#97200 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila ashkenn2k Hi Jon and Mike yes though it is possible to have restraint without understanding. To me, it is not very helpful other than a giving a person a better kamma in future lives. It does not lead to salvation. Just like to be long winded and repeat myself :-). Hope you do not mind. Restraint in the sutta is just a descriptive portion of the teachings. It is only the superficial part. Underlying restraint is a stream of citta that must be conditioned by panna. Without understanding, mere following of restraint will result a good rebirth but not lead to the end of rebirth. Sutta purpose is to reinforce our understanding of the dhamma. It is like a good story book. It is the meaning of what is written in the commentaries which is the most helpful. Few will buy this ideas. But we are the dinosaurs and we love to read them. Cheers Ken O --- On Sat, 4/4/09, jonoabb wrote: From: jonoabb Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, 4 April, 2009, 4:42 PM Hi Ken O Welcome back! > ------------ --------- --------- --------- > In my own views, restraint of akusala acts would only be possible when kusala arise. Even if one personally resolve to restraint, then we have to ask ourselves whether such resolve is an attachment to lobha (self). It is through the understanding of dhamma, then could one practise the restraint and not the other way around. If one do not understand dhamma, could one knows why one should not kill or not to steal. First understanding, then it conditions restraint. All in the works of conditions. :-) > ------------ --------- --------- --------- Yes, if understanding is developed, then restraint is also being developed. While it is possible for there to be restraint without the development of understanding, restraint that is not "perfected" by virtue of stream entry is of finite duration – it won't last. Jon #97201 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 8:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ANAPANASATI: no 3. ashkenn2k Dea Silananda no one can still a citta as long as one is in the samasara. this is called condition by the formation. Even one who practise the highest jhana of non-preception (hope I get the term correct), still must get out of it. I do not understand the rouse of attaining jhanas unless these are jhanas conditioned by panna (here I must stress Buddha dhamma and not the panna that needed to accompnay jhanas). Attaining jhanas only lead to kuasala rebrith in the Brahma world. But then who knows at the Brahma world, one could meet someone who could guide us along the buddha path. That is a long shot and furthermore, we could be so attached to our good lives as Brahmas and forget the Buddha dhamma. Why not learn here while we are still as a human. Why long for jhanas, one must ask could this be conditioned by lobha :-). Cheers Ken O #97202 From: "Robert" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 8:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila avalo1968 Hello Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Jon and Mike > > yes though it is possible to have restraint without understanding. To me, it is not very helpful other than a giving a person a better kamma in future lives. It does not lead to salvation. > > Just like to be long winded and repeat myself :-). Hope you do not mind. Restraint in the sutta is just a descriptive portion of the teachings. It is only the superficial part. Underlying restraint is a stream of citta that must be conditioned by panna. Without understanding, mere following of restraint will result a good rebirth but not lead to the end of rebirth. > > Sutta purpose is to reinforce our understanding of the dhamma. It is like a good story book. It is the meaning of what is written in the commentaries which is the most helpful. Few will buy this ideas. But we are the dinosaurs and we love to read them. > > Cheers > Ken O If the Buddha thought restraint was a superficial part of his teachings, it is odd he spent so much time talking about it. Perhaps it was superficial to the commentary writers, but I don't think it was to the Buddha. I believe that to him it was fundamental to the development of understanding. Regards, Robert A. #97203 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 4:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ANAPANASATI: no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/7/2009 11:10:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dea Silananda no one can still a citta as long as one is in the samasara. this is called condition by the formation. Even one who practise the highest jhana of non-preception (hope I get the term correct), still must get out of it. I do not understand the rouse of attaining jhanas unless these are jhanas conditioned by panna (here I must stress Buddha dhamma and not the panna that needed to accompnay jhanas). Attaining jhanas only lead to kuasala rebrith in the Brahma world. But then who knows at the Brahma world, one could meet someone who could guide us along the buddha path. That is a long shot and furthermore, we could be so attached to our good lives as Brahmas and forget the Buddha dhamma. Why not learn here while we are still as a human. Why long for jhanas, one must ask could this be conditioned by lobha :-). --------------------------------------------------- There's no point in longing for anything. But there is good reason to put forth effort to cultivate the jhanas, and one reason is the Buddha's teaching in MN 36 of what transpired after fruitless attempts by him of various sorts: < 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 secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, 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.' > Another good reason is the Buddha's repeated urging of his followers to seclude themselves and meditate in order to enter jhanas, for example as reported in MN 39: < And what more is to be done? There is the case where a monk seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of covetousness. Abandoning ill will and anger, he dwells with an awareness devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings. He cleanses his mind of ill will and anger. Abandoning sloth and drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth and drowsiness, mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth and drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness and anxiety, he dwells undisturbed, his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness and anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty. (Snip) Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. Furthermore, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters and remains in the second jhana: rapture and pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought and evaluation — internal assurance. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of composure. Just like a lake with spring-water welling up from within, having no inflow from the east, west, north, or south, and with the skies supplying abundant showers time and again, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate and pervade, suffuse and fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake unpervaded by the cool waters; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of composure. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born of composure. And furthermore, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, 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.' He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. Just as in a lotus pond, some of the lotuses, born and growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated and pervaded, suffused and filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, and nothing of those lotuses would be unpervaded with cool water; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded with pleasure divested of rapture. And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure and stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress — he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, neither-pleasure nor stress. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. > (Snip of the standard list of insights attained through to awakening) -------------------------------------------------------- Cheers Ken O ============================== With metta, Howard Hindrances /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #97204 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 8:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila ashkenn2k Dear Mike My personal opinion. One of the most interesting method use by Buddha is using the sutta. It is meant to suit everyone inclinations. To some, it could be an exhortation by the Buddha to undertake a deliberate restraint. For many, it is a straight forward and many people could relate and use. this condition kusala kamma. this is a good thing. I cannot said it is exclusively for those with advance attainments because for them, restraint is in built and these suttas text meant to reinforce the understanding of the need of developing understanding that condition restraint. Technically, (why Sarah and Jon has always to be so technical), the explanations by Jon and Sarah are right. However, I am more of a less stringnent person and I wonder why I still not kick out of DSG :-). I like straight forward practical look at it. No understanding no matter what kind of advance jhana one have or whatever, we cannot achieve right restraint. Those who committ aksuala at the moment is because of the aksuala hetus together with the taints. Even those who are very advance in their attaintment (less Arahants), will still commit akusala because taints are very strong "microbics" (this term is borrowed from Nina). Buddha always exhort one to do the correct thing in the suttas. It meant as a guide to achieve the 8NP. There is no need to fret whether it is a purposely exhortation. How to purposely exhort to restraint when we know that when purposely do something, the likelihood of lobha is there. Again my long chatty self, understanding is the heart of the exhortation of sila. Do this, the rest of the condition will likely fall in place at that moment. Dont forget understanding is also a hetu (hope I am right here, getting rusty, maybe must read up again) :-) Cheers Ken O #97205 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 8:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila ashkenn2k Dear Robert Hmm superficial is meant for the dinosaurs in DSG, they would understand what I meant. sorry I get carry away in writing this. Anyway I do not like long drawn discussion, superficial because if we compare to the depth of the conditions for the sutta words. What we look at the sutta is the tip of the iceberg. Just like 4NT, superficial writing but deep in its meaning :-) Ok next time I remember not to use this word. Again my humble apology cheers Ken O #97206 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ANAