness. The Buddha exhorted people to be mindful during all activities, also while eating, while chewing the food. -------------------------------------------- Nina. #89257 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:07 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream abhidhammika Dear Scott D, Nina, Sarah, Bob K, Jon, Mike N, Howard, Herman, connie, Alex, Phil, Swee Boon How are you? What I am about to write here is the phenomenon of dreams as accepted and discussed in Abhidhamma. So, you may not find any new information regarding dreams in this message. And, I did not even think about writing this subject until Scott made a special request. Scott seemed to be fascinated by discussion of dreams in Sammohavinodanii. Scott, at this stage, I won't be specifically dealing with the points you raised in your original request. What I shall do at this stage is that I should merely make more explicit what is already clearly stated about dreams in Sammohavinodanii. I may also take some liberty of offering some personal opinions (attanomati) to you while making every effort to keep them to a bare minimum level. Who can dream? Anyone except Arahants can dream. The above question and answer are extremely important because they allow us to calculate how many forms of mental events can occur as dreams. Puthujjanas, Sotaapannas, Sakadaagaamis, and Anaagaamis can all dream. Putthujanas are those individuals who do not have awakening while Sotaapannas, Sakadaagaamis, and Anaagaamis have awakening. Thus, Putthujjanas have far more forms of mental events that can occur as dreams. This merely means that Putthujjanas support both healthy consciousness events (kusalacittaani) and unhealthy consciousness events (akusalacittaani) in their dreams. Of course, when these kusala cittaani and akusala cittaani could not complete their arising, the indeterminate consciousness events (abyaakata cittaani) may occur as dreams. And, as Sotaapannas, Sakadaagaamis, and Anaagaamis can dream, it is fairly possible to speculate that certain mental events and mental associates as peripheries of awakening may occur as dreams or in the dreams. How about those individuals with Jhaanas? It is equally possible to speculate that mental phenomena as peripheries of Jhaanas are bound to occur as dreams or in the dreams. Sudden insight that occurred in my dream may be speculated as a precursor of awakening or as a periphery of awakening. It is very powerful and can deliver temporary escape from the routine grip of Samsaara. That is why I keep mentioning the desirableness of undertaking of samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #89258 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:14 am Subject: Re: Now: Body nidive Hi Howard, > > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent > > is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely > > places. There is no place without the Presence./ > Well, of course, this comes from a Judaic tradition, and there it > traditionally means the presence of God in (or as) the world, > which implies the opportunity of encountering that "sole reality". > In trying to make a correspondence within Buddhism, the closest > would be in referring to nibbana (or its realization). Since nibbana is the absence of the three poisons, wouldn't it be more apt to say "There is no place without the Absence."? But would that be offending to whatever tradition this quote belongs to? Swee Boon #89259 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:38 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... nidive Hi Tep, > "Good Gotama I am of this view and say: Nothing is done by the > self, nothing is done by others." > Now it is clear to me as follows. 'Self agency' means 'by the self' > or through the self as an agent. 'Other agency' means 'by others' > or through others, i.e. by any agents besides the self(atta). > > Is it a little clearer now? I am thinking "other agency" refers to the "self agency" of others. For example, from Swee Boon's perspective, whatever is done by Swee Boon falls under "self agency" but whatever is done by Tep falls under "other agency". And likewise the reverse from Tep's perspective. In a sense, we are all little selves, arahants included! Swee Boon #89260 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:04 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream nidive Hi Suan, > Sudden insight that occurred in my dream may be speculated as a > precursor of awakening or as a periphery of awakening. It is very > powerful and can deliver temporary escape from the routine grip of > Samsaara. You talk about "speculation". You sound like you aren't very sure of yourself. How do you know this is not just delusion on your part? Dream Reading & Interpretation is an interesting subject. I believe that certain dreams may foretell the occurrence of certain future events, but to hold the belief that one is on the verge of awakening due to a strong and powerful dream is quite delusional. Swee Boon #89261 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Now: Body upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/20/2008 11:15:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > > /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent > > is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely > > places. There is no place without the Presence./ > Well, of course, this comes from a Judaic tradition, and there it > traditionally means the presence of God in (or as) the world, > which implies the opportunity of encountering that "sole reality". > In trying to make a correspondence within Buddhism, the closest > would be in referring to nibbana (or its realization). Since nibbana is the absence of the three poisons, wouldn't it be more apt to say "There is no place without the Absence."? But would that be offending to whatever tradition this quote belongs to? Swee Boon ============================ When the Buddha describes nibbana in such a manner as "the end of dukkha," I take that to mean that the awakening to (or realization of) nibbana marks the end of suffering. Likewise for describing nibbana as "the absence of the three poisons": After awakening the three poisons are simply absent in the given mindstream. Note that since the three poisons do exist in most mindstreams, the three poisons are not absent in general, which, if nibbana *is* the absence of the three poisons, means nibbana doesn't generally exist! Also, if you give any credence to Abhidhamma, you may note that nibbana is there considered to be a paramattha dhamma, the sole unconditioned dhamma. But an absence of certain dhammas is not itself a dhamma. It is just a (valid) concept. I would also point out that if nibbana WERE the absence of the three poisons, then, nibbana would not exist generally, and, specifically, it would not exist for us, but it would exist for others, making it *personal*! So, I find it quite problematical to view nibbana as the absence of the three poisons. With metta, Howard #89262 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:30 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... indriyabala Hi Swee (Sarah, Jon), - We are discussing self agency and others. --------------------------------------- Hi Tep, > "Good Gotama I am of this view and say: Nothing is done by the > self, nothing is done by others." > Now it is clear to me as follows. 'Self agency' means 'by the self' > or through the self as an agent. 'Other agency' means 'by others' > or through others, i.e. by any agents besides the self(atta). > > Is it a little clearer now? I am thinking "other agency" refers to the "self agency" of others. For example, from Swee Boon's perspective, whatever is done by Swee Boon falls under "self agency" but whatever is done by Tep falls under "other agency". And likewise the reverse from Tep's perspective. In a sense, we are all little selves, arahants included! Swee Boon ================================= T: If we look at the whole "sample space" (a borrowed term from Statistics) that consists of 'Self' and 'Other Than Self', then the sub-space 'Self' includes Swee's self and other selves that inlcude Tep's, Sarah's, and also other beings'. The remaining sample space (not intersecting with the 'self subspace') involves anything, i.e. Other Than Self. Looking at the problem this way, it follows that we are not in disagreement at all. BTW I want to re-emphasize that the Self subspace above (the little selves of ours and arahants) is the 'first category' that is discussed in the following old post (that is not considered worthy enough to be included in the "Useful Posts" by DSG management). 1. As "one-self" in the more or less colloquial sense: e.g., 'attaa hi atatno naatho' (Dh. XII, 4/v. 160). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/75804 .............. Tep === #89263 From: "colette" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:20 am Subject: Re: Melatonin vs. Seratonin, now that's a conflict huh? ksheri3 Hi connie, why do you take Buddhism so lightly and trivially? > we don't understanding what motivates our behaviour and it's implications. Past kamma, by not remembering... and again, not really understanding what we do recall. > colette: here it seems that you are trying to use/apply words to avoid one of the first and most foundational Buddhist precepts: IGNORNACE. <.....> ----------------------------------------------------------- THIS IS A WINNER. WATCH HOW I TRANSMUTE THIS ONE: > I think people talk about the insecurity of life as in there being no certainty that it will continue or what will come up next as long as it does. > > colette: I take it "insecurity" and "uncertainty" are the active words here. What exactly is RISK MANAGEMENT? Do people take a risk by getting into a tub with water in it? I mean they could easily slip, fall down and go boom, and never ever walk again simply because they took the risk of having a bathtub in their home. People, athletes, in China, at this very moment, are breathing some of the most foul oxygen that has ever existed. Is that not taking a risk? What, are we to believe the Surgeon General that says only cigarettes can cause respiratory problems, as long as you don't smoke cigarettes then your lungs won't ever have a problem. What about the effects of alcohol on the digestive system? What about the Stock Market? Do you want to play NYC which is Wall Street and the DOW Jones/Nasdaq or Hong Kong which is the Hang Seng or maybe you want to play "Footsie" which places you in London England on the "FSTE" market, etc. WHERE IS THE CERTAINTY AND THE SECURITY by investing in these capital markets? What about a 30 year home loan aka "promise to pay" where's the certainty in that? How does any idiot gain security by subscribing to those institutions when RISK is the only reason for the existance of those institutions? And yet, somehow, you find that you're gonna rationalize that death is something that people know nothing about and that makes them afeared (see Jethro Bodeen) Since when did the prison called a "subdivision" or a "condo-association" start administering "security pills"? What people lack is "common sense" and actual beliefs that can and do create FAITH. toodles, colette #89264 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:49 pm Subject: The Clever Cultivator! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Agrarian Mind Maker: As a good farmer removes weeds & rocks harmful to his field, likewise a monk removes anger & jealousy from his mind. When a thought comes to his mind that produces defilement, then he immediately removes it so his mind becomes pure again, like a field becomes ready once weeds & rocks have been removed. Just like a farmer who cultivates his field with the best rice seed and plants at the right time - first fertilizing for better growth - so the disciple must cultivate advantageous states like friendliness, pity, mutual joy, and equanimity. WORTHY Whoever is master of his own mind, Bright, clear and true, He may indeed wear the yellow robe Dhammapada 10 BEGIN HERE This is the proper way to begin for a clever one: Guard the Senses; Be Content; Keep the Precepts; Cultivate only friends of pure livelihood, of lovely moral & who are rightly striving. Dhammapada 375 The Divine Classic: All-Embracing Infinite Friendliness! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Infinite_and_Divine_Classic.htm Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #89265 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- On Thu, 21/8/08, Tep Sastri wrote: >BTW I want to re-emphasize that the Self subspace above (the little selves of ours and arahants) is the 'first category' that is discussed in the following old post (that is not considered worthy enough to be included in the "Useful Posts" by DSG management). 1. As "one-self" in the more or less colloquial sense: e.g., 'attaa hi atatno naatho' (Dh. XII, 4/v. 160). http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 75804 .... S: Did you look under "Anatta 1 (Not self)" :-)? Metta, Sarah p.s Btw, as I suggested to James before, you (or anyone else) would be welcome to start an 'alternative U.P.' and put it in the files. Could be interesting! ========= #89266 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:48 pm Subject: Re: [was Sudden Insight ...] Dhamma Discussion with Sukin without Suttas ! indriyabala Dear Sukinder (Sarah and Alex), - I read your message #89249 twice and got an impression that any conflicts we used to have have been settled more than 70%. Thank you for the good intention to discuss the Dhamma with me (again). At the conclusion of the message, you wrote : >Suk: >There are other reasons I think, which I can't recall at the moment. But I hope that the above is enough to give you a better picture of my position. >That said I am ready and would indeed be very happy to discuss the Dhamma with you. Though of course as you imply, I do so thinking that I'm right. But is this not how it is with everyone, and yet we do go away learning at least a little from each other? In any case, if you can at least temporarily, not refer to Suttas, I think a discussion based on certain basic premises which we both agree upon, can proceed by way of logic and reason, do you think? T: Yes, your elaboration was enough to give a better picture. Yes, the thinking 'I am right' is, unfortunately, the way it is with everyone. I believe it will not be any problem with me to stay away from sutta quotes and discuss the Dhamma with you, solely "by way of logic and reason" from now on [until someone challenges me again to "support" my reasoning by using "proper sutta quotes"]. By admitting that you do at least "learn a little" from a discussion, you have virtually re-opened the "shut door". Having said that, let me discuss the rest of #89249. Warning: the "discussion" below may still sound like arguments or a debate to some. Despite that appearance of conflicts, please be informed that this time it is free from frustration . :-) ............................................. T: I earlier suggested that those who are not possessed of the Dhamma Eye should have referred to the words of the Buddha and arahants rather than their own in order to avoid making "intellectual" mistakes. >Suk: If that is assumed, then it must also allow for the fact that the Suttas will be referred to *with* wrong understanding as well. So where do we go from here? >And what if the person who is dependent on his "intellectual" understanding insists that he got this only from hearing any little that he has, from the Tipitaka and commentaries, further that he could never have arrived at the kind of understanding without that particular help? Does this not reflect his Saddha, whereas on the other hand, if someone were very learned in the Suttas and hence proficient at quoting from them, if his understanding is wrong, would you say there is much saddha there? T: First thing first, Sukin. Suttas are necessary for in-depth studying, and a person with genuine saddha in the Buddha's Teachings CAN learn to understand the suttas more and more every time. Zero reference to the available suttas is a total mistake; it does not reflect saddha in the Teachings either. Providing a sutta reference that is relevant to a discussion, with or without a person's comment or interpretation, already shows an educated saddha in the Teachings. In case the sutta quote is truly relevant to the discussion, the Buddha's words [with their mental refreshing power; gladdening the mind] will no doubt be helpful for the participants to develop even more saddha and more understanding. And then they too will read the suttas themselves with saddha. It does not seem possible that a very-learned Buddhist, who has studied the suttas for years with love and tremendous respect in the Greatest Sage, may understand the Buddha's words less than an inexperienced run-of-the-mill person. How is it possible for such a learned person to not have saddha, and yet has spent many years studying the suttas, over and over again? ...................... T: I also suggested that if you did not see usefulness in "making a statement of and about the Truth / Dhamma", then you yourself should have stopped Dhamma discussion from then on. >Suk: ? Does it follow? >Perhaps this is because you are talking from the standpoint of `someone with characteristic extended through time', whereas I am talking about `momentary' states arisen by conditions? T: Indeed, it follows. But I do not follow what you meant by `someone with characteristic extended through time'vs `momentary' states arisen by conditions. Please give an example. ........................ T: Then I mentioned how my own application of the Dhamma added value to the statements I had carefully made. >Suk: I'm pretty confident too. ;-) >But mine is not based on any knowledge gathered from reading the Texts and hence the ability to make reference to it, but on the understanding of there being only the Six worlds, five sense and the mind, and that the whole of the Dhamma is about and founded on the understanding of these. With regard to being informed by "experience", I find it hard to make any clear cut statements but suffice to say, that we *all* base our convictions on what `we think we understand'. ;-) T: So it should be wiser to not have aconvictions, while we know that our "present understanding" of the seen, the heard, ..., is still far from truly seeing and knowing the phenomena (through the six sense-doors). .... to be continued ..... Please feel free to respond to the above any time, since this intermission might be a few to several days. Tep === #89267 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:51 pm Subject: Re: Melatonin vs. Seratonin, now that's a conflict huh? nichiconn howdy, colette, colette: why do you take Buddhism so lightly and trivially? connie: reckon that depends on what I'm supposed to be thinking "Buddhism" is. > we don't understanding what motivates our behaviour and it's implications. Past kamma, by not remembering... and again, not really understanding what we do recall. > colette: here it seems that you are trying to use/apply words to avoid one of the first and most foundational Buddhist precepts: IGNORNACE. <.....> connie: i think i was trying to use the words you had used. Ignorance of what, though? ----------------------------------------------------------- THIS IS A WINNER. WATCH HOW I TRANSMUTE THIS ONE: > I think people talk about the insecurity of life as in there being no certainty that it will continue or what will come up next as long as it does. > > colette: I take it "insecurity" and "uncertainty" are the active words here. connie: I took them mean anyone could drop dead at any time. colette: What exactly is RISK MANAGEMENT? connie: dunno and don't particularly care. i doubt there is such a thing. peace, connie #89268 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:55 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta kenhowardau Hi Tep, ------------ T: > You are right to say that my understanding of the Buddha's Dhamma is "unerringly similar to the way Ven Thanissaro teaches". It is because he teaches and writes about the Buddha's Dhamma. Besides that, you are mostly incorrect about Ajaan Thanissaro; possibly it is due to your misunderstanding or misinterpretation of his articles (Dhamma talks) rather than disrespect. ------------- I think everything that needs to be said on this topic has been said. And I am very grateful that it has been said! For a while I wondered "Is it just me? This man seems to be teaching the exact opposite of the Dhamma, and yet he is the most revered, or most quoted, teacher on the internet! Why is this? Why are there no protests against him: why is no one saying anything?" But it was not just me. In a number of comprehensive DSG discussions knowledgeable Dhamma students of all persuasions have assured me that there is no misunderstanding: Ven. T *is* saying exactly what he seems to be saying. Let's not insult Ven. T by implying that he cannot adequately express himself. --------------------- <. . .> >KenH : >Ven T teaches that anatta is not the characteristic "absence of self" that applies to absolutely every existent thing, past present or future. He says it a simply a strategy (or "mental attitude" as you have called it) that can be adopted by meditators in order to calm their minds (to "free their minds from stressful thoughts"). T: It is wrong, Ken. He means 'strategy' in the Dhamma practice, say anatta-sanna in AN 10.60. After a complete training of anatta-sanna, the previous attitude of atta-sanna (perception of a self in the khandhas) is completely abandoned. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.060.than.html >KenH : > As I understand Ven T the self is consciousness. He says that our consciousness is "bound." I assume that means "concealed by stressful thoughts." And he says our "bound consciousness" becomes "unbound" when, upon enlightenment, its true nature is finally revealed. T: Again, you missed the point. Self is 'atta', and consciousness is 'vinnana' or 'citta'. Unbound is the Arahant's mental state, because there is no trace of lobha, dosa, and moha (i.e. Nibbana). Nibbana is Unbinding or total Release. You might be confused by his chioce of word. Why don't you read this article? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/likefire/index.h tml --------------------------- I have read it (or one like it) before. I won't read it again because it is too long. But I will quote the first two paragraphs: "The discourses report two instances where Brahmans asked the Buddha about the nature of the goal he taught, and he responded with the analogy of the extinguished fire. There is every reason to believe that, in choosing this analogy, he was referring to a concept of fire familiar to his listeners, and, as they had been educated in the Vedic tradition, that he probably had the Vedic concept of fire in mind. This, of course, is not to say that he himself adhered to the Vedic concept or that he was referring to it in all its details. He was simply drawing on a particular aspect of fire as seen in the Vedas so that his listeners could have a familiar reference point for making sense of what he was saying. Now, although the Vedic texts contain several different theories concerning the physics of fire, there is at least one basic point on which they agree: Fire, even when not manifest, continues to exist in a latent form. The Vedic view of all physical phenomena is that they are the manifestation of pre-existent potencies inherent in nature. Each type of phenomenon has its corresponding potency, which has both personal & impersonal characteristics: as a god and as the powers he wields. In the case of fire, both the god & the phenomenon are called Agni:" So, according to this article, when the Buddha spoke of a fire going out he was actually saying that something remained: an essence: a soul: an atta. Call it what you like this is definitely *not* the teaching of the Buddha. Ven T is an eternity teacher. Eternity teachers typically send missionaries out into the world to undermine and destroy other teachings. I don't know if Ven. T actually sends missionaries out, but it seems to me that he does. Do you know our former DSG friend, Victor? He argued long and hard against anatta without once admitting (despite being repeatedly asked) that he was a student of Ven T. He is now an ordained monk at Ven T's monastery (or so I have heard). Ken H #89269 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:08 pm Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... indriyabala Hi Sarah, - It is good to see correction; getting corrected helps reduce conceit. > > Tep: > >BTW I want to re-emphasize that the Self subspace above (the little > selves of ours and arahants) is the 'first category' that is > discussed in the following old post (that is not considered worthy > enough to be included in the "Useful Posts" by DSG management). > > 1. As "one-self" in the more or less colloquial sense: e.g., 'attaa > hi atatno naatho' (Dh. XII, 4/v. 160). > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 75804 > > .... > S: Did you look under "Anatta 1 (Not self)" :-)? > > Metta, T: No, I looked under Self View. You're right; I checked Anatta 1 and found 75804. Please accept my apology, Sarah. Tep === #89270 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Cause of interest in the Dhamma? truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, >Today we take an interest in the Dhamma, we like to > listen to the Dhamma. Where does this interest come from? It must > have conditions, we must have listened to the Dhamma in the past. And what was the cause of the first time one listened and took interest to the Dhamma? Do you have sutta quotes of the above? In the upanisa sutta for example it goes like this: =============================================================== stress& suffering -> conviction -> joy -> rapture-> serenity -> pleasure -> concentration -> knowledge & vision of things as they are ->disenchantment -> dispassion -> release -> knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.than.html Oh and whenever in anattalakkhana sutta we have "he grows disenchanted with "form...consciousness" the above flowchart shows few prior conditions, one of them is samadhi (concentration). Thank you, Best wishes, Alex #89271 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:39 pm Subject: Slandering the Buddha by claiming his lack of clear teaching (suttas) truth_aerator Dear Sukin, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > In any case, if you can at least temporarily, not refer to Suttas, I >think a discussion based on certain basic premises which we both agree >upon, can proceed by way of logic and reason, do you think? > > > Metta, > > Sukin Maybe we shouldn't refer to Buddha's teaching at all, if you don't want to talk about the suttas?!!! It is slandering the Buddha to claim or imply that somehow the suttas are "too difficult to understand" and that he couldn't have taugh in an easier manner. Regarding logic, it isn't a pure Dhamma approach. Unfortunately some people make illogical & self defeating statements like: "The current interest in Dhamma is due only to the prior interest in the Dhamma". Best wishes, Alex #89272 From: mlnease Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta m_nease Hi Ken (and All), kenhowardau wrote: > So, according to this article, when the Buddha spoke of a fire going > out he was actually saying that something remained: an essence: a > soul: an atta. > > Call it what you like this is definitely *not* the teaching of the > Buddha. > > Ven T is an eternity teacher. Eternity teachers typically send > missionaries out into the world to undermine and destroy other > teachings. I don't know if Ven. T actually sends missionaries out, > but it seems to me that he does. Do you know our former DSG friend, > Victor? He argued long and hard against anatta without once admitting > (despite being repeatedly asked) that he was a student of Ven T. He > is now an ordained monk at Ven T's monastery (or so I have heard). This reminded me of something posted here before: AN, PTS Volume 3, Chapter 8, paragraph viii (88) A.iii.90 Translated by E.M. Hare The Elder Monks, possessed of five qualities, the way of an elder monk is not to the advantage of many folk, is not for the happiness of many folk, is not for the good of many folk; it is to the harm and ill of devas and men. Of what five? There is the elder, time-honoured and long gone forth; well-known, renowned, with a great following of householders and those gone forth; a receiver of the requisites; the robes, alms, lodgings and medicaments for sickness; who is learned, has a retentive and well-stored mind, and those Dhammas, lovely in the beginning...are by him fully understood in theory; but he is a wrong viewer with perverted vision. He turns away many folk from Saddhamma and sets them in what is not Saddhamma. Thus though he be an elder, time-honoured and long gone forth, through him they fall into the way of wrong views; though the elder be well-known, renowned, with a great following of householders and those gone forth, through him they fall into the way of wrong views; though the elder be a receiver of the requisites...through him they fall into the way of wrong views; though the elder be learned and has a retentive and well-stored mind, through him they fall into the way of wrong views. Monks, possessed of these five qualities, the way of an elder monk is not to the advantage of many folk... mike #89273 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:57 pm Subject: KenH 's Unproven Accusations, again ? indriyabala Dear KenH, - I sincerely hope that you were right about every negative thing you had written about Ajaan Thanissaro, Ken. Because if you were wrong, then yours would be a very bad speech because it slandered a rightly practiced monk; and you know well that slandering a good and innocent Bhikkhu is a stronger 'akusala kamma' than slandering a bad, lowly person. Of course, a restraint from slandering ANYONE is kusala. I don't think you CAN prove that your following statements are truthful, not vague accusations : 1. KH: "This man seems to be teaching the exact opposite of the Dhamma." T: Prove it by showing a list of what he has wrongly taught along with the opposite Dhamma in each case. 2. KH: "In a number of comprehensive DSG discussions knowledgeable Dhamma students of all persuasions have assured me that there is no misunderstanding: Ven. T *is* saying exactly what he seems to be saying." T: Present those discussions for me to see, please, in order to prove that you are not just unfairly accusing him. 3. KH: "So, according to this article, when the Buddha spoke of a fire going out he was actually saying that something remained: an essence: a soul: an atta." "Call it what you like this is definitely *not* the teaching of the Buddha." T: It should be very interesting if you can quote his precise words that say the "something remained" is a soul as defined by Hinduism or Christianity or Islam. Any person who speaks truthfully is NEVER afraid to back up his/her words with a reliable and trustworthy evidence. Looking forward to see your adequate proof, Tep === #89274 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:29 pm Subject: KenH 's Unproven Accusations, again ? nichiconn Dear Tep, T: Any person who speaks truthfully is NEVER afraid to back up his/her words with a reliable and trustworthy evidence. c: But they might not feel like it anyway. Maybe someone with more of an interest in what and how this particular monk teaches could take up the cause. I know I myself am not interested in wading through the bulk of his stuff, but might be persuaded to read anything he has had to say regarding Abhidhamma and the Commentaries. Do you happen to have a link to that kind of thing? But here again, not that it's any of my business, really, but the way the request was made sounds more like a challenge to me so I don't consider it will be as well received as it otherwise might... you know the old "catch more flies with honey than vinegar" thing. peace, connie #89276 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:48 pm Subject: Re: KenH 's Unproven Accusations, again ? indriyabala Dear Connie (Mike, KenH), - After having read this post of yours and Mike's post, I realize that there are some background "stories" about this group that I have not been aware of. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T: Any person who speaks truthfully is NEVER afraid to back up his/her words with a reliable and trustworthy evidence. > > c: But they might not feel like it anyway. Maybe someone with more of an interest in what and how this particular monk teaches could take up the cause. I know I myself am not interested in wading through the bulk of his stuff, but might be persuaded to read anything he has had to say regarding Abhidhamma and the Commentaries. Do you happen to have a link to that kind of thing? > > But here again, not that it's any of my business, really, but the way the request was made sounds more like a challenge to me so I don't consider it will be as well received as it otherwise might... you know the old "catch more flies with honey than vinegar" thing. > T: Maybe 'running into a wasp net' is a description. ;-)) No, I am no longer interested in asking anymore questions, let alone doing the suggested research. Tep === #89277 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:54 pm Subject: Re: Slandering the Buddha by claiming his lack of clear teaching (suttas) indriyabala Hi Alex (and Sukin), - A little understanding can go a long way .. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Sukin, > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > In any case, if you can at least temporarily, not refer to > >Suttas, I think a discussion based on certain basic premises > >which we both agree upon, can proceed by way of logic and > >reason, do you think? > > > > > > Metta, > > > > Sukin > > Maybe we shouldn't refer to Buddha's teaching at all, if you don't > want to talk about the suttas?!!! > > > It is slandering the Buddha to claim or imply that somehow the suttas are "too difficult to understand" and that he couldn't have taught in an easier manner. > > Regarding logic, it isn't a pure Dhamma approach. Unfortunately some people make illogical & self defeating statements like: "The current interest in Dhamma is due only to the prior interest in the Dhamma". > > Best wishes, > > Alex > ============================== Hi Alex (and Sukin), - Riding a bicycle too is very difficult to everyone the first time. I remembered getting hurt a number of times before finally managed to get the right skill to coordinate the body and mind with the moving bicycle. How do you understand the above statement about "current interest in Dhamma", Alex? Even this looking-simple statement is not understood exactly the same by any two persons (e.g. you and me). So, maybe Sukin really has a difficult time with the suttas that, understandably, are many times more difficult than this simple statement. Tep === #89278 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:16 pm Subject: Re: Slandering the Buddha by claiming his lack of clear teaching (suttas) truth_aerator Dear Tep & Sukin, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > Hi Alex (and Sukin), - > > Riding a bicycle too is very difficult to everyone the first time. I > remembered getting hurt a number of times before finally managed to > get the right skill to coordinate the body and mind with the moving > bicycle. Without starting to practice riding bike, one will never develop the skills to ride it. > How do you understand the above statement about "current interest in > Dhamma", Alex? If it means that "current interest is due only to previous interest", then it is a defeated argument. Those who don't know certain logical fallacies will not catch this. Those who do, can and should watch with compassion, equinimity and point out these mistakes. > So, maybe Sukin really has a difficult time with the suttas that, > understandably, are many times more difficult than this simple > statement. First, there are at least ~5-10K suttas. Which ones don't Sukinder understand? Second, I am willing to discuss the suttas with him if he so wishes. Third. The reason he doesn't "understand" is that KS teaching is hard to reconcile with what some suttas say. Sukin may not even WANT to understand the suttas in the fear of realizing that tough work must be done.... Best wishes, Alex #89279 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 2. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/8/21 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear friends, > > > The subcommentary states as to without proper reflection > (appa.tisa"nkhaa), that he has unwise attention and has not > investigated the dangers and advantages (aadiinavaanisa.mse) in the > consuming of food. > > N: It is dangerous to indulge in food with lobha. > I don't disagree, but of course the fact of eating is itself conditioned by lobha. In fact, any activity we are involved in is conditioned by lobha. We pursue what we want, and we avoid what we don't want. There is a little joke about which some may enjoy: == I recently picked a new doctor. After two visits and exhaustive lab tests, he said I was doing 'fairly well' for my age. A little concerned about that comment, I couldn't resist asking him, 'Do you think I'll live to be 80?' He asked, 'Do you smoke tobacco, or drink beer or wine?' ''Oh no,' I replied. 'I'm not doing drugs, either!' Then he asked, 'Do you eat rib-eye steaks and barbecued ribs?' I said, 'No, my former doctor said that all red meat is very unhealthy!' 'Do you spend a lot of time in the sun, like playing golf, sailing, hiking, or bicycling?' 'No, I don't,' I said. He asked, 'Do you gamble, drive fast cars, or have a lot of sex?' 'No!' I said. He looked at me and said, 'Then, why do you even care (whether you wil survive till 80)?' == Cheers Herman #89280 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: Slandering of Venerable Monk. truth_aerator Dear Ken, Mike and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > Hi Ken (and All), > > kenhowardau wrote: > > So, according to this article, when the Buddha spoke of a fire >going out he was actually saying that something remained: an >essence: a soul: an atta. "Some have argued that, because the Buddha usually limits his teachings on not-self to the five aggregates — form, feeling, perceptions, fabrications, and consciousness — he leaves open the possibility that something else may be regarded as self. Or, as the argument is often phrased, he denies the limited, temporal self as a means of pointing to one's identity with the larger, unlimited, cosmic self. However, in this discourse the Buddha explicitly phrases the not-self teaching in such a way as to refute any notion of cosmic self. Instead of centering his discussion of not-self on the five aggregates, he focuses on the first four aggregates plus two other possible objects of self-identification, both more explicitly cosmic in their range: (1) all that can be seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect; and (2) the cosmos as a whole, eternal and unchanging. In fact, the Buddha holds this last view up to particular ridicule, as the teaching of a fool, for two reasons that are developed at different points in this discourse: (1) If the cosmos were "me," then it must also be "mine," which is obviously not the case. (2) There is nothing in the experience of the cosmos that fits the bill of being eternal, unchanging, or that deserves to be clung to as "me" or "mine." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html ======== Ken, Please publicly apologize regarding Ven. TB. ------------- ßTo man a dagger is born in the mouth, saying evil words with it, The fool destroys himself, by praising the blameworthy, Blaming the praiseworthy. He choses bad luck and does not feel pleasant. A gambler losing all his wealth and himself, is nothing compared to Developing a defiled mind towards well gone ones. Blaming noble ones, with defiled words and thoughts causes births in, Hundred thousand Nirabbuda hells and five sixty hundred Abbuda hells. Bhikkhu Kokalika died from that ailment and was born in the Paduma hell for developing a defiled mind towards Sàriputta and Moggallàna. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara6/10-dasakanipata/009-theravaggo-e.html ================================= Why risk it? With compassion, Alex #89281 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 2. nichiconn Dear Herman, H: In fact, any activity we are involved in is conditioned by lobha. c: Probably most of our activity, but the lobha-muula-cittas are just one of the fifty-five kinds of citta that can perform the function of javana. See ADL ch.14. I'm still not sure what kind(s) of cittas make one breathe, which is why i was feeling stupid about having said it was probably lobha the other day. peace, connie #89282 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:18 pm Subject: Re: KenH 's Unproven Accusations, again ? nichiconn Dear Tep, T: Maybe 'running into a wasp net' is a description. ;-)) No, I am no longer interested in asking anymore questions, let alone doing the suggested research. c: Quite likely so! If you do get the urge again though, you might take a quick peek inside the nest - it's hiding in the Useful Posts under "Anatta3 -ATI, No-self?, Non-self?, Not-self? Thanissaro Bhikkhu's take..". peace, connie #89283 From: "connie" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 2 nichiconn Dear Herman, and now I've had to get up out of bed because instead of falling asleep, I realized I'd said "the lobha-muula-cittas are just one of the fifty-five kinds of citta that can perform the function of javana" when they are actually 8. good grief. I stand corrected. good night, connie #89284 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:40 pm Subject: Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. kenhowardau Hi Alex, Instead of just cutting and pasting blocks of text you should to try include your interpretations of them. For a long time you have been telling us that "There is no self" was wrong view and pasting blocks of text in support. Now, it seems, you are telling us it is right view, and pasting blocks of text in support. Which is it to be? Is there a self or is there not a self? Which of the two possible views is contained in the text you have quoted here? I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. All I know for sure is that he believes in a self, which, he says, a meditator should try not to define or think about too much. All suttas teach anatta (no self) and most suttas cannot possibly be interpreted otherwise. Therefore Ven Thanissaro is often forced into some very strained reasoning. If you read your quotes carefully you will see how he tries desperately to leave the way open for his theory that the Buddha was only teaching a not-self strategy. I think the last line gives it away, but, as I said, I am not an expert on the finer points of the "not-self strategy" (nor do I want to be): "or that deserves to be clung to as "me" or "mine." Ken H #89285 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:36 pm Subject: Re: KenH 's Unproven Accusations, again ? indriyabala Dear Connie, - Sorry for the typo 'net' that should have been 'nest'. > > T: Maybe 'running into a wasp net' is a description. ;-)) > No, I am no longer interested in asking anymore questions, let alone doing the suggested research. > > c: Quite likely so! If you do get the urge again though, you might take a quick peek inside the nest - it's hiding in the Useful Posts under "Anatta3 -ATI, No-self?, Non-self?, Not-self? Thanissaro Bhikkhu's take..". > peace, > connie > T: That 'urge' was just my response to a wasp attack on the good monk. Thank you for the clue that explains the conflict. It is a well- written article, though. Tep === #89286 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:11 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 7, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, In Anurådhapura we had discussions about kamma and vipåka. Someone remarked that he found it unjust that a deed commited in a former life can cause suffering in this life. The person who suffers today is not the same person anymore as the being in the past who committed the bad deed which produces an unpleasant result. Why then do we have to suffer today because of deeds we have not do? Kamma produces vipåka. Each cause produces its appropriate result. This is the law of cause and effect which operates, no matter we like it or not. When we suffer from pain it is the result of kamma. We may be inclined to think: “Why does this have to happen to me?” But why do we think of “me”? There was no being in a former life who committed deeds, neither is there a being in this life who experiences results. There are only realities, nåmas and rúpas, arising and falling away. In the absolute sense there is not “my present lifespan”, because life exists only in one moment. There are different types of cittas which experience objects and each moment of citta falls away completely. Some cittas are cause: they can motivate good deeds and bad deeds which can produce their appropriate results. Some cittas are the results of good deeds and bad deeds, vipåkacittas. Cittas which experience pleasant or unpleasant objects through the senses, such as seeing or hearing, are vipåkacittas which arise throughout our life. Vipåkacitta arises because of conditions and falls away immediately; there is no self who experiences a pleasant or unpleasant object. When there is pain, it is only a short moment of experiencing an unpleasant object through the bodysense. It is unavoidable, because it arises because of conditions. It falls away immediately. When we think of the pain with aversion, there is not only one citta with aversion, but seven cittas with aversion arising in succession. That is the order of the cittas arising in a process . Thus, when we have aversion about pain we make it seven times worse. Pain is unavoidable. Life is birth, old age, sickness and death. The understanding of the Dhamma can help us to cope with problems in life. We met a business man who complained about the nationalisation of property. He had lost many of his possessions. After he had studied the Abhidhamma and pondered over it he worried less about his lost property and he thought more about the development of kusala. This showed that he had accumulated right understanding. We should remember the sutta about the “marvel” of the Dhamma. We read in the “Gradual Sayings” (Book of the fours, Ch XIII, § 8, Marvels): “Monks, on the manifestation of a Tathågata... four wonderful, marvellous things are manifested. What four? Monks, folk take pleasure in the habitual (sense-pleasures), delight in the habitual, are excited thereby. But when Dhamma contrary to such is taught by a Tathagata, folk are ready to hear it, they lend an ear, they apply their minds thereto... Monks, folk take pleasure in pride... folk take pleasure in excitement... Monks, folk are come to ignorance, are become blinded, overcast by ignorance. But when Dhamma controlling ignorance is taught by a Tathågata, they are ready to hear it, they lend an ear to it, they apply their minds thereto. This, monks, is the fourth wonderful, marvellous thing manifested when a Tathågata, Arahat, a fully Enlightened One is manifested....” ******* Nina. #89287 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:12 pm Subject: Ditthi and Moha szmicio Dear Dhamma Friends, When we take a seeing as mine seeing or taking reality as "whole", is it ditthi?? so seeing sees visible object, and sati can be aware of and panja can know it. We can't induced sati or anything , that's conditioned. But we can study and consider Dhamma. But what if there is no understanding, even that?? Sometimes there are a moments of understanding, but I am not sure is it just thinking or the real panja. Most of day there is a dosa-mula-citta. bye Lukas #89288 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:41 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary, part 2. nilovg Hi Herman, Op 21-aug-2008, om 3:29 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > The subcommentary states as to without proper reflection > > (appa.tisa"nkhaa), that he has unwise attention and has not > > investigated the dangers and advantages (aadiinavaanisa.mse) in the > > consuming of food. > > > > N: It is dangerous to indulge in food with lobha. > > > > I don't disagree, but of course the fact of eating is itself > conditioned by lobha. In fact, any activity we are involved in is > conditioned by lobha. We pursue what we want, and we avoid what we > don't want. ------- N: There is a possibility to accumulate kusala dhammas instead of lobha all the time. That is why the Buddha taught us satipatthaana, mindfulness in whatever activity we undertake. We can learn from the monk's life, even as laypeople. All the rules are helping the monk to live as an arahat, without any clinging. There are rules concerning the way of carrying his bowl, his way of walking, not looking around to this or that side. We will not see a monk running along the road; such a way of walking is motivated by lobha or dosa. This makes us laypeople realize to what extent lobha arises in our actions. But, at the moments we realize this, the cittas are kusala instead of akusala. We can take courage and develop the way leading to the eradication of akusala, and that means liberation from the cycle of birth and death. The Visuddhimagga texts on the Dependent Origination repeat all the time the causes of the past that give fruits at the present, and the causes at the present that will give fruits in the future. These texts with all their repetitions and so many aspects are becoming haunting, thus, good exhortations. It is said again and again how much we cling and how this leads to rebirth again and again: Text Vis. 292: (a) Herein, [as regards the words] 'There were five causes in the past', firstly only these two, namely, ignorance and formations, are mentioned. But one who is ignorant hankers, and hankering, clings, and with his clinging as condition there is becoming. Therefore craving, clinging and becoming are included as well. Hence it is said: 'In the previous kamma-process becoming, there is delusion, which is 'ignorance'; there is accumulation, which is 'formations'; there is attachment, which is 'craving'; there is embracing, which is 'clinging'; there is volition, which is 'becoming; thus these five things in the previous kamma-process becoming are conditions for rebirth-linking here [in the present becoming]' ------- Nina. #89289 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cause of interest in the Dhamma? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 21-aug-2008, om 1:24 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Today we take an interest in the Dhamma, we like to > > listen to the Dhamma. Where does this interest come from? It must > > have conditions, we must have listened to the Dhamma in the past. > > And what was the cause of the first time one listened and took > interest to the Dhamma? ------- N: Your question is similar to the question: what was the beginning of the cycle of birth and death, when was the first ignorance? Impossible to trace this back, and it is not useful. We better know this moment now. Listening and considering have conditions, and these conditions also stem from the past. See the Four Wheels sutta: meritorious deeds done in the past is one of the conditions. Nina. #89290 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 Hindrances sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Wed, 20/8/08, Herman Hofman wrote: >> S: Now, seeing sees visible object. H:> Does it? ..... S: Yes - just that which is seen at this moment. .... H:> Then you are more perceptive than the Buddha. .... Really? http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/148-chacha\ kka-e.html "It was said the six external spheres should be known. Why was it said? Sphere of forms (S:ruupe), sphere of sounds, sphere of scents, sphere of tastes, sphere of touches, and sphere of thoughts. If it was said the six external spheres should be known, it was said on account of this. This is the second six. "It was said the six conscious bodies should be known. Why was it said? Eye and forms come together, arise eye consciousness. Ear and sounds come together, arise ear-consciousness. Nose and scents come together arise nose-consciousness. Tongue and tastes come together, arise tongue consciousness. Body and touches come together, arise body consciousness. Mind and thoughts come together arise mind consciousness. If it was said the six bodies of consciousness should be known, it was said, on account of this. This is the third six." ..... H:> It has been quoted to death recently, without effect I must add, but one more quote from a selectively ignored sutta isn't going to hurt anyone. from MN43 "Discernment & consciousness are conjoined, <....> "Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them." ..... S: If you were suggesting that I (or others) have been 'selectively ignoring' this sutta, suggest again:-). I must have responded at least a couple of dozen times this or other parts of the sutta. I just put in a few words to the home-page search and came up with several, inc. the following ones responding to the above quotes: #22184, #56974 .... S:>>However the visible objects seen are a condition for thinking wisely or unwisely, for ignorance >or wisdom, all depending on accumulations. ... H:> The accumulation word makes me realise that you are telling me about a fifth century AD psychological theory from Sri Lanka..... .... S: Call it what you like, but at this moment, is there attachment, aversion, ignorance or wisdom? Can the attachment now be known as being distinct from aversion? Do they have the same or different characteristics. Test it out. Do they belong to Herman, Sarah or anyone else or are they conditioned dhammas? Again, test it out. .... > .... >> S: :-) It all just depends on different accumulations. You have no problems but also attach a lot of importance to the 'circumstances' rather than the realities, it seems. I'm more interested in the realities than the circumstances when it comes to discussing and understanding the Dhamma. .... H:> You talk about accumulations as though you know them. How can you claim to be interested in realities when you talk about what is not there but somehow latent? Again, it's all just psychological theory, Sarah. You may as well be telling me about the reality of the unconscious. ... S: Again, these dhammas are not known by any person. It's not my or your right or wrong view or knowledge. If lobha arises now, the tendency or accumulation for lobha can be known now. The same applies to dosa. Is there irritation now? If so, it's not Herman's or Sarah's, it's just a fleeting dhamma. This is not latent lobha or dosa and it's not a theory in the book. These are the realities now which can be known - seeing, visible object, attachment, aversion and so on. As soon as there is speculating or agonising about whether the reality has just passed or what the sutta really says, the reality is thinking. It too, can be known. However, as soon as there are all the ideas about 'Sarah's latent theories' or whatever else, usually we're just lost again in the stories about different scenarios whithout any awareness of the seeing, the visible object or the attachment right now. Thanks for the interest and encouragement to write more, Herman:-) Metta, Sarah ======= #89291 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:37 am Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Wed, 20/8/08, kenhowardau wrote: K:> I am sure I have, on many occasions, said to you and others that *everything* - INCLUDING THE FOUR FACTORS LEADING TO ENLIGHTENMENT - was to be seen in terms of momentary conditioned dhammas. That means 'association with wise friends' 'hearing the true Dhamma' 'considering the true Dhamma' and 'applying the true Dhamma to the present moment' are all to be understood as, in the ultimate sense, taking place in a single fleeting moment of conditioned namas and rupas. .... S: Well, I'm glad you were encouraged to say it again. Maybe it could be your signature (sign-off) quote? Metta, Sarah ========= #89292 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... sarahprocter... Dear Alex & all, Thanks for kindly including me: --- On Wed, 20/8/08, Alex wrote: > > Never, brahman, have I seen or heard of such an avowal, such a >view > > as yours. Pray, how can one step onwards, step back and say: There > > is no self-agency, there is no other-agency? [AN.6.38] <....> >"And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden." >A burden indeed are the five aggregates, and the carrier of the burden is the person. Taking up the burden in the world is stressful. Casting off the burden is bliss. Having cast off the heavy burden and not taking on another, pulling up craving, along with its root, one is free from hunger, totally unbound. " http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ sn/sn22/sn22. 022.than. html ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= == S: Please see the following in U.P. No sutta stone unturned:-) 1) Attakaaa sutta, (Self Acting), AN 6s, viii (38) 48434, 48443, 49677, 66317, 72573, 81926 2) Burden, Bhara Sutta 46426, 80482, 82682, 86339 S: If there's anything you'd like to quote and discuss further, of course I'll be glad to do so. Remember, whatever we read about from any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta. Metta, Sarah ======== #89293 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:36 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream scottduncan2 Dear Suan, Thanks for the reply: S: "Scott, at this stage, I won't be specifically dealing with the points you raised in your original request." Scott: No problem. I'm interested in the discussion. S: "...This merely means that Putthujjanas support both healthy consciousness events (kusalacittaani) and unhealthy consciousness events (akusalacittaani) in their dreams. Of course, when these kusala cittaani and akusala cittaani could not complete their arising, the indeterminate consciousness events (abyaakata cittaani) may occur as dreams." Scott: In the PTS PED I read, in relation to 'cittaani' (said to be a plural nominative): "...in scholastic works=thoughts, e. g. Vbh 403 (satta cittaani)." Do you mean the term in the sense of 'thoughts' when you refer to 'kusalacittaani' and 'akusalacittaani'? If so, are we dealing with conceptual wholes when we consider the dream - i.e., the 'dream story' - or are we remaining at the level of the moment of consciousness and the subsequent javanas? (This reminds me of the Freudian distinction between the manifest and the latent content of a dream, but I don't mean to apply such a distinction literally of course and suggest a theoretical equivalence). S: "...How about those individuals with Jhaanas? It is equally possible to speculate that mental phenomena as peripheries of Jhaanas are bound to occur as dreams or in the dreams." Scott: I think here of, say, piiti, for example, which is present in the first Jhaana. The speculation being, then, that it might be possible for such a mental factor to arise amongst the dhammas arising during dreaming. The need would still exist for piiti to be known as kusala or akusala. S: "Sudden insight that occurred in my dream may be speculated as a precursor of awakening or as a periphery of awakening. It is very powerful and can deliver temporary escape from the routine grip of Samsaara. That is why I keep mentioning the desirableness of undertaking of samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa." Scott: I am unfamiliar with such terms as 'precursor of awakening' or 'periphery of awakening'. Might you be able to provide textual support and Paa.li translations for these terms? Again, I'm not into polemical debates, I just wish to consider these (interesting) ideas, which don't seem to fit my understanding (limited) of 'awakening'. I've not heard that there can be mental events which can be categorised as 'precursors'. I've understood that the Path arises in sequence, but that it does so only once for each of the four 'levels'. Those moments leading up to the arising of the Path, but during the sequence proper, might be called 'precursors' but then I've not read where these can arise prior to and separate from the entire sequence. What you speculate about here sounds to me very much like the Zen notions of 'kensho' or 'satori', which don't seem to have an equivalent within the Theravada tradition. Sincerely, Scott. #89294 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:07 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (17-21), Commentary part 3. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta: Powers of reflection and mental development. (Pa.tisa'nkhaanabala~nca bhaavanaabala~nca.) ---------- As to the power of reflection, pa.tisa"nkhaanabala, the Co. refers to dha.sa. 1353. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1360): The Co adds: not being shaken by bewilderment (appa.tisa"nkha). Pa.tisa"nkhaanabalanti ‘‘tattha katama.m pa.tisa"nkhaanabala.m? Yaa pa~n~naa pajaananaa’’ti eva.m vitthaarita.m appa.tisa"nkhaaya akampana~naa.na.m. ---------- N: When understanding has become a power, it cannot be shaken by its opposite, ignorance. The subco. states that it is understanding that is not to be vanquished. When it has reached the summit it is lokuttara ~naa.na. ------------ As to the power of mental development, bhaavanaabala, the Co states that it is the seven factors of enlightenment (sambojjha"nga), with the factor of energy at the head. The Co. refers to dha.sa. 1354. We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1360): The Co speaks about making much of them (bahuliikamma.m). -------- Co: Bhaavanaabalanti bhaaventassa uppanna.m bala.m. Atthato viiriyasambojjha"ngasiisena satta bojjha"ngaa honti. Vuttampi ceta.m – ‘‘tattha katama.m bhaavanaabala.m? Yaa kusalaana.m dhammaana.m aasevanaa bhaavanaa bahuliikamma.m, ida.m vuccati bhaavanaabala.m. Sattabojjha"ngaa bhaavanaabala’’nti- ------- N: The seven factors of enlightenment, sambojjha"ngas, are: mindfulness, investigation of the Dhamma (dhammavicaya, which is pa~n~naa), energy, rapture (or enthusiasm, piiti), tranquillity, concentration, equanimity. When they have become powers, they cannot be shaken by the defilements that are their opposites. As to the factor of energy that is leading when the factors of enlightenment are being developed, it is viriya cetasika, and it is known that it is not ‘my energy’. It arises because of its proper conditions. When mindfulness and understanding of naama and ruupa arise, energy also performs its function. When energy develops one has courage to continue developing understanding of whatever reality arises at the present moment. ------- Investigation of the dhamma, dhamma vicaya, is one of the factors of enlightenment. We read in the “Atthasaalinii” (I, Discourse on the Section of the Exposition, 147): < That which investigates impermanence, etc., is ‘search’ (vicaya). ‘Research’ (pavicaya) shows increase by means of the preposition. ‘Search for doctrine [N: dhamma]’ is that which investigates the doctrine of the Four Truths....> ------------ Nina. #89295 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ditthi and Moha nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 21-aug-2008, om 8:12 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > When we take a seeing as mine seeing or taking reality as "whole", is > it ditthi?? ------- N: This is hard to tell. We can cling to seeing, or cling to a person without wrong view, just with lobha, with wrong view or with conceit. Only insight knowledge that has been developed can directly know this. Someone else cannot answer this question for you. ------- > > L: so seeing sees visible object, and sati can be aware of and > panja can > know it. We can't induced sati or anything , that's conditioned. But > we can study and consider Dhamma. But what if there is no > understanding, even that?? ------- N: If there is no understanding it can be developed. By listening and studying. ------ > > L: Sometimes there are a moments of understanding, but I am not > sure is > it just thinking or the real panja. ------ N: There is understanding of the level of thinking and considering, and it can grow and become direct understanding later on. There are many degrees of pa~n~naa, and even a low level is still pa~n~naa. -------- > > L: Most of day there is a dosa-mula-citta. ------- N: Dosa is conditioned by lobha. So, we cannot be sure what arises more often. There are also many cittas rooted in ignorance in between. Before the first stage of insight has arisen that knows the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa, the different kinds of nama cannot yet be known precisely. It cannot be known precisely when lobha arises, when dosa, when conceit. We may know in a coarse way. When the first stage of insight has arisen it is known more clearly what nama is, clearly distinct from rupa, rupa is not blended in. ***** Nina. #89296 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:52 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... nidive Hi Tep, > Looking at the problem this way, it follows that we are not in > disagreement at all. I am happy to be in agreement with you. > BTW I want to re-emphasize that the Self subspace above (the little > selves of ours and arahants) is the 'first category' that is > discussed in the following old post > 1. As "one-self" in the more or less colloquial sense: e.g., 'attaa > hi atatno naatho' (Dh. XII, 4/v. 160). > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/75804 Yes, I remember that post. Swee Boon #89297 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:04 am Subject: Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. truth_aerator Hi Ken and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Instead of just cutting and pasting blocks of text you should to >try include your interpretations of them. I want to show support for what I say regarding Dhamma. Unsupported statements about Dhamma and its key issues aren't always convincing. Rather than engage in Ad Hominem, please reply to the issue at hand. > I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. If you are not an expert on his teaching, than how can you be so certain that "he teaches Eternalism" ? And is it even safe to keep saying this about a very respected monk, with many years under his belt, with expert knowledge of Pali, who made many people be interested in Buddhism, who translated many suttas and have them distributed for free on the internet? > All I know for sure is that he believes in a self, which, he says, a > meditator should try not to define or think about too much. I've provided a quote from where where he refutes the Higher Self. Note, the Buddha didn't refute a conventional "venerable of such and such a name that needs to do this and that". ==================================== "Some have argued that, because the Buddha usually limits his teachings on not-self to the five aggregates — form, feeling, perceptions, fabrications, and consciousness — he leaves open the possibility that something else may be regarded as self. Or, as the argument is often phrased, he denies the limited, temporal self as a means of pointing to one's identity with the larger, unlimited, cosmic self. However, in this discourse the Buddha explicitly phrases the not-self teaching in such a way as to refute any notion of cosmic self. Instead of centering his discussion of not-self on the five aggregates, he focuses on the first four aggregates plus two other possible objects of self-identification, both more explicitly cosmic in their range: (1) all that can be seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect; and (2) the cosmos as a whole, eternal and unchanging. In fact, the Buddha holds this last view up to particular ridicule, as the teaching of a fool, for two reasons that are developed at different points in this discourse: (1) If the cosmos were "me," then it must also be "mine," which is obviously not the case. (2) There is nothing in the experience of the cosmos that fits the bill of being eternal, unchanging, or that deserves to be clung to as "me" or "mine." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html ===================== > Therefore Ven Thanissaro is often forced into > some very strained reasoning. If you read your quotes carefully you > will see how he tries desperately to leave the way open for his > theory that the Buddha was only teaching a not-self strategy. > I think the last line gives it away, but, as I said, I am not an > expert on the finer points of the "not-self strategy" (nor do I >want to be): You've said -> >Ken:I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. How can you Judge him? Don't Judge and don't be Judged. If he is an Ariya and you keep slandering him without repent, then remember the Kokalika example. === To man a dagger is born in the mouth, saying evil words with it, The fool destroys himself, by praising the blameworthy, Blaming the praiseworthy. He choses bad luck and does not feel pleasant. A gambler losing all his wealth and himself, is nothing compared to Developing a defiled mind towards well gone ones. Blaming noble ones, with defiled words and thoughts causes births in, Hundred thousand Nirabbuda hells and five sixty hundred Abbuda hells. Bhikkhu Kokalika died from that ailment and was born in the Paduma hell for developing a defiled mind towards Sàriputta and Moggallàna. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara6/10-dasakanipata/009-theravaggo-e.html ============================================ Lots of Compassion, Alex #89298 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 8/21/2008 12:41:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Alex, Instead of just cutting and pasting blocks of text you should to try include your interpretations of them. For a long time you have been telling us that "There is no self" was wrong view and pasting blocks of text in support. Now, it seems, you are telling us it is right view, and pasting blocks of text in support. Which is it to be? Is there a self or is there not a self? Which of the two possible views is contained in the text you have quoted here? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course I could be mistaken, but it was never my impression that Alex took exception to "no self". There is a difference between "no self" and "no person". A person is a changing aggregate of mental and physical phenomena without any lasting or identifying core (i.e., without self) and, unless misunderstood, only conventionally spoken of as an individual. ----------------------------------------------- I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. All I know for sure is that he believes in a self, which, he says, a meditator should try not to define or think about too much. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: That may or may not be so about the venerable, but what does it have to do with Alex? -------------------------------------------- All suttas teach anatta (no self) and most suttas cannot possibly be interpreted otherwise. Therefore Ven Thanissaro is often forced into some very strained reasoning. If you read your quotes carefully you will see how he tries desperately to leave the way open for his theory that the Buddha was only teaching a not-self strategy. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Some people think that there is no self in anything, but that no matter how many times one repeats that fact, the sense of self (and even the belief in self) remains in control, and that what is required is a no-self strategy (or strategies) to disabuse one of the affliction of belief in self and (ultimately also) the sense of self. That view is different from one which thinks there might BE a self but it is useful to pretend otherwise, which, IMO, is quite contrary to the Dhamma. I'm not clear on which is the venerable's position, but as for Alex, I never got the impression that his was an atta-view. -------------------------------------------------- I think the last line gives it away, but, as I said, I am not an expert on the finer points of the "not-self strategy" (nor do I want to be): "or that deserves to be clung to as "me" or "mine." Ken H ============================= With metta, Howard #89299 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:20 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... truth_aerator Thank you Sarah for those #s. However if they deny conventional trees, cars, people, actions. Then I disagree based on number of suttas. How can you hold the view that "There was no Buddha, no teaching, no one being taught, no caves/forests and abandoned places where the forest monks liked to develop Arahatamagga & phala". Conventionally these people and things DO exist. Otherwise who is reading and writing these? Before stream, one has Sakkayditthi (even if one keeps saying "No Ken! No Sarah! No Alex!" Before Arahatship there is STILL delusive conceit "I am". To disregard these things (prior to stream) is like sticking one's head in the ground between railway tracks in front of the train. Best wishes, Alex > ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= == > S: Please see the following in U.P. No sutta stone unturned:-) > > 1) Attakaaa sutta, (Self Acting), AN 6s, viii (38) 48434, 48443, 49677, 66317, 72573, 81926 > > 2) Burden, Bhara Sutta 46426, 80482, 82682, 86339 > #89300 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:46 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... indriyabala Hello Swee, - Thank you for writing back. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > > Looking at the problem this way, it follows that we are not in > > disagreement at all. > > I am happy to be in agreement with you. > > > BTW I want to re-emphasize that the Self subspace above (the little > > selves of ours and arahants) is the 'first category' that is > > discussed in the following old post > > 1. As "one-self" in the more or less colloquial sense: e.g., 'attaa > > hi atatno naatho' (Dh. XII, 4/v. 160). > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/75804 > > Yes, I remember that post. > > Swee Boon > I am happy too that we have come to agreement in regard to our independent interpretations of the Dhamma. It is a rare event, in general. Like Hugo said at the SD group discussion, there are several reasons why two Buddists may disagree about the Teachings, even when their saddhas are quite comparable. Tep === #89301 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:09 pm Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... No Self, No Train .. indriyabala Dear Alex (and the rest of DSG), - It was an interesting conversation you had with my good friend Sarah. > S: Please see the following in U.P. No sutta stone unturned:-) > > 1) Attakaaa sutta, (Self Acting), AN 6s, viii (38) 48434, 48443, > 49677, 66317, 72573, 81926 > > 2) Burden, Bhara Sutta 46426, 80482, 82682, 86339 > > S: If there's anything you'd like to quote and discuss further, of > course I'll be glad to do so. Remember, whatever we read about from > any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== T: Sarah has adopted quite an effective scheme to condense several background info from the past discussion into a capsule-type of reply as above. >Alex: Before stream, one has Sakkayditthi (even if one keeps saying "No Ken! No Sarah! No Alex!"). Before Arahatship there is STILL delusive conceit "I am". To disregard these things (prior to stream) is like sticking one's head in the ground between railway tracks in front of the train. T: It is alright if the train is not moving. But remember, no train is seen by those who have no selves. Tep === #89302 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cause of interest in the Dhamma? .. Root Cause of Ignorance ... indriyabala Dear Nina (Alex, Herman, Scott, Howard), - Several other members of DSG may not know the origin of ignorance either, Nina. > >Alex: And what was the cause of the first time one listened and > >took interest to the Dhamma? ------- > N: Your question is similar to the question: what was the > beginning of the cycle of birth and death, when was the first > ignorance? Impossible to trace this back, and it is not > useful. ... .... T: For your information, Nina, like all conditioned dhammas, avijja has its condition (paccaya) too. § 125. A beginning point for ignorance — [such that one might say], 'Before this, ignorance did not exist; then it came into play' — cannot be discerned. This has been said. Nevertheless, it can be discerned, 'Ignorance comes from this condition.' And I tell you, ignorance has its nutriment. It is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for ignorance? The five hindrances... [ AN 10.61 Avijja Sutta. See paragraph 125 in Wings to Awakening.] Best wishes, Tep === #89303 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:53 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta kenhowardau Hi Mike and Connie, Thanks for your input and quotes. When all this talk about teachers and their students reminds of something we have seen in the Tipitaka it reminds us there are only conditioned dhammas doesn't it? Ultimately, in truth and reality, no teachers or students at all! Ken H > > He is now an ordained monk at Ven T's monastery (or so I have heard). > > > This reminded me of something posted here before: > > AN, PTS Volume 3, Chapter 8, paragraph viii (88) > A.iii.90 > Translated by E.M. Hare > > The Elder > > Monks, possessed of five qualities, the way of an elder monk is not to > the advantage of many folk, is not for the happiness of many folk, is > not for the good of many folk; it is to the harm and ill of devas and > men. #89304 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:17 pm Subject: Warning - Wrong view truth_aerator Hi Ken, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > wrote: > > Hi Mike and Connie, > >When all this talk about teachers and their students reminds of >something we have seen in the Tipitaka it reminds us there are only >conditioned dhammas doesn't it? Ultimately, in truth and reality, no >teachers or students at all! > > Ken H And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html Best wishes, Alex #89305 From: mlnease Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:27 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta m_nease Hi Ken (and All), In the suttanta method, there are teachers, students, Buddhas, Devas, Brahmas, events, and individuals including you, me, bhikkhus and so on. All concepts, designations--pa.n.natti--illustrating 'the all', dukkha--and the way out of dukkha. From this perspective, all the malice, delusion, wrong view and craving that each of us brings to the internet is his own accumulated (and accumulating) akusala kamma--a very sobering thought, to me. In the abhidhamma method, there are just the dhammas, each and every one holding the potential of liberating insight. These two methods can, I think, balance each other in the same way that the faculties of faith and understanding must, for liberating insight to occur. These two methods are absolutely congruent and compatible. When any discrepancy seems to appear between the two, it should be an unmistakable red flag indicating delusion at the very least. This is, I think, why atthadi.t.thi hates the abhidhamma. It forces the viewer to see the suttanta in the light of the three characteristics (which are of course not applicable to pa.n.natti in any useful way). So it seems to me, anyway, and I think this is compatible both with the texts and with my own experiences. mike #89306 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:48 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni... kenhowardau Hi Sarah, --- > S: Well, I'm glad you were encouraged to say it again. --- Thank you. -------- S: > Maybe it could be your signature (sign-off) quote? -------- I might try that. And maybe it could be the screen saver on my computer - and a fridge magnet. And . . Sometimes I think it would be good if I could remember this "all the time!" But that's missing the point, isn't it? *Now* is the only time for satipatthana. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > --- On Wed, 20/8/08, kenhowardau wrote: > K:> I am sure I have, on many > occasions, said to you and others that *everything* - INCLUDING > THE FOUR FACTORS LEADING TO ENLIGHTENMENT - was to be seen in terms > of momentary conditioned dhammas. That means 'association with wise > friends' 'hearing the true Dhamma' 'considering the true > Dhamma' and 'applying the true Dhamma to the present moment' are all > to be understood as, in the ultimate sense, taking place in a single > fleeting moment of conditioned namas and rupas. > #89307 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta kenhowardau Hi Mike, ------- <. . .> M: > These two methods are absolutely congruent and compatible. When any discrepancy seems to appear between the two, it should be an unmistakable red flag indicating delusion at the very least. This is, I think, why atthadi.t.thi hates the abhidhamma. It forces the viewer to see the suttanta in the light of the three characteristics (which are of course not applicable to pa.n.natti in any useful way). ------ I couldn't agree more. It is a matter of two methods, not of two teachings. The objective of both methods equally is right understanding of conditioned dhammas. When the Buddha employed conventional designations he did so "without getting caught out by them." That was no mean feat! How many would- be Dhamma teachers do get caught out by conventional designations all the time? They think there are two realities. They think one of those realities - us - has to somehow see the other reality - conditioned dhammas. It won't work! Ken H #89308 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:36 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta indriyabala Hi Mike (KenH, Alex), - The perspective/viewpoint that you gave in the last message (see below) is a middle way that avoids the extreme view, "Only this is right". Indeed there is no contradiction at all in the Teachings of the Buddha; any seemed-to-be contradictions are caused by tanha, ditthi and avijja of the beholder. Tep === ................................ [Mike's message] Hi Ken (and All), In the suttanta method, there are teachers, students, Buddhas, Devas, Brahmas, events, and individuals including you, me, bhikkhus and so on. All concepts, designations--pa.n.natti--illustrating 'the all', dukkha--and the way out of dukkha. From this perspective, all the malice, delusion, wrong view and craving that each of us brings to the internet is his own accumulated (and accumulating) akusala kamma--a very sobering thought, to me. In the abhidhamma method, there are just the dhammas, each and every one holding the potential of liberating insight. These two methods can, I think, balance each other in the same way that the faculties of faith and understanding must, for liberating insight to occur. These two methods are absolutely congruent and compatible. When any discrepancy seems to appear between the two, it should be an unmistakable red flag indicating delusion at the very least. This is, I think, why atthadi.t.thi hates the abhidhamma. It forces the viewer to see the suttanta in the light of the three characteristics (which are of course not applicable to pa.n.natti in any useful way). So it seems to me, anyway, and I think this is compatible both with the texts and with my own experiences. mike kenhowardau wrote: > > > Hi Mike and Connie, > > Thanks for your input and quotes. When all this talk about teachers > and their students reminds of something we have seen in the Tipitaka > it reminds us there are only conditioned dhammas doesn't it? > Ultimately, in truth and reality, no teachers or students at all! > > Ken H #89309 From: mlnease Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:44 pm Subject: Re: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta m_nease Hi Tep, Very glad we see eye-to-eye on this point, at least. Best Wishes, mike #89310 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:51 pm Subject: Warning - Tongue in Cheek Response Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta indriyabala Dear Mike (and KenH), - >Mike: >Very glad we see eye-to-eye on this point, at least. T: Me too. We agree in the general principle. Tep === #89311 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream sukinderpal Hi Herman, Sorry for the delay in responding. ============ > That being the case, I think that you will agree also, that the view > about practice each one of us holds is either right or it is wrong, > and therefore if we perceive ours to be right, there is no reason to > think "maybe". In other words if we think along the lines that our > position is right and that others whose view are quite different, in > fact even opposed, that they too could be right, then we can be sure > that our own *must* be wrong!! Herman: You are quite mistaken in putting this absolute value on being right and wrong. This is from the advice given to the Kalamas, who were faced with a situation, not unlike our own here at dsg, with some believing they are absolutely right. "As they sat there, the Kalamas of Kesaputta said to the Blessed One, "Lord, there are some priests & contemplatives who come to Kesaputta. They expound & glorify their own doctrines, but as for the doctrines of others, they deprecate them, revile them, show contempt for them, & disparage them. And then other priests & contemplatives come to Kesaputta. They expound & glorify their own doctrines, but as for the doctrines of others, they deprecate them, revile them, show contempt for them, & disparage them. They leave us absolutely uncertain & in doubt: Which of these venerable priests & contemplatives are speaking the truth, and which ones are lying?" Sukin: What if instead of this I said that ‘there is no place for being ‘unsure’’? When the Buddha to the Kalamas, said to the effect, that “there will be doubt”, he was referring to their reaction to doctrines that were “wrong view”, and not to his own teachings. The Dhamma requiring ‘understanding’ from the very outset opposes doubt, and the latter is said to be one hindrance to development. Indeed doubt is directly related to wrong view, such that with increase in accumulated right view, doubt decreases and is eradicated at Stream Entry at the same time as when wrong view does. The people on DSG do not think that *they* are absolutely right. The rightness refers to the Dhamma as understood by them. Their seeking out to study and discuss is evidence of this. My insistence on being right is a statement in opposition to doubt. In other words, I may be wrong, but doubt will not help me get to the right, only with the arising of panna does this happen. ============ Herman: Apart from the well-known advice, the Buddha also says the following to them: "Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires four assurances in the here-&-now: "'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires. "'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires. "'If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?' This is the third assurance he acquires. "'But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both respects.' This is the fourth assurance he acquires. "One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires these four assurances in the here-&-now." Please note that the Buddha doesn't say There is a world after death, or There isn't a world after death. Please note he doesn't say Evil is done through acting or Evil is not done through acting. Sukin: It appears that you are reading into the Buddha’s words what you like in order to make a point about your own views. ;-) The point the Buddha was making simply, was that a moral life has many positive effects. Even this implies a level of ‘right understanding’, even though one that is not necessarily tied to the one that understand conditionality or kamma / vipakka. I believe in kamma and rebirth, but would not insist that others believe in this too before I can talk about the usefulness of Sila to them. ============== Herman: He doesn't say This view is right or That view is wrong. Being right or wrong, it turns out, is quite irrelevant to a disciple of the noble ones. Sukin: He was “teaching Right View” but wasn’t in a situation where he had to make an affirmation of it. And I wasn’t talking about ‘self-assurance’, but the need to understand right cause and effect and not to waver about it. Metta, Sukin #89312 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha by claiming his lack of clear teaching (suttas) sukinderpal Hi Alex (and Tep), =============== > In any case, if you can at least temporarily, not refer to Suttas, I >think a discussion based on certain basic premises which we both agree >upon, can proceed by way of logic and reason, do you think? Alex: Maybe we shouldn't refer to Buddha's teaching at all, if you don't want to talk about the suttas?!!! Sukin: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha’s teaching you know, and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the Suttas with self view. And I guess that once you begin to accept it as the Buddha’s teachings and understand it truly, your own citing of the Suttas will then be more appropriate and hence agreeable. ;-) ============== Alex: It is slandering the Buddha to claim or imply that somehow the suttas are "too difficult to understand" and that he couldn't have taugh in an easier manner. Sukin: Why do you think the Buddha hesitated as first to teach? Why when he then decided to do so, he had in mind a limited audience and why did he prefer each morning to survey the world in order to find the most suitable of listeners? But by the end of his 45 years of teaching the Dhamma, there were all together quite many who got enlightened and overall they were no ordinary audience. This actually reflects the depth of the message each time doesn’t it? And I doubt that were you and I living around then, the Buddha would seek us out to teach. There were likely many with much better accumulations that also ended up not getting any special attention from the Buddha. So who slanders the Buddha? The one who thinks that the dhamma is deep and hard to understand? Or the one who thinks that any Tom, Dick and Harry can read the Suttas and get on with the practice?! Who slanders the Buddha? The one who in referring to his accumulations finds himself lack in terms of wisdom and the other parami, and in case of reading the “Suttas”, admits to much akusala? Or the one who dismisses the “Abhidhamma” as being Buddha vaccana and refers to the wordling’s, such as scholars and historians, reasoning as basis for the rejection? Who slanders the Buddha? The one who understands that the Buddha took aeons to get enlightened and thinks the Path to be so difficult as to require of him too, aeons of development? Or the one who ignores this fact and the need for accumulated understanding from the past, and insists instead that any Alex, Sukin or Tep can just get on with the practice and in 7days, 7 months or 7 years possibly reach the goal? And btw, my difficulty with the Suttas is not only the depth of the message, but the formulation, language and my conditioned response to books and prospect of having to read long texts. Sure, all this reflects the accumulated akusala, most notably, impatience. However they have nothing to do with underestimating the Buddha’s ability to teach. It so happens that we are talking about “Dhamma” and not neuroscience! Besides my reaction in this regard, has been this way since I was in school and college (my college books remained brand new till final exams). And at present not only do I react this way to the Sutta, but also to the commentaries, Nina’s and A. Sujin’s books. So neither is this anything to do with “avoiding Suttas” for fear of discovering some incongruence with an existing perspective. Also, don’t forget that the various reasons that I gave were with regard to using the Suttas, especially more than one at a time, in arguing points. It was not in reference to “studying” one Sutta at a time or something, to which I would then have expressed an altogether different perspective and attitude. ============= Alex: Regarding logic, it isn't a pure Dhamma approach. Sukin: True, but I did refer to the need to start with basic concepts and this implies “understanding” and the requirement to build from the bottom up. Do you think I would allow my discussion with Tep to go by without trying to understand at least intellectually, each concept used? ============= Alex: Unfortunately some people make illogical & self defeating statements like: "The current interest in Dhamma is due only to the prior interest in the Dhamma". Sukin: I wonder if this is not an example of the Truth being hard to swallow for one while setting another free. Hard to swallow, because the outcome then seems to be not within one’s control. Setting one free, because one is not mindlessly driven by desire and ambition as one otherwise might be. More importantly, the truth must come with detachment! The Dhamma is about “seeing” / understanding Alex, not trying to having a certain attitude and ending up following a practice which results in being deluded that one is then ‘seeing’. Those of us who believe in past accumulations see to some extent, evidence of this in our moment to moment experiences. Your view on the other hand, is based on desire to reach a particular goal in “this very life”, but in fact has nothing to do with understanding anything in the present moment. Metta, Sukin #89313 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha by claiming his lack of clear teaching (suttas) TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/21/2008 7:41:31 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha’s teaching you know, and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the Suttas with self view. And I guess that once you begin to accept it as the Buddha’s teachings and understand it truly, your own citing of the Suttas will then be more appropriate and hence agreeable. ;-) Hi Sukin, Alex As for your first sentence above...no, we don't know...and any real evidence based on history or style would indicate it is not. Its a brilliant analysis however. TG #89314 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha truth_aerator Hi Sukinder and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder >wrote: > Hi Alex (and Tep), > Sukin: Why do you think the Buddha hesitated as first to teach? Because of people who were too engaged in Sensuality and householder stuff and didn't want to become homeless monks living in Caves and forests. > But by the end of his 45 years of teaching the Dhamma, there were >all together quite many who got enlightened and overall they were no > ordinary audience. There were also no Dhamma Books. Most monks knew 100x less than Buddhists today who regualrly read Nikayas. There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. More possibilities for undistracted forest life. > This actually reflects the depth of the message each > time doesn't it? And I doubt that were you and I living around >then, the Buddha would seek us out to teach. There may have been too many people for Buddha to teach. No mass media. Who knows in which worlds (other than human realm) we were. > There were likely many with much > better accumulations that also ended up not getting any special > attention from the Buddha. > > So who slanders the Buddha? > The one who thinks that the dhamma is deep and hard to understand? Yes the Dhamma IS hard to understand in a magga-phala way, to shave off the beard, put on robes and become a Monk who dwelling along and resolute in abandoned caves reaches Arahatship in no long time... >Or the one who thinks that any Tom, Dick and Harry can read the >Suttas and get on with the practice?! Obviously this isn't the case as we see. > Who slanders the Buddha? > The one who in referring to his accumulations finds himself lack in > terms of wisdom and the other parami, Self lowering is a Conceit, you know that. There is this referal to "*my* poor accumulations, *my* lack of wisdom & other paramis". My, my, my, poor me, *I* don't exist (even though it feels to the contrary) - this is conceit. > The one who understands that the Buddha took aeons to get >enlightened He became a Buddhist under Buddha Kassapa, then he was reborn in Tusita Heaven from which his final life was in the Human realm. 3 Lives as a Buddhist. Of course he did a LOT of meditation (such as metta) before and was for many aeons in Brahma planes. But I am not sure how much to count that previous experience. Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta were proficient Meditation masters but didn't have Buddhist "understanding". They could have easily become Arahats, perhaps almost instanteneously if they would hear Buddha. In fact they were the first 2 people whom the Buddha wanted to teach as he was most certain about them. MN26. > and thinks the Path to be so difficult as to require of him too, >aeons of development? >Or the one who ignores this fact and the need for accumulated >understanding from the past, and insists instead that any Alex, >Sukin or Tep can just get on with the practice and in 7days, 7 >months or 7 years possibly reach the goal? > a) You are depriciating the power of Satipatthana and the ha's teaching abilities b) By complaining about your lack of accumulations are you programming yourself to fail EVERY FRIGGIN TIME. When you say "I can't do it" you are always and without fail, absolutely right. You can fully create physical diseases in yourself by conscious suggestions. So by insisting that "I can't do it" you are slowing down your own progress from this Conceit. Change your attitude from: "I can't do it" to "it is easy and can be done" and then you can demolish akusala states from there. >Besides my reaction in this regard, has been this way since I was in >school and college (my college books remained brand new till final >exams). Don't refuse to learn new things > Sukin: True, but I did refer to the need to start with basic >concepts and this implies "understanding" and the requirement to >build from the bottom up. Do you think I would allow my discussion >with Tep to go by without trying to understand at least >intellectually, each concept used? > Here is the thing about basic understanding. It is to be used as a roadmap to train the mind to become disspassionate, liberated and freed. > ============= > Alex: > Unfortunately some people make illogical & self defeating >statements like: "The current interest in Dhamma is due only to the >prior interest in the Dhamma". > > Sukin: I wonder if this is not an example of the Truth being hard >to swallow for one while setting another free. You are running off tangent, completely missing the question. > The Dhamma is about "seeing" / understanding Alex, "As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self- aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.053.than.html Best wishes, You can do it, Alex #89315 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:39 pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma WHICH ONE? truth_aerator To All, > Sukin: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha’s teaching you know, >and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the >Suttas with self view. And I guess that once you begin to accept >it as the Buddhaâ's teachings and understand it truly, your own >citing of the Suttas will then be more appropriate and hence >agreeable. ;-) First, the Theravadin (one of 20 early traditions and the only fully surving one) tradition says that Abhidhamma was taught to Sariputta who then taught other monks. The Abh we have today is not the same long version the Buddha is said (by later commentators) to teach the Devas. There is Theravada, Sarvastivadin Abhidhamma, Dharmaguptaka Sariputrabhidharmasastra (T. 1548), Vajjiputakkas had Abhidhamma of Sariputta. The Abhidharmasammuccaya, The AbhidharmaKosa, Abhidharmakosabhasyam? The MulaMadhymakaKarika of Nagarjuna? Best wishes, Alex #89316 From: "connie" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:59 pm Subject: Re: Slandering the Buddha nichiconn Dear Alex, A: There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. c: Are you saying one or more of the five physical senses and/or their objects didn't exist at the time? peace, connie #89317 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:03 pm Subject: Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. kenhowardau Hi Howard, --------- H: > Of course I could be mistaken, but it was never my impression that Alex took exception to "no self". There is a difference between "no self" and "no person". --------- Ah, that could explain some misunderstandings, thanks. But the way I see it, there is no difference between the two. We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. ------------------------ H: > A person is a changing aggregate of mental and physical phenomena without any lasting or identifying core (i.e., without self) and, unless misunderstood, only conventionally spoken of as an individual. ------------------------ There can be change, but there cannot be a thing that changes. ---------------------------- H: > > I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. All I know for sure is that he believes in a self, which, he says, a meditator should try not to define or think about too much. Howard: > That may or may not be so about the venerable, but what does it have to do with Alex? ------------------------------ Nothing, but try to tell Alex that! :-) (Just joking.) Alex usually criticises me for saying there is no self. But when I accuse Ven T of saying there is a self, Alex criticises me for that too. So which is it to be, self or no self? ------------------------------------ H: > > All suttas teach anatta (no self) and most suttas cannot possibly be interpreted otherwise. Therefore Ven Thanissaro is often forced into some very strained reasoning. If you read your quotes carefully you will see how he tries desperately to leave the way open for his theory that the Buddha was only teaching a not-self strategy. Howard: > Some people think that there is no self in anything, but that no matter how many times one repeats that fact, the sense of self (and even the belief in self) remains in control, and that what is required is a no-self strategy (or strategies) to disabuse one of the affliction of belief in self and (ultimately also) the sense of self. That view is different from one which thinks there might BE a self but it is useful to pretend otherwise, which, IMO, is quite contrary to the Dhamma. I'm not clear on which is the venerable's position, but as for Alex, I never got the impression that his was an atta-view. ----------------------------------------- No, but you have more lenient guidelines than I have. I accuse just about everyone of atta-view. :-) Ken H #89318 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... szmicio Dear Sarah(all) > S: If there's anything you'd like to quote and discuss further, of course I'll be glad to do so. Remember, whatever we read about from any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta. so this remembering about anatta, can condition understanding of nama and rupa? Can you say something about diffrent levels of panja? bye Lukas #89319 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:40 am Subject: Re: Slandering the Buddha indriyabala Dear Connie, - I read your reply below and thought that it sounded so familiar. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > A: There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. > > c: Are you saying one or more of the five physical senses and/or their objects didn't exist at the time? > > peace, > connie > This is familiar to the previous question you asked me about 'sati'. > > Connie (#88819) : I'd guess 'asati' here is 'without'... not partaking of. As far as sati, whether it's a power or a faculty, isn't it still sati? Tep === #89320 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:48 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma WHICH ONE? indriyabala Dear Alex (Sukin), - I think there is something important missing in your reply , Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > To All, > > > Sukin: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha’s teaching you know, > >and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the > >Suttas with self view. And I guess that once you begin to accept > >it as the Buddhaâ's teachings and understand it truly, your own > >citing of the Suttas will then be more appropriate and hence > >agreeable. ;-) > > First, the Theravadin (one of 20 early traditions and the only > fully surving one) tradition says that Abhidhamma was taught to > Sariputta who then taught other monks. The Abh we have today is not > the same long version the Buddha is said (by later commentators) to > teach the Devas. > > There is Theravada, Sarvastivadin Abhidhamma, Dharmaguptaka > Sariputrabhidharmasastra (T. 1548), Vajjiputakkas had Abhidhamma of > Sariputta. The Abhidharmasammuccaya, The AbhidharmaKosa, > Abhidharmakosabhasyam? The MulaMadhymakaKarika of Nagarjuna? > > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > T: Did you forget the "DhammaStudyGroup Abhidhamma"? Tep === #89321 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 2:22 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 7, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, When sati arises, it is mindful of the present reality, appearing through one of the six doors. However, because of our ignorance we may easily mislead ourselves. We may think that there is awareness of the present object when we are actually thinking about it with attachment, aversion and ignorance. For example, there may be impact of hardness or softness on the bodysense. Instead of studying these characteristics I found myself thinking of the places where the impact occurred. This shows that there was no sati, only thinking about the body, about concepts. When there is mindfulness of hardness, only that characteristic appears and no other object is experienced at that moment. There is no “place of impact” in the hardness, no body in the hardness. Our ignorance and clinging can be known and then we can be reminded immediately to study the present reality, even if it is clinging. I looked at the colourful saris the ladies were wearing and I noticed that lobha arose as soon as I looked. I was watching “my lobha”. Thinking about one’s lobha or watching it is not mindfulness of its characteristic. Once, while I was eating and enjoying my food, Khun Sujin asked me whethere there was mindfulness. I said: “Lobha”, without being mindful of its characteristic. Khun Sujin reminded me that lobha has its own characteeistic and that it can be directly known when it appears. In that way it can be realized as only an element, not self. There is no need to think about it or to name it. Someone remarked that one should practise satipatthåna methodically, otherwise there would not be any result. If one tries to be mindful according to a certain method, who is trying? There is a concept of self who tries to direct sati to a particular object. That is thinking, not mindfulness. We never know whether attachment, anger, seeing or doubt will arise, or whatever other reality. How can we then direct sati or follow a certain method? Sati is not self, it arises only when there are the right conditions for its arising. “If sati does not arise, nobody can be aware at that moment”, Khun Sujin said. Do we still believe that we can control sati? If one tries very hard to have sati, one will become tense, it will not be of any help. One of the monks remarked that he found it such a relief that one does not have to try to make sati arise. The present reality is here, now. Only study is necessary in order to know it. We obstruct the arising of sati if we think that we have to sit in a room and practise methodically. Inside the room and outside there are only seeing, hearing, hardness and other realities appearing one at a time, through the six doors. Khun Sujin said that at this moment of seeing, hearing or thinking we should have the courage to find out whether there is awareness of the present reality or not yet. Seeing is real, it sees. Visible object is real. It is different from seeing. These objects should be studied in our daily life, during our activities, so that they can be known as they are. ****** Nina. #89322 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight ... Discssion with Sukin with No Suttas.. indriyabala Dear Sukin, - This message concludes my reply to your message #89266, 8/20/2008. In response to my complaint about your "mischaracterization" that any statement I ever made "is not useful to anyone", you referred back to a conversation I had earlier with Sarah. [Hmm.. Sarah possibly turned to you again for help.] Suk:> I was thinking only about some particular instances, for example: - Sarah's "flip-flopping". Here I thought that I understood her and saw no change of positions on her part, though I did think also, that you saw as you did as a result of wrong reading of her statements. - In the post I initially responded to where you said: "I wish that they drop the view 'Only this is right'". Here I thought that you simply attached a statement made by the Buddha in a different situation to one that you saw existing here. T: Have you checked the evidence that I produced in order to prove her flip-flopping on mindfulness? The statement 'Only this is right' applies very well to the persistently consistent view about no-self/not-self, no Buddha, no teachings, no practices, no puggalas, no kamma/actions -- all these -- that I have heard from the prominent DSG members, including you. .............................. Suk:> And there have been other cases as well, which I don't think necessary to cite. Apart from this however and anything else which I perceive to be `wrong understanding', I do think that you have contributed positively, be this directly or indirectly. T: Sure, even a "wrong understanding" CAN be a positive contribution, if its drawbacks are identified and accepted. This statement applies to the fault-finders/accusers as well. ......................................................... >Suk: The Suttas can be interpreted in any number of ways depending on the view. - I consider quoting Suttas to be of value only when both sides more or less agree, in which case the person who gets to read it, his understanding then increases. However when it is used to substantiate one's own belief and attempt to prove the other wrong, given as above that the Suttas can be interpreted in more than one way, this then becomes ineffective. - Sometimes such practice is seen as amounting to an "appeal to authority" and not on "understanding" and any reasoning based thereof. - Some Suttas refer to truths which apply to those with greater understanding, therefore sometimes when we quote it to make a point about our understanding, it does not quite apply. T: Not unlike any valuable referenced materials, to be highly beneficial the suttas must be wisely studied and wisely applied. Wrong interpretations, and when there are several ways to interpret the suttas, do not cause a damage, unless there is an attachment to "my interpretation" and conceit that "mine" is better than "yours". Good students with great saddha always learn with open- mindedness that helps them to re-study and research the suttas a few more times until they get much a better understanding. Practicing in accordance with the Teachings that one has learned from the suttas, is extremely important for errors correction and reduction of wrong views to become wiser in the Dhamma. .......................................................... >Suk: - Sometimes as in other's discussions with you, what is being asked is for example, whether "panna" is not needed from the very outset. You, not believing in this but instead your so-called "sequential step by step practice" of Sila > Samadhi > Panna, by citing a Sutta which refer to panna of a higher level, namely "indriya", make the discussions more difficult to proceed. - Often in quoting Suttas which talk about things that don't apply to the point of discussion, the Buddha then becomes a shield against our own views being exposed and questioned. T: I appreciate the feedback, Sukin. But the real difficulty was not only due to "my way" of consistently referring to the suttas on panna or any topic. It was difficult because the "other side" consistently rejected all sutta evidences that I had produced to demonstrate the sequencial developments in Buddhism. >Suk: But I have no deep desire to convince you or anyone. Besides life is too short to be seeking out to debate and you may think the same too, so no problem if you don't want to risk this. :-) T: You have done a better job than others in explaining your position and pointing out my faults (at least from where you stand) effectively. Thus I forsee no risk in discussing the Dhamma with you, Sukin. Indeed, I look forward to future suttas-free Dhamma conversations with you; it CAN be fun. Kung-Fu masters do not carry weapons. Sincerely, Tep === #89323 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/22/2008 1:03:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, --------- H: > Of course I could be mistaken, but it was never my impression that Alex took exception to "no self". There is a difference between "no self" and "no person". --------- Ah, that could explain some misunderstandings, thanks. But the way I see it, there is no difference between the two. We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: And I think you are just plain wrong with regard to the two preceding paragraphs. (So there!! ;-)) Look at what Alex posted yesterday: And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) In particular, look at "There is ... no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view." The Buddha speaks of people here, and he says that it is WRONG VIEW to consider that there are none such. That should NOT be dismissed due to one's preferred view. (But the Buddha would also certainly say that there is no self to be found in any of these people or in any of the fleeting phenomena of which they are just dynamic assemblages. ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ H: > A person is a changing aggregate of mental and physical phenomena without any lasting or identifying core (i.e., without self) and, unless misunderstood, only conventionally spoken of as an individual. ------------------------ There can be change, but there cannot be a thing that changes. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! And what sort of paramattha dhamma is change?! --------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- H: > > I am not an expert on Thanissaro's teaching, nor do I want to be. All I know for sure is that he believes in a self, which, he says, a meditator should try not to define or think about too much. Howard: > That may or may not be so about the venerable, but what does it have to do with Alex? ------------------------------ Nothing, but try to tell Alex that! :-) (Just joking.) Alex usually criticises me for saying there is no self. But when I accuse Ven T of saying there is a self, Alex criticises me for that too. So which is it to be, self or no self? ------------------------------------ H: > > All suttas teach anatta (no self) and most suttas cannot possibly be interpreted otherwise. Therefore Ven Thanissaro is often forced into some very strained reasoning. If you read your quotes carefully you will see how he tries desperately to leave the way open for his theory that the Buddha was only teaching a not-self strategy. Howard: > Some people think that there is no self in anything, but that no matter how many times one repeats that fact, the sense of self (and even the belief in self) remains in control, and that what is required is a no-self strategy (or strategies) to disabuse one of the affliction of belief in self and (ultimately also) the sense of self. That view is different from one which thinks there might BE a self but it is useful to pretend otherwise, which, IMO, is quite contrary to the Dhamma. I'm not clear on which is the venerable's position, but as for Alex, I never got the impression that his was an atta-view. ----------------------------------------- No, but you have more lenient guidelines than I have. I accuse just ( about everyone of atta-view. :-) --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, hey, it's always nice to have a hobby! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------- Ken H ======================== With metta, Howard #89324 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:44 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream abhidhammika Dear Scott D, Nina, Sarah, Bob K, Jon, Mike N, Howard, Herman, connie, Alex, Phil, How are you? Scott wrote and wondered: "Scott: In the PTS PED I read, in relation to 'cittaani' (said to be a plural nominative): "...in scholastic works=thoughts, e. g. Vbh 403 (satta cittaani)." Do you mean the term in the sense of 'thoughts' when you refer to 'kusalacittaani' and 'akusalacittaani'? If so, are we dealing with conceptual wholes when we consider the dream - i.e., the 'dream story' - or are we remaining at the level of the moment of consciousness and the subsequent javanas? (This reminds me of the Freudian distinction between the manifest and the latent content of a dream, but I don't mean to apply such a distinction literally of course and suggest a theoretical equivalence)." Suan replied: No, Scott, I do not mean the term in the sense of `thoughts'. As I wrote in my original post, Putthujjanas support both healthy consciousness events (kusalacittaani) and unhealthy consciousness events (akusalacittaani) in their dreams. So, as you put it, we are remaining at the level of healthy consciousness events (kusalacituppaadaa) or at the level of unhealthy consciousness events (akusalacituppaadaa). I think "satta cittaani" you quoted as `thoughts' come from Chapter 18 Dhammahadayavibhanga, in Vibhanga Pali. The original Pali passage is as follows. 990. Tattha katamaani satta cittaani? Cakkhuviññaa.nam, sotaviññaa.nam, ghaanaviññaa.nam, jivhaaviññaa.nam, kaayaviññaa.nam, manodhaatu, manoviññaa.nadhaatu – imaani vuccanti "satta cittaani". We could translate the above Pali nicely like this. 990. There, what are seven mental events or seven consciousness events? Visual consciousness, auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, taste consciousness, tactile consciousness, mental element, and mental consciousness element – these are called seven consciousness events. You will notice that I have not used the term `thoughts' in translating the above Vibhanga Pali passage. Why was that so? That is because translating cakkhuviññaa.nam as visual consciousness is better than translating it as visual thought. Then, this must mean that translating `satta cittaani' as seven consciousness events is better than translating that phrase as seven thoughts. Scott also asked: "Scott: I am unfamiliar with such terms as 'precursor of awakening' or 'periphery of awakening'. Might you be able to provide textual support and Paa.li translations for these terms?" Suan replied: As part of my rare indulgence in attanomati (personal opinions, personal speculation), I made up those expressions, namely, `precursor of awakening' and 'periphery of awakening'. So, at this stage, I am unable to provide textual support and Pali translations for those creative efforts. Scott also wrote: "Again, I'm not into polemical debates, I just wish to consider these (interesting) ideas, which don't seem to fit my understanding (limited) of 'awakening'. I've not heard that there can be mental events which can be categorised as 'precursors'. I've understood that the Path arises in sequence, but that it does so only once for each of the four 'levels'. Those moments leading up to the arising of the Path, but during the sequence proper, might be called 'precursors' but then I've not read where these can arise prior to and separate from the entire sequence." Suan replied: What you wrote above is fair and reasonable. But, I was using dreams as the context of my speculation. I was not discussing the actual processes of awakening. If my attanomati (personal opinions, personal speculation) for the phenomena of dreams confused you, please disregard them. Scott also wrote: "What you speculate about here sounds to me very much like the Zen notions of 'kensho' or 'satori', which don't seem to have an equivalent within the Theravada tradition." Suan replied: My speculation was offered only in the context of the phenomena of dreams, so, I am afraid, it may not do justice to those Zen notions which may have been understood by the Zen practitioners in the context of waking moments. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #89325 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Root Cause of Ignorance ... nilovg Dear Tep and friends, Tomorrow I go away for about four days. I will be back on line next week Friday. Tep, thank you for the quote, very appropriate. Indeed ignorance has conditions, and we cannot trace back when the hindrances arose for the first time. But it is important to understand conditions and we are confronted now with the hindrances and with ignorance. Nina. Op 21-aug-2008, om 21:35 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > § 125. A beginning point for ignorance — [such that one might > say], 'Before this, ignorance did not exist; then it came into play' > — cannot be discerned. This has been said. Nevertheless, it can be > discerned, 'Ignorance comes from this condition.' And I tell you, > ignorance has its nutriment. It is not without nutriment. And what is > the nutriment for ignorance? The five hindrances... #89326 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... nilovg Dear Lukas, Sarah is traveling and may not answer immediately. I try to add something, but I will be off tomorrow for a few days. Op 22-aug-2008, om 8:57 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > S: If there's anything you'd like to quote and discuss further, of > course I'll be glad to do so. Remember, whatever we read about from > any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta. > > so this remembering about anatta, can condition understanding of nama > and rupa? > Can you say something about diffrent levels of panja? -------- N: Yes it can. Clinging to self is deeply rooted and it is good to know when the clinging to 'I' arises. As Sarah said, 'whatever we read about from any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta.' In this light you could read again what I wrote in Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka: We have to remember that sati is not self, otherwise we go the wrong way. When we have right understanding of sati as not self there are condiitons for correct understanding of nama and rupa that appear one at a time and that are only dhammas which are anatta. In my previous post to you I tried to explain the levels of pa~n~naa. We should not despise the beginning level. If there is a right beginning pa~n~naa can grow. Nina. #89327 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:58 am Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions truth_aerator Dear Connie and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" >wrote: > Dear Alex, > > A: There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. > > c: Are you saying one or more of the five physical senses and/or >their objects didn't exist at the time? > > peace, > connie Connie, you got to be joking. Right? If not, Please forgive me if I don't reply to your posts in the future. If some people in full seriousness do not understand, then let me explain. In the Buddha's time there were no newspapers. No loud and noisy cars. No TV, no radio. No heavy construction equipment happening. There were no Pop magazines in the markets. The beatifying products were not as good as today's. The population was much smaller and there were more clean forests available. The lay householders could feed forest moments who made their way into a town near the forest. The food wasn't contaminated with modern chemicals, hormones and so on, and thus was much more healthier. At initial stages of Buddha's teaching there weren't monasteries at all (and NO vinaya), they came later, when many more monks joined. We don't quite have such an opportunity in most countries, do we (except when ordaining, and even then there are some restrictions)? Best wishes, Alex #89328 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Root Cause of Ignorance ... truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Indeed ignorance has conditions... But it is important to understand >conditions and we are confronted now with the hindrances and with >ignorance. > Nina. It is crucial that we also abandon those conditions leading to 5 hindrances and to Avijja. Best wishes, Alex #89329 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions nilovg Dear Alex (and Connie), Op 22-aug-2008, om 18:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > A: There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. > > > > c: Are you saying one or more of the five physical senses and/or > >their objects didn't exist at the time? > > > > peace, > > connie > > Connie, you got to be joking. Right? If not, Please forgive me if I > don't reply to your posts in the future. ------- N: Daer Alex, Connie is not joking, she gave a very deep answer, worth considering. No matter where one is, in a forest or before the T.V., please consider: are there impressions other than those through the senses and the mind-door? The Buddha spoke about these time and again. Even when in a forest, there are distractions caused by one's own defilements. Thoughts of lobha, dosa and moha coming up, they are conditioned, anatta. I now have to close off my Email because tomorrow I leave. I did not mean to debate. Nina. #89330 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Root Cause of Ignorance ... Show Me How ... indriyabala Dear Alex and all, I have a few tough questions for you to kindly consider. > >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > >Indeed ignorance has conditions... But it is important to > >understand conditions and we are confronted now with the > >hindrances and with ignorance. > > Nina. > > Alex: It is crucial that we also abandon those conditions leading to 5 hindrances and to Avijja. > T: Can the conditions be abandoned and, if they can, then can you kindly suggest in your own words (not simply give several sutta quotes without your own interpretations) how they may be "abandoned"? More importantly, have you been sucessful in abandoning hindrances in daily living? If so, then could you please tell me how do you know that you have been successful (not imagining)? These questions are not asked to irritate; they are asked in order that other people who have not yet "practiced" the Dhamma may become motivated to start it soon. Tep === #89331 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:52 pm Subject: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' indriyabala Hi Kenh, Sukin, Sarah (Attn: Alex, Howard), - It is important to see the BIG difference between 'no self' and 'no individual' as Howard points out today (message #89323): H: > Of course I could be mistaken, but it was never my impression that Alex took exception to "no self". There is a difference between "no self" and "no person". --------- [KenH:] Ah, that could explain some misunderstandings, thanks. But the way I see it, there is no difference between the two. We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: And I think you are just plain wrong with regard to the two preceding paragraphs. (So there!! ;-)) Look at what Alex posted yesterday: And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) In particular, look at "There is ... no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view." The Buddha speaks of people here, and he says that it is WRONG VIEW to consider that there are none such. That should NOT be dismissed due to one's preferred view. (But the Buddha would also certainly say that there is no self to be found in any of these people or in any of the fleeting phenomena of which they are just dynamic assemblages. ----------------------------------------------------- T: The Buddha made it very clear when there was a 'self'; when there was no self; and also when the anatta dhamma 'not self' in nama- rupa/khandhas/ayatanas should be contemplated. We have to be wise with appropriate attention to the Dhamma; otherwise, we shall be confused. The two cases below should be carefully studied. (I) Self as Individual or person (in Buddha's own words) : 'Attaa hi attano naatho, ko hi naatho paro siyaa. Attanaa hi sudantena, naatham labhati dullabham.' "One indeed is one's own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one? With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can reach a refuge which is so difficult to attain." --------------------------------------- (II) A Not-self Contemplation Strategy for Abandoning the Self View (as told by the Lord Buddha): 'Cakkhum aniccato vavattheti no niccato, dukkhato vavattheti no sukhato, anattato vavattheti no attato, nibbindati no nandati, virajjati no rajjati, nirodheti no samudeti, patinissajjati no aadaayati.' "He defines the eye as impermanent, not as permanent; he defines it as painful, not as pleasant; he defines it as not self, not as self; he becomes dispassionate, he does not delight; he causes the fading of greed, he does not inflame it; he causes cessation, he does not originate; he relinquishes, he does not grasp. ....................................... What can be made clearer than the above Buddha's words? Sincerely, Tep === #89332 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions truth_aerator Dear Nina, Connie and all, Are there more possibilities for defilements to arise in a busy mall, or in a fairly empty forest? Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex (and Connie), > > Op 22-aug-2008, om 18:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > A: There were not as many sensual distractions as we have today. > > > > > > c: Are you saying one or more of the five physical senses and/or > > >their objects didn't exist at the time? > > > > > > peace, > > > connie > > > > Connie, you got to be joking. Right? If not, Please forgive me if I > > don't reply to your posts in the future. > ------- > N: Daer Alex, Connie is not joking, she gave a very deep answer, > worth considering. No matter where one is, in a forest or before the > T.V., please consider: are there impressions other than those through > the senses and the mind-door? The Buddha spoke about these time and > again. Even when in a forest, there are distractions caused by one's > own defilements. Thoughts of lobha, dosa and moha coming up, they are > conditioned, anatta. > I now have to close off my Email because tomorrow I leave. I did not > mean to debate. > Nina. > #89333 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 3:26 pm Subject: Is the Abhidhamma Reading Free from Self View? indriyabala Hi Sukin (Alex and others), - >Suk: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha's teaching you know, and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the Suttas with self view. T: That is an interesting twist! Why is the Abhidhamma (Pitaka, or other versions?) easier than the Suttanta Pitaka? But I think the Suttas are less complicated because there is only one version of the Theravada Pali Cannon. BTW What do you mean by "reading the Suttas with self view? Do you imply that reading the "Abhidhamma" is fool-proof from a self view (Self Demon)? Why? Tep === Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (72) #89334 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Root Cause of Ignorance ... Show Me How ... truth_aerator Dear Tep, and all > Dear Alex and all, > T: Can the conditions be abandoned and, if they can, then can you > kindly suggest in your own words (not simply give several sutta > quotes without your own interpretations) how they may >be "abandoned"? 1) The quicker you recognize and remember that hindrance has appeared, the more chances there is to tranquilize its further proliferation 2) ASAP relax body&mind (kaya-citta sankhara), thus making the mind more content and crave less for distractions of various sorts. 3)Return back to the object of meditation. In other words redirect attention to the meditation object. Keep relaxing everything. Tension is sort of protectiveness, possessivness, clinging and not letting go of something. By relaxing and giving up squeezing something, you give up (temporary) latent atta-clinging. When you are tense, even slightly, there is this slight protectiveness of something... Observe that. Note, one can be tense even while reading, subconsciously grabbing "ones body here" as opposed to things or information "out there". > More importantly, have you been sucessful in abandoning hindrances >in daily living? Sometimes. Definately in a sitting on the cushion, doing sitting practice. > If so, then could you please tell me how do you know > that you have been successful (not imagining)? Incredible peace. (very) Slightly rocking body(?). Bliss & happiness. Disappearing body & pain. Lack of solid orientation. More infinite black space...Incredible state. Best wishes, Alex #89335 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Root Cause of Ignorance ... Show Me How ... indriyabala Dear Alex (and others), - Based on what you have explained, it seems that the five hindrances are temporary suppressed through Anapanasati while you are sitting on a cushion. Without depending on the power of samatha, have you ever dwelled without the five hindrances, during a normal life, through Satipatthana bhavana? [It is certainly viable.] Thank you for the explanation. Tep === #89336 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions scottduncan2 Dear All, A: "Are there more possibilities for defilements to arise in a busy mall, or in a fairly empty forest?" Scott: Yes. Sincerely, Scott. #89337 From: "colette" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:35 am Subject: Re: Melatonin vs. Seratonin, now that's a conflict huh? ksheri3 "The sight of a touch The scent of a sound" the Moddy Blues Good Morning connie, I was using the new keyboard my roomates got for their computer this morning when it suddenly shut down, they baught this funky keyboard at this computer store that has this tiny backspace key right next to a key that controls the power for the system, it'll take time to get used to. I started by cognizing the way you introduced your participation: > howdy, colette, > colette: RED FLAG! I bet there are a few IEDs in this post. This is a Relative Truth since there is a large amount, percentage, of people that are effected by both the Relatvie and Ultimate Truths in that their lives (existances) completely depend on the acceptance and obedience to the falsehoods they portray as being truths i.e. smoke & mirrors, or simply snake oil salesmen. With this a foundation we can continue. I also made it clear that I am too deep into Nargarjuna at this time and cannot possibly walk away from this cognition that's just laying there on the shoulder of the path, on the wayside (notice I DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY apply that word, "wayside", as a way of showing the complete Miss Direction and Miss Information which the Western christian, judeaist, and muslim will adhere to, as a means of misleading and misdirecting the believers that rely upon them for guidence), just laying there on the shoulder, wayside, begging for COGNITION. > colette: why do you take Buddhism so lightly and trivially? > connie: reckon that depends on what I'm supposed to be thinking "Buddhism" is. > colette: YES, indeed this is true. But, are you really supposed to be thinking that Buddhism is anything OTHER THAN a guide, a vehicle, that can leed to the sucation of suffering and to the arising of enlightenment? Mulamadhyamakakarika: "For a brief example of each, we may consider that the modern Theravadins have represented the text as a mere recapitulation of early Buddhist anatman-theory (i.e. the Buddha's rejection of a transcendent self), various Mahayana schools have regarded the text as the basis for their metaphysics (as with the Yogacara in India, or the Hua-Yen in China), and the Prasangika school (led by Candrakirti) regarded the Mulamadhyamakakarike as a definitive manual on method, allowing of little in the way of further development and taking little interest in text's sources in the Sravaka Sutras." "The Theravadan interpretation, on the other hand (which has come to prominece only recently) suggests that Nagarjuna neither inteded to preclude metaphysics (with a perfect system of reasoning) nor to found a new system of thought. The purpose of this text, so this argument goes, was to counteract certain misinterpretations that had sprung up around the Buddha's original teaching of anatman (literally 'no soul' or 'no self')." We can find this in the many denominations of christianity and only recently in the flowering versions of judeaism, but most starkly seen in the divisions between the Sunni and the Shia muslims. ------------------------ > > we don't understanding what motivates our behaviour and it's > implications. Past kamma, by not remembering... and again, not > really understanding what we do recall. > > > > colette: here it seems that you are trying to use/apply words to > avoid one of the first and most foundational Buddhist precepts: > IGNORNACE. <.....> > > connie: i think i was trying to use the words you had used. Ignorance of what, though? > colette: lets start with something simple (always rely on the K.I.S.S. principle -- Keep It Simple Stupid) the IGNORANCE that IGNORANCE EXISTS! The complete failure on/of the individuals to cognize that IGNORANCE EXISTS is without a doubt the most blatant of all booby-traps that exist on The Path. I dare ya to mix the chemical compositions of the "Ignorance of Ignorance" with the deliberate and intentional behavior of "going along to get along" on the ASS-U-MPTION that the "receiver" of a message from a "sender" fully understands and comprehends the duplicity found within the message. <...> -------------------------- > colette: I take it "insecurity" and "uncertainty" are the active > words here. > > connie: I took them mean anyone could drop dead at any time. > colette: thank you for saying what I was also trying to say and suggest through my application of a bathtub filled with water. ----------------------------- > colette: What exactly is RISK MANAGEMENT? > > connie: dunno and don't particularly care. colette: FALSE! Do not try to con me or the group. You do care. Youd do worry about it. You have simply developed a system of life which allows you to possess blindness as to it's presence and functioning. --------------------- i doubt there is such a thing. > colette: jeeze, just rationalization for a false statement. On the Ultimate level, however, I agree that there is no risk since it's all karma, D.O., and our friend, CAUSE & EFFECT. Thanks for the reply. toodles, colette #89338 From: "connie" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:05 pm Subject: Re: Melatonin vs. Seratonin, now that's a conflict huh? nichiconn my dear colette: I dare ya to mix the chemical compositions of the "Ignorance of Ignorance" with the deliberate and intentional behavior of "going along to get along" on the ASS-U-MPTION that the "receiver" of a message from a "sender" fully understands and comprehends the duplicity found within the message. <...> connie: and i double dare ya!! unless and until we are knower's of other minds. but even then, who is interested most of the time? or interesting, for that matter. we're already bound by our own past and present dupedness. We can drag in the rest of the wheel, but my arrogance assumes we agree. why should i bother to rope you into my fantasies - better we poor fellers recognize we're all falling in the same old ways and there's something called sadhamma that beats our bluffs and blunders. I guess that's the real risk management material. on a personal note, i wrote my friend about you. she also did the daddy's caddy trip. there must be some bleed over to you of my affection for her. not that it might be worth much, but one never knows. nor should it be a concern. and here, what might be my duplicity: i do tend to skate on thin metta at times and at others, there is none. but the risk of friendship is in following the wrong ones. and who do we hold more dear than ourselves? anyway, cheri - toodles, connie. ps. re: subject line. most humourous, indeed. I like that the bodily humours are called dosas. #89339 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:06 pm Subject: Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----------- <. . .> KH: > >We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. Howard: > And I think you are just plain wrong with regard to the two preceding paragraphs. The Buddha speaks of people here, and he says that it is WRONG VIEW to consider that there are none such. That should NOT be dismissed due to one's preferred view. (But the Buddha would also certainly say that there is no self to be found in any of these people or in any of the fleeting phenomena of which they are just dynamic assemblages. --------------------- It pains me to use the term, dynamic assemblages, :-) but I must ask; do dynamic assemblages feel pain? Are they given birth to? Do they grow old and die? If they die are they reborn? Are they not reborn? Are they both reborn and not reborn? Are they neither reborn nor not reborn. I think you can see what I am getting at, but these are serious questions all the same. Ken H #89340 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha sukinderpal Hi Alex, Just two points I want to comment on and would like then to make this the last for now. Hope you don’t mind. =============== Suk: > Who slanders the Buddha? > The one who in referring to his accumulations finds himself lack in > terms of wisdom and the other parami, Alex: Self lowering is a Conceit, you know that. There is this referal to "*my* poor accumulations, *my* lack of wisdom & other paramis". My, my, my, poor me, *I* don't exist (even though it feels to the contrary) - this is conceit. S:> Alex, you have often defended your own use of “I” as being merely a conventional designation. Note my above statement. It says nothing about comparison with another person’s accumulation. In referring to “his” accumulations, this is used only conventionally to point to a set of akusala dhammas repeatedly observed, some of which are even seen as being hindrance to understanding. The kusala dhammas on the other hand, such as ‘wisdom’ are seen as being very weak in terms of frequency and by virtue of the fact of what one understands a more developed level to be like. ================= Suk: > and thinks the Path to be so difficult as to require of him too, >aeons of development? >Or the one who ignores this fact and the need for accumulated >understanding from the past, and insists instead that any Alex, >Sukin or Tep can just get on with the practice and in 7days, 7 >months or 7 years possibly reach the goal? Alex: a) You are depriciating the power of Satipatthana and the ha's teaching abilities b) By complaining about your lack of accumulations are you programming yourself to fail EVERY FRIGGIN TIME. When you say "I can't do it" you are always and without fail, absolutely right. You can fully create physical diseases in yourself by conscious suggestions. So by insisting that "I can't do it" you are slowing down your own progress from this Conceit. Change your attitude from: "I can't do it" to "it is easy and can be done" and then you can demolish akusala states from there. S:> Satipatthana is the N8FP, and this is taught only during the Buddha sasana once every few aoens. No other Dhamma comes close to being useful in ending suffering, not even the highest Jhanas. So indeed I have great respect for satipatthana and in its power to liberate beings from samsara. Unlike you however, I do not give it any magical power. Like all kusala dhammas, it begins from a very weak level and accumulates very gradually before there can be any real change. More than any other kind of kusala however, this particular dhamma has to wade through a most powerful and limitless counter force, namely “ignorance” and so more than any of the other parami, this one is extremely difficult to develop. In other words, we are talking about the Middle Way, which is most subtle and hard to see, unlike other forms of kusala, which by comparison are much easier to recognize and hence develop. Don’t worry about my ‘negative thinking’ Alex, I don’t believe in the power of “thought” to make any difference in terms of accumulated tendencies to kusala or akusala. As I said, the Dhamma is about “seeing” and not a matter of holding a particular attitude, so no this or that strategy either. It is more about “View”. Only Right View allows one to look in the right direction, and once this is established, no kind of negative or positive thinking will make any difference. On the other hand, Wrong View is looking in the wrong direction, but even here, the thinking, positive or negative which follows, this is more or less only incidental. I think it is you who is doing himself a disservice in thinking so superficially about the Dhamma. Last word to you. Metta, Sukin #89341 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:09 am Subject: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' indriyabala Hi Kenh, Sukin, Sarah (Attn: Alex, Howard), - It is important to see the BIG difference between 'no self' and 'no individual' as Howard points out today. (Message #89323): H: > Of course I could be mistaken, but it was never my impression that Alex took exception to "no self". There is a difference between "no self" and "no person". --------- Ken H: Ah, that could explain some misunderstandings, thanks. But the way I see it, there is no difference between the two. We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: And I think you are just plain wrong with regard to the two preceding paragraphs. (So there!! ;-)) Look at what Alex posted yesterday: And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html) In particular, look at "There is ... no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view." The Buddha speaks of people here, and he says that it is WRONG VIEW to consider that there are none such. That should NOT be dismissed due to one's preferred view. (But the Buddha would also certainly say that there is no self to be found in any of these people or in any of the fleeting phenomena of which they are just dynamic assemblages. ----------------------------------------------------- T: The Buddha made it very clear when there was a (fleeting) 'self' and when there was no (permanent)self; also He made it clear when 'not self' in nama-rupa/khandhas/ayatanas should be contemplated. We have to pay wise attention to the Dhamma. I) Self in the Sense of Individual /Oneself (in Buddha's own words) : --------------------------------------- 'Attaa hi attano naatho, ko hi naatho paro siyaa. Attanaa hi sudantena, naatham labhati dullabham.' "One indeed is one's own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one? With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can reach a refuge which is so difficult to attain." II) A Not-self Strategy of Contemplation (as told by the Lord Buddha): -------------------------------------- 'Cakkhum aniccato vavattheti no niccato, dukkhato vavattheti no sukhato, anattato vavattheti no attato, nibbindati no nandati, virajjati no rajjati, nirodheti no samudeti, patinissajjati no aadaayati.' "He defines the eye as impermanent, not as permanent; he defines it as painful, not as pleasant; he defines it as not self, not as self; he becomes dispassionate, he does not delight; he causes the fading of greed, he does not inflame it; he causes cessation, he does not originate; he relinquishes, he does not grasp. ....................................... What can be made clearer than the above Buddha's words? Thank you Alex and Howard for trying again and again and AGAIN; but your effort is NOT fruitfull simply because the other side clings to the inflexible & extreme view 'ONLY THIS IS RIGHT'. Sincerely, Tep === #89342 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta jonoabb Hi Alex Apologies to you (and others) for the delay in replying. First batch coming up (the rest later). > Other teachings also may say: "Just study and consider our texts". So > studying and considering by itself is not unique to Buddhism. Correct. "Studying and considering" is not unique to Buddhism (although the development of the path I have been talking about is not a matter of "studying and considering"; we've been through this before!) > > But this has nothing to do with our discussion, does it? > > It does. What is the difference between lets say studying, > considering & trying to apply Abh vs Talmud (for example)? There you go again: "studying, considering & trying to apply". Not what I've been talking about. > I know that Buddhist teaching is da best, but one of the reasons for > that is that it has extra things up its sleaves... :) The goal of the Buddhist teaching is quite different from the goal of any other teaching. > Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta were the two people whom Buddha > wanted to teach the first, since they could understand it. They had > very little, if any, Buddhist Panna. But they did have lots of > Samadhi-Bhavana... I don't know of any basis for the assertion that "Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta had very little, if any, Buddhist Panna". Since they didn't hear any Dhamma in that lifetime, there was no opportunity for accumulated panna to manifest. My recollection of this incident is that the sutta says the Buddha considered who would be most open to receive the teaching and determined that those 2 would be (had they still been in a realm where the teachings could be received). > The samadhi is proximate condition of "seeing things as they are" in > that sutta. Please don't conviniently leave that out. Yes, but you are contending that the samadhi in question is the samadhi that accompanies the development of samatha/jhana, whereas that is not specified in the sutta. In any event, we need to understand what is meant by "proximate condition". Consider this in connection with all the factors in the list. > > Again, you are relying on an inference, namely, an inference drawn > > from the order in which the indriyas are dealt with. > > I've given them, the MN70 sutta, the indriya samyutta... You are relying on an inference rather than an express statement. > There are some things listening&considering can't accomplish, > > For the rest of us there is Jhana... Yes, I realise that this is how you see things. But from our discussions to date it seems that this is based on inferences drawn from various suttas, rather than on express statements of doctrine. Jon #89343 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:27 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! jonoabb Hi Alex > In the MN2 there are specific instructions: > Asavas "abandoned by seeing, by restraining, by using, by tolerating, > by destroying, by developing." You had asked me to talk about the development of kusala, not about the abandoning of the asavas. The development of kusala is possible regardless of the strength or level of the asavas. To my understanding, the reference in MN2 to abandonment *by seeing* is a reference to abandonment by the development of awareness/insight. > The nature of those isn't "become wise by doing nothing", Agreed, there is no teaching of *becoming wise by doing nothing*. The teaching is about the development of wisdom. Wisdom, as a kusala mental factor, develops by being nurtured when it arises. > Oh, and reflections: "I have no self... Am I not?" are WRONG > reflections. Sorry, but I don't see the significance of this to our discussion. I haven't mentioned any such reflection as "I have no self... Am I not?" (in fact, I'm not sure what you mean by that). Jon #89344 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:28 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! jonoabb Hi Tep > T: That kind of undeveloped insight, that is not well supported by > samadhi, is like a few drops of water that evaporate quickly. The > water drops do not have a chance to accumulate, unlike heavy > rainfalls (analogous to developed & strong insight knowledges) that > can fill up lakes and rivers. I agree that weak insight develops more slowly than well-developed insight. But if you're saying that all that's needed is more samadhi of the kind that is associated with samatha bhavana, then I would say I don't know where this idea is found in the texts. If insight as developed in previous lifetimes is weak, then it remains weak until it has been developed further. There's no magic bullet that can make it stronger in a hurry. > T: Superficially-thin metta, similar to the "few drops of water" as > explained before, does not accumulate or "develops" further to be > powerful unlike the metta-cetovimutti case in the suttas. A > worldling's appreciation of such undeveloped kusala in a present > moment once in a while is like adding a few more drops of water to a > dry container that has been left open in the sun all day long -- they > evaporate quickly too. To my understanding, accumulated kusala (or akusala) does not dissipate. It remains accumulated. If the (inherited) kusala is relatively undeveloped at present, then it's further development will necessarily be slower. There's no such thing as accelerated development. > § 110. {Iti IV.11; Iti 115} > This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have > heard: "If, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of > sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and > he does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, or wipe that thought > out of existence, then a monk walking with such a lack of ardency & > concern is called continually & continuously lethargic & low in his > persistence. > ... > "But if, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of > sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and > he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought out of > existence, then a monk walking with such ardency & concern is called > continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence aroused. > > T: But I do not have any hope to convince you. ;-)) Thanks for the sutta quote. You haven't said how you interpret this passage, for the purpose of the present discussion, so I don't know what you'd like to convince me of ;-)) My reading of the sutta is that whenever there is akusala (in sutta/ conventional terms, a thought of sensuality, ill-will or harmfulness) there is lack of kusala viraya (the person is "lethargic & low in persistence"), and whenever there is kusala (the abandoning, dispelling, demolishing, & wiping out of existence of such thoughts) there is kusala viriya (aroused persistence). Jon #89345 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Herman > If I ever found myself writing in order to play semantical games, or > construct a legal beagle escape clause so that I could continue to > argue a vapid point, I suspect I would stop writing once I became > aware of it. If that's how you see my comments, then perhaps you haven't appreciated the point ;-)) > Given all that, I agree that flying to Bangkok does not > necessarily imply anything. Well this is certainly a welcome acknowledgement. And isn't this the actual point we're discussing? I'm not of course saying that my flying to Bangkok is free of wrong view; but then my (or anyone's) particular instances of wrong view are surely not of relevance here. > In principle doesn't exist, Jon. You fly to Bangkok for whatever > reason you do, it doesn't just happen. SimilarIy, I write here what I > write when I do, without compulsion. I hope you find what you are > looking for in Bangkok, and if you're not looking for anything you may > as well not go, don't you think? Our motives for doing these things are bound to be mixed. What of it? Jon #89346 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Herman > I am quite happy to talk about dhammas, and how the teachings say if > you want them presently you can only actually have nimittas. So, Jon, > what are the nimittas of the present moment? And isn't the Tipitaka > just full of reminders to be aware of the present nimitta? Not!! :-) I may not be getting your point. So let me just say that to my understanding, the development of insight spoken of in the teachings is the development of awareness/understanding of a presently arising dhamma. Can we proceed from there? Jon #89347 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:35 am Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! jonoabb Hi Scott > Scott: The story this makes me think of was from the other day. > ... I watched her half-hearted attempts fail to achieve what I > imagined was the desired effect of stopping the man in the vehicle. I > was already thinking about the whole thing, and by then, the time to > act, if there ever had been one, was over. Loved your anecdote, and related to it immediately. > I was interested in this. It's hard to say what the impulse was. Was > the impulse to help kusala? Was it akusala? I know the feeling. However, I've come to see (at an intellectual level only, of course) such experiences as not worth dwelling on, because any such pondering can only be speculation. And in any event, the answer is obviously going to be "mixed" ;-)) > The other story this reminds me of was when we got out of the car on > the way in to a bookstore to get books for the kids. I noticed that a > magpie had found a very large caterpillar and had been pecking it > preparatory to what might have been an excellent meal. ... > and this was something entirely > between two other beings - or more specifically, something going on in > each of two beings and by conditions - bird killing, caterpillar > reaching the end of a life-cycle. Both beings could be the object of equanimity or compassion. But the reality again is that (for us) the cittas are bound to be mixed. Jon #89348 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:37 am Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> jonoabb Hi Alex > > What is important is a greater understanding of the way things (i.e., > > dhammas) truly are. > > This happens after heavy samatha practice. There is no necessary correlation stated in the texts between "heavy samatha practice" and the arising of awareness of dhammas. There are plenty of instances of association between monks attaining enlightenment after having attained jhana, but there is no point of doctrine to be inferred from this. In any event, if we are not already persons of highly developed samatha, there's nothing in the texts that says we should develop samatha before the development of insight can begin. > You see, we have lots of > defilements which add on, or subtract from the bare experience. It's the *thinking* (which may be kusala or akusala), rather than the kusala/akusala itself, that adds to the bare experience. > The reality is what it is and isn't what it isn't. The reality is not > what it seems (to a mind overcome by defilements) but neither is it > different from what is. To the kusala mind also (unless the kusala is of the level of insight), reality is not what it seems. > The thing about samatha is that it calms down the defilements so that > the perception of reality is less and less twisted by defilements & > perversions. Of course if one tries to incorporate Jhana within some > doctrinal context and see through the lenses of Doctrine, then the > effects will be hindered. But the suttas tell us enough we need to > know, but it is only for the defilements "not enough". > > Even the Buddha has stated in Upanisa sutta that samadhi is proximate > condition of seeing as it is. Am I right that you equate "samadhi" with "samatha practice"? I don't think that assumption can be made. (Nor, by the way, do I think that is the inference to be drawn from the fact that samma samadhi is described in terms to the 4 jhanas.) > So the proper study of ABh is after Jhana, when mind is bright and > capable. If you are talking about *after* jhana, then we are back in the (ordinary) world of mixed kusala and akusala. Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and clarity? Jon #89349 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions indriyabala Hi Scott, - Why 'yes'? > A: "Are there more possibilities for defilements to arise in a busy > mall, or in a fairly empty forest?" > > Scott: Yes. > T: It depends on the person. If I were alone in a forest at night, I would be mostly scared than when I were in a busy mall seeing many people. Tep === #89350 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:28 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! indriyabala Hi Jon, - Nice to see you back. Appreciate your reply as usual. > T: That kind of undeveloped insight, that is not well supported by > samadhi, is like a few drops of water that evaporate quickly. The > water drops do not have a chance to accumulate, unlike heavy > rainfalls (analogous to developed & strong insight knowledges) that > can fill up lakes and rivers. Jon: I agree that weak insight develops more slowly than well- developed insight. But if you're saying that all that's needed is more samadhi of the kind that is associated with samatha bhavana, then I would say I don't know where this idea is found in the texts. .................. T: I do not think it is true that "more samadhi of the kind" induces more samadhi all by itself. It is analogous to the illogical saying that more raindrops being collected in a container would induce more rain to fall! Thus it makes more sense to me to compare "more raindrops" with more strength of samadhi that keeps the mind of the meditator more steady, not easily distracted. It is like maintaining momentum to move a vehicle uphill. .................. Jon: If insight as developed in previous lifetimes is weak, then it remains weak until it has been developed further. There's no magic bullet that can make it stronger in a hurry. > T: Superficially-thin metta, similar to the "few drops of water" as explained before, does not accumulate or "develops" further to be > powerful unlike the metta-cetovimutti case in the suttas. A > worldling's appreciation of such undeveloped kusala in a present > moment once in a while is like adding a few more drops of water to a dry container that has been left open in the sun all day long -- they evaporate quickly too. Jon: To my understanding, accumulated kusala (or akusala) does not dissipate. It remains accumulated. Jon: If the (inherited) kusala is relatively undeveloped at present, then it's further development will necessarily be slower. There's no such thing as accelerated development. T: Your saying that "accumulated kusala (or akusala) does not dissipate but remains accumulated" is the same as saying that "accumulations are PERMANENT". Did the Buddha ever state that kind of contradiction to the 'anicca' principle? .......................... > § 110. {Iti IV.11; Iti 115} > This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have > heard: "If, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and > he does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, or wipe that thought > out of existence, then a monk walking with such a lack of ardency & > concern is called continually & continuously lethargic & low in his > persistence. > ... > "But if, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of > sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and > he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought out of existence, then a monk walking with such ardency & concern is called continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence aroused. > > T: But I do not have any hope to convince you. ;-)) Thanks for the sutta quote. You haven't said how you interpret this passage, for the purpose of the present discussion, so I don't know what you'd like to convince me of ;-)) T: I do not have any hope to convince you to agree with me; that was what I meant above. ........................ Jon: My reading of the sutta is that whenever there is akusala (in sutta/conventional terms, a thought of sensuality, ill-will or harmfulness) there is lack of kusala viraya (the person is "lethargic & low in persistence"), and whenever there is kusala (the abandoning, dispelling, demolishing, & wiping out of existence of such thoughts) there is kusala viriya (aroused persistence). T: I did not give an interpretation of the sutta quote because it might distract your mind from the quote to focus instead on criticizing my understanding. ;-) More seriously out of 10 points your above reply is worth 2. Why? Because your reverse logic missed the most important point : the Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma-sankappa (the 2nd magga factors) 100% of the time. There is no tolerance for akusala vitakka in the Dhamma-vinaya. And more importantly such maintenance of kusala REQUIRES samma-viriya and samma-sati that are guided by samma-ditthi [see MN 117]. Tep === #89351 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/23/2008 1:12:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ----------- <. . .> KH: > >We can't divide atta into two categories and say one exists while the other does not. There is no self, and that means there are, in reality, no people trees or cars either. There are only dhammas. If self did exist, there would people, trees and cars but no dhammas. Howard: > And I think you are just plain wrong with regard to the two preceding paragraphs. The Buddha speaks of people here, and he says that it is WRONG VIEW to consider that there are none such. That should NOT be dismissed due to one's preferred view. (But the Buddha would also certainly say that there is no self to be found in any of these people or in any of the fleeting phenomena of which they are just dynamic assemblages. --------------------- It pains me to use the term, dynamic assemblages, :-) but I must ask; do dynamic assemblages feel pain? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Only in a manner of speaking. Unpleasant bodily sensations arise there and are felt as painful. If there is the thought that there is literally some "one" who feels pain, that is an error. ---------------------------------------------- Are they given birth to? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, but not in the sense that the assemblage is a single reality that is given birth to. Weren't you given birth to? If not, what a surprise for your mum! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- Do they grow old and die? If they die are they reborn? Are they not reborn? Are they both reborn and not reborn? Are they neither reborn nor not reborn. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: What does the Buddha say? Read the suttas. Ken, there is more than one level of speech, and so long as one understands the facts in adequately full detail, there is no problem. If one misapplies the facts, so that, for example, one thinks that when murder occurs, no one has been killed, that is drastic error. ------------------------------------------------ I think you can see what I am getting at, but these are serious questions all the same. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: They ARE serious and very important, and need to be treated fully. --------------------------------------------- > Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard #89352 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha & negative thinking truth_aerator Hi Sukinder and all, -- Sukinder wrote: > S:> Satipatthana is the N8FP, Yes, Satipatthana is part of N8FP. And what is an excellent way to develop Satipatthana? Anapanasati MN118. > No other Dhamma comes close to being >useful in ending suffering, >not even the highest Jhanas. It is interesting that in MN36, after severe austerities the Buddha remembered Jhana and that it IS PATH TO AWAKENING. ============================================================= I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html =========================================================== Then the thought occurred to me, 'To whom should I teach the Dhamma first? Who will quickly understand this Dhamma?' Then the thought occurred to me, 'This Alara Kalama[alex: & Udakka Ramaputta] is wise, competent, intelligent. He has long had little dust in his eyes. And knowledge & vision arose within me: 'Alara Kalama [alex: & Udakka Ramaputta] died seven days ago.' The thought occurred to me, 'A great loss has Alara Kalama suffered. If he had heard this Dhamma, he would have quickly understood it.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html =============== "So at a later time, having seen the drawback of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I pursued that theme; having understood the reward of the cessation of perception & feeling, I familiarized myself with it. My heart leaped up at the cessation of perception & feeling, grew confident, steadfast, & firm, seeing it as peace. With the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I entered & remained in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as I saw with discernment, the mental fermentations went to their total end. "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step- by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon as I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling- attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html ======================== >Unlike you however, I do not give it any magical power. I don't. Please don't invent things, put them into my mouth, and then refute them. > Don't worry about my `negative thinking' Alex, Its your problem. > I don't believe in the power of "thought" to make any difference in >terms of accumulated tendencies to kusala or akusala. So according to you a person who thinks negative thoughts (cruelty, ill will, sensuality, etc) vs positive thoughts, don't make any changes in the accumulated tendencies tendency? You are denying "Right intention" there. With Compassion, Alex #89353 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:48 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > I don't know of any basis for the assertion that "Alara Kalama & > Udakka Ramaputta had very little, if any, Buddhist Panna". Since > they didn't hear any Dhamma in that lifetime, there was no > opportunity for accumulated panna to manifest. But if they have heard 1000x less then you did, they'd be Arahats. What made them so ready to recieve Dhamma? > > The samadhi is proximate condition of "seeing things as they are" > in > > that sutta. Please don't conviniently leave that out. > > Yes, but you are contending that the samadhi in question is the > samadhi that accompanies the development of samatha/jhana, whereas > that is not specified in the sutta. Please forgive me, and in how many (and which) suttas does Samadhi as a factor of the path means other than Jhana. And even if it does, it still does not take away the requirement for Jhana. "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step- by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon as I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling- attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html Same with Sariputta and MahaMoggallana, btw. > > > > Again, you are relying on an inference, namely, an inference > drawn > > > from the order in which the indriyas are dealt with. > > > > I've given them, the MN70 sutta, the indriya samyutta... > > You are relying on an inference rather than an express statement. I am relying here on what is written in the suttas, putting this and that sutta together (if needed). It is reading applies into oranges when suttas say one thing, and some people infer that it only means something totally different. ex: Buddha often says "Such and such Venerable walks, trains, goes to alm rounds, sitts crosslegged in the forest, etc ..." and some insist that it means ONLY about some cittas arising and passing away. And of course the "empty huts", "roots of the trees" are metaphorical, and thus could be anywhere where mental state is 'right', even sitting on a cushion and watching Olympics... Yeh. Right... Best wishes, Alex #89354 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 7:01 am Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > There is no necessary correlation stated in the texts >between "heavy samatha practice" and the arising of awareness of >dhammas. Anything can be misused, and even the most refined experiences can be squeezed into one's own doctrine. > There are > plenty of instances of association between monks attaining > enlightenment after having attained jhana, but there is no point of > doctrine to be inferred from this. If you think that you have less hindrances and quicker faculties than them, then go right ahead. Good for you. Sariputta couldn't attain Arahatship. MahaMoggallana couldn't attain Arahatship. Without Cessation and other factors. > In any event, if we are not already persons of highly developed > samatha, there's nothing in the texts that says we should develop > samatha before the development of insight can begin. Tell me how it goes. Infact I doubt that Buddha really taught "vipassana" or insight practice. That could be later additions, or reinterpretations of results from Samadhi. After all in MN109 (or thereabouts) Ananda has said that the ONLY, THE ONLY, meditation that Buddha praised were the Jhanas. Jon, I don't want to hear some smart 21st century Pandit pretend to know better then Ananda and Buddha. You can disagree, but here you deviate from the teaching. > > Am I right that you equate "samadhi" with "samatha practice"? I > don't think that assumption can be made. (Nor, by the way, do I > think that is the inference to be drawn from the fact that samma > samadhi is described in terms to the 4 jhanas.) How many times do I need to quote the same passage where samma- samadhi is 4 Jhanas? How many times do I need to remind that 4 fruits of Jhana are: stream- >Arahatship > Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and clarity? Everywhere where 4th Jhana is mentioned. Regarding Cultivation: ======================================================== And of this pleasure I say that it is not to be cultivated, not to be developed, not to be pursued, that it is to be feared. "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana... he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm- pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html Best wishes, Alex #89355 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 7:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions truth_aerator Dear Tep, Scott and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi Scott, - > > Why 'yes'? > > > A: "Are there more possibilities for defilements to arise in a >busy > > mall, or in a fairly empty forest?" > > > > Scott: Yes. > > > > T: It depends on the person. If I were alone in a forest at night, >I would be mostly scared than when I were in a busy mall seeing many > people. > > Tep > === That is the point. In different places, different environmental & psychological factors cause different defilements to arise. Some places can cause this defilements to arise, some that. Some places can cause more defilements to arise, some less. So maybe instead of a forest, how about safe & quite monastery with almost no physical distractions. In that place it would be mostly mental distractions that would arise. But those mental distractions have LESS physical things to cling to and to be stimulated by. In many suttas, like Channa sutta, it was said that monks were not supposed to get close to lay families, and less contact with outside world, the better. Best wishes, Alex #89356 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 8/23/2008 10:01:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: After all in MN109 (or thereabouts) Ananda has said that the ONLY, THE ONLY, meditation that Buddha praised were the Jhanas. ========================== Can you find the exact sutta, Alex. It's definitely not MN 109. With metta, Howard #89357 From: Sukinder Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:11 am Subject: Introduction to the Dhamma. sukinderpal Dear Tep, ========== T: Not unlike any valuable referenced materials, to be highly beneficial the suttas must be wisely studied and wisely applied. Wrong interpretations, and when there are several ways to interpret the suttas, do not cause a damage, unless there is an attachment to "my interpretation" and conceit that "mine" is better than "yours". Good students with great saddha always learn with open- mindedness that helps them to re-study and research the suttas a few more times until they get much a better understanding. Practicing in accordance with the Teachings that one has learned from the suttas, is extremely important for errors correction and reduction of wrong views to become wiser in the Dhamma. Sukin: I was formulating a different reply to this and the other post until I came to this part quoted above. My initial reaction to this was that when it is with ‘attachment’ and ‘conceit’, I don’t mind so much, but when it comes to ‘wrong view’ which is ‘wrong interpretation’, this is what causes me to react strongly. But this isn’t true because I realized then, that I did in fact often react to other akusala as well, including mana. It struck me at that point, that perhaps I should indeed just stick to the matter of wrong view while allowing for the other side to react as they will without being disturbed. Because if I do, I think I invariably end up adding fuel to the fire. Besides, what about my own akusala reactions?!! (If I had thought about this earlier, I wouldn’t have said all that I did in the other posts. But I guess conditions rule. ;-)) So I have decided to skip everything else and get on with initiating a discussion about Dhamma with you as I said I wanted to. I’ve changed the subject heading for this purpose, so here I go: To make it easier for myself, I would like to ask if you have read say, Nina’s ‘Abhidhamma in Daily Life’ and if you disagreed with anything stated there. Do you think it a good introduction to the beginner of Dhamma, to be told that there are two kinds of realities, Nama and Rupa. Nama include the conditioned namas namely, citta and cetasika and the unconditioned Nibbana (which I’ll leave out for now). Conditioned nama is that which experiences an object, and this can be another nama or a rupa. Rupa is material reality, it is conditioned but it can’t experience anything. ‘Conditioned’ means that none of these realities can arise without the arising of certain other realities at the same time and each conditioning the other in various ways. Etc, etc. If you don’t think that this is the best introduction, what in your opinion is? Just this much for now. Metta, Sukin #89358 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:15 am Subject: Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? indriyabala Hi, all - A comment was recently made by a Jhana Enthusiast : "What is important is a greater understanding of the way things (i.e. dhammas) truly are. This happens after heavy samatha practice". Response of a disbeliever: -------------------------- > There is no necessary correlation stated in the texts >between "heavy samatha practice" and the arising of awareness of >dhammas. > There are plenty of instances of association between monks attaining > enlightenment after having attained jhana, but there is no point of > doctrine to be inferred from this. > In any event, if we are not already persons of highly developed > samatha, there's nothing in the texts that says we should develop > samatha before the development of insight can begin. > Am I right that you equate "samadhi" with "samatha practice"? I > don't think that assumption can be made. (Nor, by the way, do I > think that is the inference to be drawn from the fact that samma > samadhi is described in terms to the 4 jhanas.) > Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and clarity? Defensive reply: --------------- If you think that you have less hindrances and quicker faculties than them, then go right ahead. Good for you. I don't want to hear some smart 21st century Pandit pretend to know better then Ananda and Buddha. You can disagree, but here you deviate from the teaching. How many times do I need to quote the same passage where samma- samadhi is 4 Jhanas? [Reference: Message #89348] =================================================== Questions for discussion, if you want to discuss. ;-) ------------------------ Is frustration avoidable in Dhamma discussion? In case it is unavoidable, how may frustraion be manageed so that a fruitful/beneficial outcome still is possible? Tep === #89359 From: "connie" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:23 am Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions nichiconn Dear Alex, You've given me a whole list of mental distractions, sure, but my question was about the sensual objects - the same eight sensual distractions now as then: visible object, sound, scent, taste, motion, hardness, temperature. It does not change depending on where on this planet you may go & ordaining does not change it, either. Understanding this furthers any opportunity, as you call it. I see now Nina & Tep have already answered & ordinarily, I would just delete mine, but there it is anyway. A: " Are there more possibilities for defilements to arise in a busy mall, or in a fairly empty forest? " Scott: Yes. c: Yes - haha! even though defilements, to my understanding, do not really arise any "place", but as the mind, (where) our 'sensory distraction consciousness' is kusula- or akusala- vipaaka, the mind of the result of past kamma; pretty much the reason we live at present, but the javanas are not far behind and there, as Nina wrote in #89054: N: <> c: i would add: the first javanas of each set are too weak to execute the commission of verbal or bodily kamma nor do these succesive javanas all ripen at the same future times, but whichever, kusala or akusala, that first one is, so are other six. CDB p.1426 n201 Spk: Just the arising of mindfulness is slow, but as soon as it has arisen the defilements are suppressed and cannot persist. For when lust, etc., have arisen in the eye door, with the second javana process one knows that the defilements have arisen and the third javana process occurs with restraint. that's fast. peace, connie #89360 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> indriyabala Dear Howard and Alex (RobK), - I have recalled a few suttas that might be appropriate to this discussion of you two. But I have no intention to post all of them as yet. For now the following is the one I like best. ................... Four types of concentration defined in terms of internal tranquility of awareness and/or insight or "heightened discernment": "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment." [AN 4.94] RobertK has a bigger collection under his belt, and once in a while he flashes them out to impress people. If you search his old posts in the archive, you should find several ones that will delight you. Tep === #89361 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:56 am Subject: Buddha praised this Mental Absorption MN108 truth_aerator Dear Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 8/23/2008 10:01:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > After all in MN109 (or thereabouts) Ananda has said that the ONLY, > THE ONLY, meditation that Buddha praised were the Jhanas. > ========================== > Can you find the exact sutta, Alex. It's definitely not MN 109. > > With metta, > Howard It is MN108, Gopaka Moggalana sutta. I was off by one number. =========== Ananda: "And what sort of mental absorption did he praise? 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. 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. 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 pleasant abiding.' 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 is the sort of mental absorption that the Blessed One praised. "It would seem, Ven. Ananda, that Master Gotama criticized the mental absorption that deserves criticism, and praised that which deserves praise. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html === Furthermore, in MN36 the Buddha has said regarding Jhana: "This IS the path to awakening". ""I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana... Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html ========= #89362 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:22 am Subject: Re: Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? truth_aerator Dear Tep, Jon, Sukinder, and all, >---"Tep Sastri" : > Is frustration avoidable in Dhamma discussion? Yes. But only when sati, viriya and other factors, are good enough at that time. > In case it is unavoidable, how may frustration be manageed? Relax and smile! :) ===== Brahman, there are ten inspiring qualities expounded by the Blessed One — the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self- awakened. In whoever among us those ten qualities are found, we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate him; honoring & respecting him, we live in dependence on him. Which ten? [1] "There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Patimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest faults. [2] "He has heard much, has retained what he has heard, has stored what he has heard. Whatever teachings are admirable in the beginning, admirable in the middle, admirable in the end, that — in their meaning & expression — proclaim the holy life entirely perfect & pure: those he has listened to often, retained, discussed, accumulated, examined with his mind, and well-penetrated in terms of his views. [3] "He is content with robes, alms food, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for curing the sick. [4] "He attains — whenever he wants, without strain, without difficulty — the four jhanas that are heightened mental states, pleasant abidings in the here-&-now. [5-9] "He experiences manifold supranormal powers... [Alex: Abhinnas] [10] "Through the ending of the mental fermentations, he remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & made them manifest for himself right in the here & now. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html ============= Best wishes, Alex #89363 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:30 am Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions truth_aerator Dear Connie and all, >"connie" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > You've given me a whole list of mental distractions, sure, but my >question was about the sensual objects - the same eight sensual >distractions now as then: visible object, sound, scent, taste, >motion, hardness, temperature. It does not change depending on >where on this planet you may go & ordaining does not change it, >either. In the case of seeing attractive young "man or girl" there is more basis for latent tendencies of lust to arise than in the case of seeing rotten corpse or excrement. In both cases there is visible object. Yet the reaction is different. When some women sees a $5 purse & $200 dollar purse, the reaction is different! Please don't forget about the specifics of the visual (or any other) object. While ugly & pleasant sight are both "sight" - the content of the sight and its effect on someone with latent tendencies is different. Best wishes, Alex #89364 From: Sukinder Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is the Abhidhamma Reading Free from Self View? sukinderpal Dear Tep, I almost forgot about this post. The matter here is actually closely related to what I was saying in the post that I just sent. ============= >Suk: The Abhidhamma is also the Buddha's teaching you know, and a good place to start for those of us who continually read the Suttas with self view. T: That is an interesting twist! Why is the Abhidhamma (Pitaka, or other versions?) easier than the Suttanta Pitaka? Sukin: I like the question. ;-) First we have to ask ourselves, what makes the Buddhadhamma difficult? Obviously, it is the accumulated ignorance on our part as students. We then ask what is ‘ignorance’ ignorant of. The answer is the ‘Four noble Truths’? The Abhidhamma imo, in talking about nama and rupa and distinguishing this from concept, lays bare what the First Noble Truth is. And with further study about other aspects including conditionality, one begins to have a little understanding of the other Truths as well. More importantly however, in pointing directly to our moment to moment experience we then come to see that we study the Abhidhamma not in order to accumulate ‘theory’, but rather to “apply” whatever we hear about. So we don’t have to wait for a more ideal situation, whatever arises now, it can be understood as much as conditions allow. In referring to “dhammas”, we are given the opportunity to have a glimpse of the Ariyan’s world. Further, in not being limited by situations or a better time and place, the way is open for understanding to arise at anytime. Sure, the Suttas can lead to the same, but more difficult, since the various dhammas there, are described in terms of conventional reality. So when someone does not come from knowing to distinguish paramattha dhamma from pannati, the chances are that he will take all dhammas including tanha, dosa, avijja etc. on one side and sati, viriya, panna, khanti etc. on the other side, for self. The implication of this is that he does not get to glimpse the true characteristic of those dhammas including them being anatta, worse in fact, he likely takes them for ‘self’ to the extent of then being unable to see this at the only time he ever can, namely “NOW”. Instead he gets into a habit of thinking about better time, place, posture and situation, and when he thinks he is understanding the present moment, namely when involved in meditation, what he takes for “now” is in fact only concept. After all “now” is related to understanding and is known by virtue of knowing the characteristic of a reality. So this is another way of looking at the problem, if someone is always thinking in terms of another time and place and never in terms of what is going on now, he accumulates a habit of never taking an interest in the present moment and of taking concept for reality. This is why it has always been my position, that even though the Suttas are good enough to lead someone to the goal and it is possible that someone relies solely on this and not go wrong, if however on being exposed to the Abhidhamma this person rejects it, then I’m sure that his reading of the Sutta is with Self View. Why else would someone oppose the exposition of dhammas and their paccaya?!! ================= Tep: But I think the Suttas are less complicated because there is only one version of the Theravada Pali Cannon. Sukin: The Suttas are probably not complicated. The Abhidhamma when seen as a whole can seem intimidating. However, the true purpose for studying the Abhidhamma being to apply the understanding in experience and since this can take place from the very outset; it then comes to the understanding of the individual how he proceeds. If he misunderstands the purpose, then he may end up being one of those who hold the snake by the wrong end. So perhaps Tep, if you feel intimidated by the Abhidhamma for any reason, think again about its purpose and you may come to see that the Abhidhamma in fact helps to simplify, and by leaving out the concept of a ‘person who studies and practices’, makes the gap between theory and practice less difficult to cross over. ============= Tep: BTW What do you mean by "reading the Suttas with self view? Do you imply that reading the "Abhidhamma" is fool-proof from a self view (Self Demon)? Why? Sukin: The Abhidhamma also can be read with self view in which case it is equally harmful. I’ve written the above feeling quite fuzzy headed and so it is possible that I will end up correcting something I said in a later post. Metta, Sukin #89365 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, Notice that in all cases Samadhi & Insight is to be developed. Same with Yuganaddha sutta. Anapanasati for example includes both Samadhi & Insight, and it is up to the person which steps (calm or insight) are developed first. But regardless of which steps are more developed first, and which are undeveloped, all components must be there developed to the max. >--- "Tep Sastri" wrote: > Four types of concentration defined in terms of internal tranquility > of awareness and/or insight or "heightened discernment": > [AN 4.94] 2. Vittarasuttam In detail 017.02. Bhikkhus, these are the four means of reaching the goal. What four? A difficult means and slow realization, a difficult means and quick realization, a pleasant means and slow realization and a pleasant means and quick realization. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara2/4-catukkanipata/017-patipadavaggo-e.html The diffuculty is the strength of defilements present. The slowness is the sharpness of 5 faculties. And one of the faculties is.... Concentration... No surprise again. In Indriya-Samyutta we know what that indriya means... Best wishes, Alex #89366 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:20 am Subject: Re: Introduction to the Dhamma. indriyabala Dear Sukin (Alex, Herman, Scott), - Your email sounds a lot different this time ... it is like an off- list message that is easy-going and friendly. Thank you for this new way of communication. >Suk: It struck me at that point, that perhaps I should indeed just stick to the matter of wrong view while allowing for the other side to react as they will without being disturbed. Because if I do, I think I invariably end up adding fuel to the fire. T: Adding fuel to the fire, or disturbing the "other side", would complicate the on-going discussion unnecessarily, I think. Sticking to just one issue at a time is the best policy ! >Suk: To make it easier for myself, I would like to ask if you have read say, Nina's `Abhidhamma in Daily Life' and if you disagreed with anything stated there. T: I have not read it from the first to the last page yet. Assuming that the whole book is in complete agreement with the objective in her Introduction as shown below, I think I mostly agree with it (except for some deviations from the Suttas). ................................. Nina: As regards the Abhidhamma, this is an exposition of all realities in detail. 'Abhi' literally means 'higher', thus ' Abhidhamma' means 'higher dhamma'. The form of this part of the Tipitaka is different, but the aim is the same: the eradication of wrong view and eventually of all defilements. Thus, when we study the many enumerations of realities, we should not forget the real purpose of the study. The theory (pariyatti) should encourage us to the practice (patipatti) which is necessary for the realization of the truth (pativedha). While we are studying the different namas and rupas and while we are pondering over them, we can be reminded to be aware of nama and rupa appearing at that moment. In this way we will discover more and more that the Abhidhamma is about everything which is real, that is, the worlds appearing through the six doors. ................................... T: The 'worlds appearing through the six doors' are real. There is nothing to disagree with at this point, before the ultimate realities creep in and make the 'worlds appearing through the six doors' no longer real. ................................... Nina: Without the Buddha's teaching we would be ignorant of reality. We are inclined to take for permanent what is impermanent, for pleasant what is sorrowful, for self what is not self. The aim of all three parts of the Tipitaka is to teach people the development of the way leading to the end of defilements. .................................. T: That is in perfect agreement with what I learn from the sutta. Who can disagree with that? .................................. >Suk: Do you think it a good introduction to the beginner of Dhamma, to be told that there are two kinds of realities, Nama and Rupa. Nama include the conditioned namas namely, citta and cetasika and the unconditioned Nibbana (which I'll leave out for now). Conditioned nama is that which experiences an object, and this can be another nama or a rupa. Rupa is material reality, it is conditioned but it can't experience anything. `Conditioned' means that none of these realities can arise without the arising of certain other realities at the same time and each conditioning the other in various ways. T: That "there are two kinds of realities" is the first sentence of Chapter 1, The Four Paramattha Dhammas. But after more and more details are added i.e. the various cetasikas and cittas and Nibbana as Nama, then it is no longer easy for the "beginner"! Besides, Nama and rupa in the suttas are defined differently; Nama does not include citta(consciousness) or Nibbana. For example, MN 9: "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form." ................................... >Suk: If you don't think that this is the best introduction, what in your opinion is? T: It is one of the best easy-to-read Buddhism books (with a heavy emphasis on Abhidhamma) written by Western scholars, Sukin. In my humble and cheap opinion (IMHACO), there is no "the best" introduction book on the Buddha's Dhamma. Tep === #89367 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and "enthusiast" and "disbeliever") - In a message dated 8/23/2008 11:16:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi, all - A comment was recently made by a Jhana Enthusiast : "What is important is a greater understanding of the way things (i.e. dhammas) truly are. This happens after heavy samatha practice". Response of a disbeliever: -------------------------- > There is no necessary correlation stated in the texts >between "heavy samatha practice" and the arising of awareness of >dhammas. > There are plenty of instances of association between monks attaining > enlightenment after having attained jhana, but there is no point of > doctrine to be inferred from this. > In any event, if we are not already persons of highly developed > samatha, there's nothing in the texts that says we should develop > samatha before the development of insight can begin. > Am I right that you equate "samadhi" with "samatha practice"? I > don't think that assumption can be made. (Nor, by the way, do I > think that is the inference to be drawn from the fact that samma > samadhi is described in terms to the 4 jhanas.) > Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and clarity? ================================ In SN 22.5, there is the following: The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." Also, in the book of tens in the AN, the Buddha taught the following, which shows samadhi leading to pa~n~na: Virtuous ways of conduct -> Non-remorse -> Gladness -> Joy -> Serenity -> Happiness -> Concentration of the mind -> Knowledge and vision of things as they really are -> Revulsion and dispassion -> Knowledge and vision of liberation. With metta, Howard #89368 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:30 am Subject: Correction: truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Tep, Jon, Sukinder, and all, > > >---"Tep Sastri" : > > Is frustration avoidable in Dhamma discussion? > >Alex: Yes. But only when sati, viriya and other factors, are good >enough at that time. Should have added NOT after are and before good. Yes. But only when sati, viriya and other factors, are *NOT* good enough at that time. #89369 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:11 am Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream scottduncan2 Dear Suan, Thanks for the reply: S: "No, Scott, I do not mean the term in the sense of `thoughts'...990. There, what are seven mental events or seven consciousness events? Visual consciousness, auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, taste consciousness, tactile consciousness, mental element, and mental consciousness element � these are called seven consciousness events...translating cakkhuvi~n~naa.nam as visual consciousness is better than translating it as visual thought... translating `satta cittaani' as seven consciousness events is better than translating that phrase as seven thoughts." Scott: Thanks. What about 'types' for cittaani, as in 'types of consciousness'? Or by 'event', do you refer only to a momentary arising and not to a series of moments? S: "...at this stage, I am unable to provide textual support and Pali translations for those creative efforts." Scott: No problem, Suan. Sincerely, Scott. #89370 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:16 am Subject: Re: what makes the Buddhadhamma so difficult? truth_aerator Dear Sukinder and all, > Sukinder wrote: > First we have to ask ourselves, what makes the Buddhadhamma >difficult? Due to our unwillingness (and ignorance & Co) to let go off acquizitions (which include mental concepts, theories, labels, and "understandings"). "There is the case where a certain person is practicing for the abandoning & relinquishing of acquisitions. As he is practicing for the abandoning & relinquishing of acquisitions, memories & resolves associated with acquisitions assail him. He acquiesces to them. He does not abandon them, destroy them, dispel them, or wipe them out of existence. I tell you, Udayin, that this sort of person is fettered, not unfettered. Why is that? Because I have known the diversity of faculties with regard to this type of person." "Then there is the case where a certain person, realizing that acquisitions are the root of suffering & stress, is without acquisitions, released in the ending of acquisitions. I tell you, Udayin, that this sort of person is unfettered, not fettered. Why is that? Because I have known the diversity of faculties with regard to this type of person." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html Best wishes, Alex #89371 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/23/2008 11:37:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: RobertK has a bigger collection under his belt, and once in a while he flashes them out to impress people. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Oh, my! -------------------------------------- If you search his old posts in the archive, you should find several ones that will delight you. =================== With an exhibition of metta, Howard #89372 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha praised this Mental Absorption MN108 upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - Thanks for the following reply.I find the one about the rose-apple tree especially good. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/23/2008 11:56:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 8/23/2008 10:01:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > After all in MN109 (or thereabouts) Ananda has said that the ONLY, > THE ONLY, meditation that Buddha praised were the Jhanas. > ========================== > Can you find the exact sutta, Alex. It's definitely not MN 109. > > With metta, > Howard It is MN108, Gopaka Moggalana sutta. I was off by one number. =========== Ananda: "And what sort of mental absorption did he praise? 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. 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. 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 pleasant abiding.' 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 is the sort of mental absorption that the Blessed One praised. "It would seem, Ven. Ananda, that Master Gotama criticized the mental absorption that deserves criticism, and praised that which deserves praise. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html === Furthermore, in MN36 the Buddha has said regarding Jhana: "This IS the path to awakening". ""I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana... Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html #89373 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:46 pm Subject: Re: Is the Abhidhamma Reading Free from Self View? indriyabala Dear Sukin (Alex, Howard, Swee), - Thank you for not forgetting to give me your thought on the aspects of the Abhidhamma that you think make it easier for us to understand the Dhamma than the Suttas. 1. I fully agree in principle with your following points : 1.1 Ignorance makes the Dhamma difficult to understand the Four Noble Truths 1.2 One understands the 1st Noble Truth through contemplation of Nama and Rupa 1.3 Clear understanding of the First Truth leads to penetration of the other three Truths 1.4 Discerning the rise and fall of Nama and Rupa is for there and now (present moment), or "understanding can arise any time". I have two questions for you. We all know that the Abhidhamma is known as 'Dhamma Theory', while the Suttas (discourses given to the monks over the 45 years He was living) are about practice/development of sila-samadhi-panna in accordance with the Teachings. A. How can the Abhidhamma theory be used to discern the First Noble Truth? B. How does it deal with practical aspects of the Fourth Noble Truth? 2. I disagree with the following points you made: 2.1 The Suttas can lead to the same, but more difficult, since the various dhammas there, are described in terms of conventional reality. T: The Buddha taught the monks using conventional language to practice the Dhamma in "conventional reality" such that the ultimate truths of the "ultimate realities" could be penetrated. Therefore, the Suttas are DIRECT and hence easier to follow. That's why I do not see your point. .......................................................... 2.2 Without making a distinction between paramattha dhamma and pannati, one "does not get to glimpse the true characteristic of those dhammas including them being anatta" T: The true characteristics(anicca, dukkha, and anatta) of the kaya, vedana, citta, and dhamma are contemplated by the method of Satipatthana that is expounded in the Suttanta-Pitaka, not in the Abhidhamma books. The Buddha never once mentioned "a distinction between paramattha dhamma and pannati". .......................................................... 2.3 The true purpose for studying the Abhidhamma being to apply the understanding in experience and since this can take place from the very outset; it then comes to the understanding of the individual how he proceeds. T: Where in the Abhidhamma Pitaka can such application be found? The Abhidhamma is not known for teaching how to apply the Dhamma Theory (e.g. about the citta-vithi and 121 cittas) to daily experience. It is Nina who explains how to "apply" the theory. Yet, her "approach" is still elementary and she never suggests how such approach is going to lead to yatha-bhuta~nana-dassana. This is the real problem with Dhamma Theory alone. Sukin, please read the following typical 'Abhidhamma in daily life' by Nina. Then please tell me how does it help you to "glimpse the true characteristic of those dhammas including them being anatta". Nina: Different characteristics of rupa can be experienced through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense and mind. These characteristics are real since they can be experienced. We use conventional terms such as 'body' and 'table'; both have the characteristic of hardness which can be experienced through touch. In this way we can prove that the characteristic of hardness is the same, no matter whether it is in the body or in the table. Hardness is a paramattha dhamma; 'body' and 'table' are not paramattha dhammas but only concepts. We take it for granted that the body stays and we take it for self, but what we call 'body' are only different rupas arising and falling away. The conventional term 'body' may delude us about reality. We will know the truth if we learn to experience different characteristics of rupa when they appear. Nina: Citta, cetasika and rupa only arise when there are the right conditions, they are conditioned dhammas (in Pali: sankhara dhamma). Seeing cannot arise when there is no eye-sense and when there is no visible object. Sound can only arise when there are the right conditions for its arising. When it has arisen it falls away again. Everything which arises because of conditions has to fall away again when the conditions have ceased. One may think that sound stays, but what we take for a long, lasting moment of sound is actually many different rupas succeeding one another. ..................................................... 2.4 The Abhidhamma in fact helps to simplify, and by leaving out the concept of a `person who studies and practices', makes the gap between theory and practice less difficult to cross over. T: On which side of the "gap" is the Abhidhamma? Of course, the answer is the Abhidhamma is on the Theory Side. The Suttas are, on the other hand, already on the same side with practices. Is there an instruction or explanation in the Abhidhamma books how to leave out the concept of a `person who studies and practices'? I suspect that it is an Abhidhammika's interpretation of the 'anatta' principle as seen in the Suttas. The 'tilakkhana' and their contemplation (known as Vipassana) are only taught in the discourses of the Second Basket. 3. I think the following is a disconnect with the Suttas, since 'pannati' was not taught by the Buddha. -- Instead he gets into a habit of thinking about better time, place, posture and situation, and when he thinks he is understanding the present moment, namely when involved in meditation, what he takes for "now" is in fact only concept. After all "now" is related to understanding and is known by virtue of knowing the characteristic of a reality. Well, I am sorry for the several disagreements with you. I am willing to correct myself, if you can show that I have been wrong. Tep === #89374 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> indriyabala Hi, Howard, - Your humor is quite exceptional ! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 8/23/2008 11:37:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > indriyabala@... writes: > > RobertK has a bigger collection under his belt, and once in a > while he flashes them out to impress people. > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > Oh, my! > -------------------------------------- > > If you search his old posts in > the archive, you should find several ones that will delight you. > =================== > With an exhibition of metta, > Howard > ============== Boy! Your cut-and-paste technique completely changed the original message. Excellent! Tep === #89375 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? indriyabala Dear Howard, (Jon, Alex, Swee, Sukin), - > Jon: Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and clarity? ================================ Howard: In SN 22.5, there is the following: The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." Also, in the book of tens in the AN, the Buddha taught the following, which shows samadhi leading to pa~n~na: Virtuous ways of conduct -> Non-remorse -> Gladness -> Joy -> Serenity -> Happiness -> Concentration of the mind -> Knowledge and vision of things as they really are -> Revulsion and dispassion -> Knowledge and vision of liberation. With metta, Howard ............................. T: This theme has been my message in the "Sila Comes First" thread. The same theme, as seen in several other suttas, either begins with Virtues (Sila) or a hindrance-free mind-state that leads to gladness (pamojja) and joy or rapture (piti), calm or serenity (passadhi), and happiness (sukha). Unmistakenly clear as the blue sky, these are jhana factors that support samadhi (concentration). But who can convince any "disbeliever" who possibly has not studied many suttas? Or, worse than that, he has made up his mind to believe in X but never in Y, because he has been taught that "Only this is right"? Tep === #89376 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:30 pm Subject: Wise and Virtuous = Worthy! bhikkhu0 Daily Words of the Buddha for 22 August 2008 The Blessed Buddha once said: Pandito sÄ«lasampanno, Sanho ca patibhÄ?navÄ?, NivÄ?tavutti atthaddho, TÄ?diso labhate yasam. Worthy, wise and virtuous: Who is wise and virtuous, Gentle and keen-witted, Humble and amenable, Such one may honour gain. Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ... #89377 From: "colette" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:09 am Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions, "duh" Homer Simpson ksheri3 Hi Alex, > When some women sees a $5 purse & $200 dollar purse, the reaction is > different! colette: "It invites the question, 'empty of what'? And the answer is: 'empty of inherent existence, or self-nature, or, in more Western terms, essesnce.' Now, to say that the table is empty is hence simply to say that it lacks essence and, importantly, not to say that it is completely nonexistent. To say that it lacks essence, the Madhyamika philosopher will explain, is to say, as the Tibetans like to put it, that it does not exist 'from its own side' -- that its existence as the object that it is, as a table, depends not only upon it or on any purely nonrelational characteristics, but upon us as well." When I started in magik back in 1980<.....> Since then I have learned soooooo much but now, you, here, right now, come in and tell us that there ain't no way other than your way. I thought, back a few years ago when I found the web as a vehicle which can help me relate to colleagues studying the same things, I found this guy named Jaq. Derrida and I tried to read some of his stuff but MAN DID THAT <...> GIVE ME A HEADACHE. It was worse than reading the Illuminatus Trilogy by R.A.Wilson, et al. Luckily Dr. Sanford Drob understood the problems I was confronted by through this character named Jaq. Derrida. I can firmly tell you that I and a lot of my friends would love to see you on stage proving that your way is the only way BECAUSE I AM CERTAIN THAT BOTH NAGARJUNA AND DERRIDA HAVE THE FOUNDATIONS OF MAGIK. And yes, I am using Aleister Crowley's spelling of the word "magik" as a means of differentiating -- don't go too far on Crowley aka "Uncle Al" since he is a known deviant and an addict of herion, and... blah blah blah but that doesn't mean that some of what Crowley has or did is not valuable, just like Kenneth Grant, et al. I want to see how this one flies since Las Vegas may just put odds on your ability to pull it off "on stage" in front of an audience. The spotlight is hot, isn't it? toodles, colette #89378 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 pm Subject: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. truth_aerator Dear Jon, Sarah, Sukinder and all, Please forgive me for implying that Buddha didn't focus much on understanding reality. He did teach understanding [AN 9.41]. The Buddha has said that until he didn't fully understand the drawbacks of sensuality and *understood* the reward of renunciation, he couldn't enter and remain in the first Jhana. Understanding isn't just theoretical maze of concepts that can be navigated through in PhD thesises. The understanding has to be of sort that is powerful enough to actually ACT on it, ie letting go of that understood thing. Through understanding the drawbacks of sensuality one can enter 1st Jhana. =================================================== "So at a later time, having seen the drawback of sensual pleasures, I pursued that theme; having ***understood*** the reward of renunciation, I familiarized myself with it. My heart leaped up at renunciation, grew confident, steadfast, & firm, ***seeing*** it as peace. Then, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana" ========================================================= Through understanding the drawbacks of rupa on can enter Base of infinite space. ====================================== "So at a later time, having seen the drawback of forms, I pursued that theme; having ***understood*** the reward of the dimension of the infinitude of space, I familiarized myself with it. My heart leaped up at the dimension of the infinitude of space, grew confident, steadfast, & firm, ***seeing*** it as peace. With the complete transcending of perceptions of form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, [perceiving,] 'Infinite space,' I entered & remained in the dimension of the infinitude of space." ======================================= Through understanding the drawbacks of base of neither perception nor non-perception, one can enter Cessation of Perception & feelings. =========================================== So at a later time, having seen the drawback of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I pursued that theme; having ***understood*** the reward of the cessation of perception & feeling, I familiarized myself with it. My heart leaped up at the cessation of perception & feeling, grew confident, steadfast, & firm, seeing it as peace. With the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I entered & remained in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as ***I saw with discernment***, the mental fermentations went to their total end. "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step- by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon as I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling- attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html Best wishes, Alex #89379 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:23 pm Subject: Part 2 Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. truth_aerator Part 2 Understanding of Sensuality & Unwholesome mental qualities = 1st Jhana. Understanding of vitakka&vicara = 2nd Jhana. Understanding of piti = 3rd Jhana. Understanding of Sukha = 4th Jhana. Understanding of Rupa = Base of Infinite space. Understanding of Base of Infinite space = Base of infinite Consciousness. Understanding of Base of infinite Consciousness = Base of Nothingness. Understanding of Base of Nothingness = Base of Neither Perception nor Non-perception Understanding of Base of Neither Perception nor Non-perception = Sanna-vedana Nirodha http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html Understanding of Kama-Loka = 1st Jhana Understanding of Rupa-Loka = base of infinite space Full Understanding of Arupa, Rupa, Kamaloka = Cessation. Arhatship The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html Jhana: IS the path to awakening - MN36 Is what Buddha awakened to. AN9.42 & SN2.7 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Is Practiced by awakened ones: Dhp 23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.02.than.html#dhp-23 Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) Is Right Concentration - SN 45.8 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on it http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html Samadhi is proximate condition to "knowledge and vision of things as they really are" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised. MN108 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html Jhana blinds mara -MN25 Goes together with discernment (panna): Dhp 372 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.25.than.html#dhp- 372 Is a mark of a great discernment, great man http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.035.than.html Jhana is the escape from confinement. AN 9.42 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Released through Panna (Pannavimutti) = Jhanas 1-9 AN 9.44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.044.than.html 7 Parts of Noble 8 Fold path are Support for Noble concentration (Jhana) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html MN Suttas that mention Jhana: 1,4,6,8,13,19,35,30,31,36,38,43,45,53,53,59,64,65,66,76,77,78,79,85, 106, 107,108,111,112, 113, 119,121, 128, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,152 DN# 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,22,19,26,27,29,31,32 Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the no-whither way. Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo Anguttara Nikaya The Lion Roar text iii, 414, Vi, vi, 64 "Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do." - Bruce Lee "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html =================================================================== Best wishes, Alex #89380 From: Sukinder Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha & negative thinking sukinderpal Hi Alex, ============== > S:> Satipatthana is the N8FP, Alex: Yes, Satipatthana is part of N8FP. And what is an excellent way to develop Satipatthana? Anapanasati MN118. S:> Satipatthana *is* the Path. Five or six path factors arise during mundane moments and all eight during the supramundane. This is a topic of discussion on its own and as I foresee, a long and mentally demanding one. So I’m not going to start or even think of getting involved in it with someone who is in the habit of throwing tones of Suttas around. ;-) ============== > No other Dhamma comes close to being >useful in ending suffering, >not even the highest Jhanas. Alex: It is interesting that in MN36, after severe austerities the Buddha remembered Jhana and that it IS PATH TO AWAKENING. ============================================================= I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html S:> It is the path to-be-Buddhas take. This path is *not* ‘The Path’, otherwise it would amount to saying that the bodhisatta was already enlightened, or had knowledge of the Path before he sat down under the Bodhi tree. =============== Alex: Then the thought occurred to me, 'To whom should I teach the Dhamma first? Who will quickly understand this Dhamma?' Then the thought occurred to me, 'This Alara Kalama[alex: & Udakka Ramaputta] is wise, competent, intelligent. He has long had little dust in his eyes. And knowledge & vision arose within me: 'Alara Kalama [alex: & Udakka Ramaputta] died seven days ago.' The thought occurred to me, 'A great loss has Alara Kalama suffered. If he had heard this Dhamma, he would have quickly understood it.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html S:> ‘Little dust in his eyes’ not due to Jhana, but vipassana panna developed in previous lives. Otherwise what is implied is that had Alara Kalama pursued along the path he was on, that he too could have attained enlightenment and become a Buddha. But I’m not going to argue and so will now go to the part which is the reason I decided to respond to this post. ================ >Unlike you however, I do not give it any magical power. Alex: I don't. Please don't invent things, put them into my mouth, and then refute them. S:> It would have been better had I phrased the above differently, but this is what I was reacting to. You said in that other post: “a) You are depriciating the power of Satipatthana and the Buddha's teaching abilities.” In response to this: “>Or the one who ignores this fact and the need for accumulated >understanding from the past, and insists instead that any Alex, >Sukin or Tep can just get on with the practice and in 7days, 7 >months or 7 years possibly reach the goal?” So you can see now why I thought what I did. But if it is not what you actually meant, fine, I accept it. =============== > I don't believe in the power of "thought" to make any difference in >terms of accumulated tendencies to kusala or akusala. Alex: So according to you a person who thinks negative thoughts (cruelty, ill will, sensuality, etc) vs positive thoughts, don't make any changes in the accumulated tendencies tendency? You are denying "Right intention" there. S:> Every moment is conditioned and adds to the accumulations. My point was to focus on the realities which underlie particularly ignorance, attachment and wrong view on one hand and understanding and non-attachment on the other. The concepts, that which define positive and negative ‘thinking’; these do not make any difference in this regard. Someone might, in fact most likely will, have optimistic thoughts rooted in attachment and ignorance, on the other hand someone else may not feel optimistic, and sound negative to another person, but this is based on the fact of having rightly seen one’s own kilesas. And please don’t change my meaning! You were talking about positive / negative thinking as with Dale Carnegie and such, and not “kusala” / “akusala” thoughts. And I was talking about the uselessness of such kind of positive thinking and not saying that thought rooted in kusala or akusala has no consequence! If you don’t get another response, take it that I don’t want to. I know that you will understand. Metta, Sukin #89382 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:14 pm Subject: Re: Part 2 Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. indriyabala Hi Alex (Sukin, Jon, Howard, Herman, Swee), - I am impressed by your conscientious and energetic review of the suttas with the focus on jhana. Thank you very much, although I would be more thankful if you could summarize them in just one paragraph or two. ;-) > Jhana is the escape from confinement. > 7 Parts of Noble 8 Fold path are Support for Noble concentration > (Jhana) > Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, > non-concentration the no-whither way. So you insist that jhanas are the path, and Sukin insists that satipatthana is the same path as the N8FP but different from jhanas. A remaining question to be asked is : Are 1st jhana and 2nd jhana (when vitakka & vicara are abandoned) necessary for the establishment of mindfullness on an object of satipatthana? [See MN 125] If the answer is 'yes', then jhanas and satipatthana are on the same path with the N8FP. Then there are the so-called four paths(magga) of the 'ariya puggalas' : the stream-entry path; the once-return path; the non- return path; the arahant path. Are these paths coincident with the jhana path or not? Are these four maggas and the N8FP bundled together toward Nibbana, or aren't they? If anybody say they are not, there there is something wrong in the way the Suttas are studied. Tep === #89383 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight indriyabala Dear Alex and other members, - Just a clarification ... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Tep and all, > > Notice that in all cases Samadhi & Insight is to be developed. > Same with Yuganaddha sutta. > > Anapanasati for example includes both Samadhi & Insight, and it is up to the person which steps (calm or insight) are developed first. But regardless of which steps are more developed first, and which are > undeveloped, all components must be there developed to the max. > > >--- "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Four types of concentration defined in terms of internal tranquility of awareness and/or insight or "heightened discernment": > > [AN 4.94] > > > 2. Vittarasuttam In detail > > 017.02. Bhikkhus, these are the four means of reaching the goal. What four? > > A difficult means and slow realization, a difficult means and quick > realization, a pleasant means and slow realization and a pleasant means and quick realization. > http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- > Nikaya/Anguttara2/4-catukkanipata/017-patipadavaggo-e.html > > The diffuculty is the strength of defilements present. > The slowness is the sharpness of 5 faculties. > > > And one of the faculties is.... Concentration... No surprise again. > > In Indriya-Samyutta we know what that indriya means... > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Alex > ================================================= I like almost everything you said above except the fact that the most important part of my earlier message was missed: a meditator CAN develop and attain insight through directly discerning (contemplating) the dhammas (phenomena); not through samatha (tranquillity). "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness." [AN 4.94] I did not deny the huge importance of jhanas; so a defence of jhanas is not necessary. :-) Peace, Tep === #89384 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Alex) - In a message dated 8/24/2008 8:39:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: I like almost everything you said above except the fact that the most important part of my earlier message was missed: a meditator CAN develop and attain insight through directly discerning (contemplating) the dhammas (phenomena); not through samatha (tranquillity). "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness." [AN 4.94] I did not deny the huge importance of jhanas; so a defence of jhanas is not necessary. :-) Peace, Tep ================================ In looking over AN 4.94, I note something that may have been missed: In every case, heightened discernment is presumed. Look at the introductory paragraph: _________________________________ There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. ---------------------------------------------------------- It seems to me that the foregoing presumes in every case an application of "heightened discernment," but with varying results. Let H stand for heightened awareness, let T stand for attainment of tranquillity of awareness and I stand for attainment of insight into phenomena. The four cases are: 1) Through H, there is T but not I, 2) Through H, there is I but not T, 3) Through H, there is neither T nor I, and 4) Through H, there is both T and I. With metta, Howard #89385 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Slandering the Buddha & negative thinking truth_aerator Hi Sukinder and all, >--- Sukinder wrote: > Alex: > Yes, Satipatthana is part of N8FP. And what is an excellent way to > develop Satipatthana? Anapanasati MN118. > > S:> Satipatthana *is* the Path. > > > No other Dhamma comes close to being >useful in ending suffering, > >not even the highest Jhanas. > > Alex: > It is interesting that in MN36, after severe austerities the Buddha > remembered Jhana and that it IS PATH TO AWAKENING. > ============================================================= > I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, >and > I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite > withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental > qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on > that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html > > S:> It is the path to-be-Buddhas take. This path is *not* `The >Path', So, the Buddha followed one path and taught us another? 1st Strike. Moreover he did recommend Jhana to his disciples. 2nd strike. He did often praise Jhana. The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html Jhana: IS the path to awakening - MN36 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html Is what Buddha awakened to. AN9.42 & SN2.7 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Is Practiced by awakened ones: Dhp 23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.02.than.html#dhp-23 Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) Is Right Concentration - SN 45.8 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on it http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html Samadhi is proximate condition to "knowledge and vision of things as they really are" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised. MN108 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html Jhana blinds mara -MN25 Goes together with discernment (panna): Dhp 372 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.25.than.html#dhp- 372 Is a mark of a great discernment, great man http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.035.than.html Jhana is the escape from confinement. AN 9.42 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Released through Panna (Pannavimutti) = Jhanas 1-9 AN 9.44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.044.than.html 7 Parts of Noble 8 Fold path are Support for Noble concentration (Jhana) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html MN Suttas that mention Jhana: 1,4,6,8,13,19,35,30,31,36,38,43,45,53,53,59,64,65,66,76,77,78,79,85, 106, 107,108,111,112, 113, 119,121, 128, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,152 DN# 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,22,19,26,27,29,31,32 Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the no-whither way. Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo Anguttara Nikaya The Lion Roar text iii, 414, Vi, vi, 64 Strike 3. > otherwise it would amount to saying that the bodhisatta was already > enlightened, or had knowledge of the Path before he sat down under >the Bodhi tree. Being fully awakened, and knowing the (yet unrealized) path are different things. Just because someone can talk about N8P, doesn't make one an Arahant. 2 Lives ago, he became a monk under Buddha Kassapa. (MN 81 or so. Ghatikara sutta) Then he learned at least *something*. > =============== > Alex: > Then the thought occurred to me, 'To whom should I teach the Dhamma > first? Who will quickly understand this Dhamma?' Then the thought > occurred to me, 'This Alara Kalama[alex: & Udakka Ramaputta] is wise, > competent, intelligent. He has long had little dust in his eyes. > And knowledge & vision arose within me: 'Alara Kalama [alex: & Udakka > Ramaputta] died seven days ago.' The thought occurred to me, 'A great > loss has Alara Kalama suffered. If he had heard this Dhamma, he would > have quickly understood it.' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html > > S:> `Little dust in his eyes' not due to Jhana, but vipassana panna How do you know that? Maybe they've trained under Barney the Dragon and there they got their panna. Same believability, same sutta support -> NONE. > developed in previous lives. Otherwise what is implied is that had >Alara Kalama pursued along the path he was on, that he too could >have attained enlightenment and become a Buddha. Maybe Pacceka Buddha. They were credited with 5 faculties (saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, panna) > > ================ > S:> Every moment is conditioned and adds to the accumulations. My point was to focus on the realities which underlie particularly ignorance, attachment and wrong view on one hand and understanding and non-attachment on the other. The concepts, that which define positive and negative `thinking'; these do not make any difference in this regard. Someone might, in fact most likely will, have optimistic thoughts rooted in attachment and ignorance, on the other hand someone else may not feel optimistic, and sound negative to another person, but this is based on the fact of having rightly seen one's own kilesas. ============================================= Both optimism and pessimism may be rooted in Avijja and kilesas. But when an optimistic person believes (here we have faith, saddha), he will be energetic (viriya), mindful (sati) because things can be done, concentrated (samadhi) and panna will develop. A pessemist will groan and moan about lack of some accumulations and hold back from the effort until the better times. Guess what, they may never come! NOW is the time! Present is the only time we have! Besides, a truly wise person can NEVER be negative! Best wishes, Alex #89386 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:28 am Subject: Re: Part 2 Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" >indriyabala@...> wrote: > So you insist that jhanas are the path, I DO NOT INSIST. That is said in MN36. All questions to the Man Himself. I'll try to add my 2c. > and Sukin insists that satipatthana is the same path as the N8FP >but different from jhanas. When one is in right Jhana it is helped by other 7 factors, and Jhana itself helps the other 7 factors. > A remaining question to be asked is : > > Are 1st jhana and 2nd jhana (when vitakka & vicara are abandoned) > necessary for the establishment of mindfullness on an object of > satipatthana? [See MN 125] I'd say Yes and no. There are different levels of sati requiring different levels of Samadhi. For satipatthana to be fully effective, Jhana is needed. For Jhana, mindfulness is required. Anapanasati for example contains both elements. Does this mean that there are two different Anapana techniques *in the suttas*? One vipassana anapana, and another "mere" samatha anapana? > If the answer is 'yes', then jhanas and satipatthana are on the same > path with the N8FP. Here is a little misunderstanding. The separation of "two separate paths" or "two techniques" may be not fully correct. Obviously Jhana isn't mindless state so both aspects are present. > Then there are the so-called four paths(magga) of the 'ariya > puggalas' : the stream-entry path; the once-return path; the non- > return path; the arahant path. > > Are these paths coincident with the jhana path or not? DN29 (Pasadika sutta) says that 4 results are obtained from Jhana: Stream ...-> Arhatship. This BTW, implies mundane Jhana, if a person practicing for stream isn't an Ariya. Also in some suttas there it is said that the difference between the types of path is the strength of faculties. Since samadhi-indriya makes up one of the faculties and is defined in terms of Jhana - it appears to literary suggest that saddhanusarin already has at least *some*, weak, Jhana experience, and later stages demand more development of all faculties, including samadhi-indriya. Best wishes, Alex #89387 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight truth_aerator Dear Tep, Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Tep (and Alex) - > > In a message dated 8/24/2008 8:39:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > indriyabala@... writes: > > I like almost everything you said above except the fact that the >most > important part of my earlier message was missed: a meditator CAN > develop and attain insight through directly discerning > (contemplating) the dhammas (phenomena); not through samatha > (tranquillity). > > "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight > into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal > tranquillity of awareness." [AN 4.94] > > I did not deny the huge importance of jhanas; so a defence of >jhanas is not necessary. :-) > > Peace, > > Tep Thank you very much for pointing that out. However it is still one option out of 4. However how does this don't contradict with 5 faculties & 8th limb of N8P? > ================================ >In looking over AN 4.94, I note something that may have been >missed: In every case, heightened discernment is presumed. Look at >the introductory paragraph: > >It seems to me that the foregoing presumes in every case an application > of "heightened discernment," but with varying results. > Let H stand for heightened awareness, let T stand for attainment of > tranquillity of awareness and I stand for attainment of insight into phenomena. > The four cases are: > > 1) Through H, there is T but not I, > 2) Through H, there is I but not T, > 3) Through H, there is neither T nor I, and > 4) Through H, there is both T and I. > > With metta, > Howard Excellent summarization Howard. Can somebody tell me what the heightened discernment is in pali? Adhipanna? I will need to find how Heightened Discernement is defined, how exactly "internal tranquility" and "insight into phenomena" are defined as well. Best wishes, Alex #89388 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 8/24/2008 10:42:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Can somebody tell me what the heightened discernment is in pali? Adhipanna? ============================= All the PTS dictionary gives is the following: AdhipaññÄ? (f.) [adhi + paññÄ?] higher wisdom or know- ledge, insight (cp. jhÄ? na & paññÄ?); usually in combn. with adhicitta & adhisÄ«la Vin The prefix 'adhi' means "above," "over," or "superior" according to Childer's dictionary. With metta, Howard #89389 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight indriyabala Dear Howard (and Alex, Sukin), - Still, there might be another issue besides "overlooking" : the individual interpretation of the sutta wordings.( Our dear friend Sukin has emphasized this issue a few times before. He is right.) Sutta Quote: "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment." ---------------------------------------------------------- It seems to me that the foregoing presumes in every case an application of "heightened discernment," but with varying results. Let H stand for heightened awareness, let T stand for attainment of tranquillity of awareness and I stand for attainment of insight into phenomena. The four cases are: 1) Through H, there is T but not I, 2) Through H, there is I but not T, 3) Through H, there is neither T nor I, and 4) Through H, there is both T and I. With metta, Howard ---------------------------------------------------------- With all due respect, I think "insight into phenomena through heightened discernment" is a single clause, meaning insight into the dhammas is through higher understanding (adhipanna). Please note that there is no "heightened awareness" in the text, only 'heightened discernment' is seen. So let HD stand for heightened discernment. Now, we have a simplified notation system, IHD = 'insight into phenomena through heightened discernment', T = 'internal tranquillity of awareness'. It follows that the four cases are: 1) There is attainment of T but not IHD; 2) There is IHD but no T; 3) There is neither attainment of T nor IHD, and 4) There are attainment of both T and IHD. Tep === #89390 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight indriyabala Dear Alex and Howard, - Thank you a whole lot for your helpful discussion/suggestion and questions that might lead to heightened discernment. ;-) Heightened means 'adhi' like you said, Alex. The three 'adhisikka' are defined in Nyanatiloka Dictionary. They are also found in several suttas, such as the following. "And what is the training in heightened discernment? There is the case where a monk, through the ending of the mental fermentations, enters & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & made them manifest for himself right in the here & now. This is called the training in heightened discernment." [AN 3.89 Sikkha Sutta] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.089.than.html I pointed out, by referencing AN 4.94, that 'insight into phenomena' could be attained directly through "heightened discernment", and you asked a further question : >Alex: However it is still one option out of 4. However how does this don't contradict with 5 faculties & 8th limb of N8P? T: I do not follow. What contradiction, why, and how do you see it, Alex? Tep === #89391 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/24/2008 11:45:51 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: With all due respect, I think "insight into phenomena through heightened discernment" is a single clause, meaning insight into the dhammas is through higher understanding (adhipanna). Please note that there is no "heightened awareness" in the text, only 'heightened discernment' is seen. So let HD stand for heightened discernment. Now, we have a simplified notation system, IHD = 'insight into phenomena through heightened discernment', T = 'internal tranquillity of awareness'. It follows that the four cases are: 1) There is attainment of T but not IHD; 2) There is IHD but no T; 3) There is neither attainment of T nor IHD, and 4) There are attainment of both T and IHD. Tep ========================== Yes, your reading is also possible, and is in fact the less strained of the two. You're probably correct. With metta, Howard #89392 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight scottduncan2 Dear All, "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquility of awareness." [AN 4.94] Bh. Bodhi: "Here, monks, a certain person gains internal tranquility of mind but does not gain the higher wisdom of insight into things.* Another person gains the higher wisdom of insight into things but does not gain internal tranquility of mind..." * Note 46: "AA explains internal tranquility of mind (ajjhatta.m cetosamatha) as the concentration of full mental absorption (i.e. jhaana), and the higher wisdom of insight into things (adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa) as the insight knowledge discerning formations (sa"nkhaaraparigghaahaka-vipassanaa~naa.na). The latter is called 'higher wisdom' and it is insight into the 'things' comprised by the five aggregates." Sincerely, Scott. #89393 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight truth_aerator Dear Tep, > "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Dear Alex and Howard, - > > >Alex: However it is still one option out of 4. However how does this > don't contradict with 5 faculties & 8th limb of N8P? > > T: I do not follow. What contradiction, why, and how do you see it, > Alex? > > > Tep > === 1) The Buddha has stated that all ariyan disciples (ncluding saddhanusarin have 5 faculties. (Indriya samyutta 48. 16 (6) ) 2) One of these faculties is samadhi-indriya 3) Samadhi-indriya is defined as 4 Jhanas. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html Thank you very much for the other part of your post. =========================================================== "And so this convinced disciple of the noble ones, thus striving again & again, recollecting again & again, concentrating his mind again & again, discerning again & again, becomes thoroughly convinced: 'Those phenomena that once I had only heard about, I here & now dwell touching them with my body and, through discernment, I see them clear through.' Whatever conviction he has, is his faculty of conviction." — SN 48.50 (from WTA) ================================================================ A monk endowed with these six qualities could break through the Himalayas, king of mountains, to say nothing of miserable ignorance. Which six? There is the case where a monk is skilled in the attaining of concentration, in the maintenance of concentration, in the exit from concentration, in the [mind's] preparedness for concentration, in the range of concentration, & in the application of concentration. — AN 6.24 (from WTA) ================================================================ Best wishes, Alex #89394 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear All, > * Note 46: "AA explains internal tranquility of mind (ajjhatta.m > cetosamatha) as the concentration of full mental absorption (i.e. > jhaana), and the higher wisdom of insight into things > (adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa) as the insight knowledge discerning > formations (sa"nkhaaraparigghaahaka-vipassanaa~naa.na). The latter is > called 'higher wisdom' and it is insight into the 'things' comprised > by the five aggregates." > > Sincerely, > > Scott. Thank you very much for your reply. However this "the higher wisdom of insight into things" still implies development. So in this particular sutta 3/4 have Jhana, 1 doesn't (?). However, let us remember this point. The "minimum" requirements are not always sufficient. Just because some are able to achieve the path easily, quickly and without much work in *THIS* life, it doesn't by itself means that it is the only and most effective path for us. Those who can't progress in that 4th way, may have to progress in other 3 ways. Best wishes, Alex #89395 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight .. Scott's Contribution ... indriyabala Dear Scott (Howard, Alex and other friends), - I truly appreciate the input that you provided this time; it is very helpful and has helped me become less negative about commentaries (in general). Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi's superb choice of words & literary skills are second to none indeed. The following Pali terms are of great educational value. internal tranquility of mind = ajjhatta.m cetosamatha higher wisdom of insight into things = adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa insight knowledge discerning formations = sa"nkhaaraparigghaahaka- vipassanaa~naa.na. Scott, may I ask you a few questions? Do you see any difference between 'parigghaaha' and 'pari~n~naa' or pari~n~naata ? Is discerning same as comprehending, in your opinion ? With appreciation, Tep === #89396 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight ... Simplify, simplify, simplify indriyabala Dear Alex (Howard, Scott, Sukin), - Your reply to my simple question (see below) has not yet answered it. The explanation seems to complicate the problem, not solving it. ;-)) So, could you please try again? Talk to me like you would to a 10- year-old kid; it will work. ................................. > >Alex: However it is still one option out of 4. However how does this don't contradict with 5 faculties & 8th limb of N8P? > > T: I do not follow. What contradiction, why, and how do you see it, > Alex? > > > Tep > === 1) The Buddha has stated that all ariyan disciples (ncluding saddhanusarin have 5 faculties. (Indriya samyutta 48. 16 (6) ) 2) One of these faculties is samadhi-indriya 3) Samadhi-indriya is defined as 4 Jhanas. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html Thank you very much for the other part of your post. =========================================================== "And so this convinced disciple of the noble ones, thus striving again & again, recollecting again & again, concentrating his mind again & again, discerning again & again, becomes thoroughly convinced: 'Those phenomena that once I had only heard about, I here & now dwell touching them with my body and, through discernment, I see them clear through.' Whatever conviction he has, is his faculty of conviction." — SN 48.50 (from WTA) ================================================================ A monk endowed with these six qualities could break through the Himalayas, king of mountains, to say nothing of miserable ignorance. Which six? There is the case where a monk is skilled in the attaining of concentration, in the maintenance of concentration, in the exit from concentration, in the [mind's] preparedness for concentration, in the range of concentration, & in the application of concentration. — AN 6.24 (from WTA) ================================================================ Best wishes, Alex ................................ Sincerely yours, Tep === #89397 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - Thanks for providing the following. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:38:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear All, "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquility of awareness." [AN 4.94] Bh. Bodhi: "Here, monks, a certain person gains internal tranquility of mind but does not gain the higher wisdom of insight into things.* Another person gains the higher wisdom of insight into things but does not gain internal tranquility of mind..." * Note 46: "AA explains internal tranquility of mind (ajjhatta.m cetosamatha) as the concentration of full mental absorption (i.e. jhaana), and the higher wisdom of insight into things (adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa) as the insight knowledge discerning formations (sa"nkhaaraparigghaahaka-vipassanaa~naa.na). The latter is called 'higher wisdom' and it is insight into the 'things' comprised by the five aggregates." Sincerely, Scott. #89398 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight ... Simplify, simplify, simplify truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, >--- "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Dear Alex (Howard, Scott, Sukin), - > > Your reply to my simple question (see below) has not yet answered >it. The explanation seems to complicate the problem, not solving > > So, could you please try again? Talk to me like you would to a 10- > year-old kid; it will work. In that sutta, 1 option seems to say that samadhi is not required for Arhatship or insight into phenomena. The Buddha has said that all noble disciples have 5 faculties, one of which is samadhi (defined as 4 Jhanas). So it seems hard to reconcile "no samadhi is necesery" and "samadhi is necessery". Furthermore since when "sensuality and unwholesome states" are fully understood, 1st Jhana can be attained and since by the Anagami stage one has let go off sensuality & unwholesome states, Jhana should be easy to reach. Furthermore, Pannavimutti Arahants are defined as possesing Jhana - so the notion of totally dry Arhat is hard to reconcile with the suttas. Best wishes, Alex > > ................................. > > > >Alex: However it is still one option out of 4. However how does > this don't contradict with 5 faculties & 8th limb of N8P? > > > > T: I do not follow. What contradiction, why, and how do you see it, > > Alex? > > > > > > Tep > > === > > 1) The Buddha has stated that all ariyan disciples (ncluding > saddhanusarin have 5 faculties. (Indriya samyutta 48. 16 (6) ) > > 2) One of these faculties is samadhi-indriya > > 3) Samadhi-indriya is defined as 4 Jhanas. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html > > Thank you very much for the other part of your post. > > Best wishes, > > Alex > > ................................ > > Sincerely yours, > > > Tep > === > #89399 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight .. More Work to Do .. indriyabala Dear Alex, Howard, Sukin, Scott and other friends, - Alex, you are concerned about the 1 in 4 cases that does not attain 'insight into phenomena' through adhipa~n~na. But I do not think it indicates a shortcoming of samatha ('internal tranquillity of awareness'). First, let's review the four cases. ................................................................. > T: Now, we have a simplified notation system, IHD = 'insight into phenomena through heightened discernment', T = 'internal tranquillity of awareness'. >It follows that the four cases are: 1) There is attainment of T but not IHD; 2) There is IHD but no T; 3) There is neither attainment of T nor IHD, and 4) There are attainments of both T and IHD. ................................................................ T: A good meditator who has attained 'tranquillity of awareness' (very lucky guy!) still has more work to do in terms of adhipa~n~na; similarly, a person who has attained IHD without T (case 2) also has more work to do in terms of adhicitta. The person in case 3, of course, has a lot more work to do. Only a person in Case 4 does not have anymore work. "As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. [ AN 4.94] This kind of Teaching CANNOT be found in ABhidhamma books of Dhamma Theory or in Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Regards, Tep ===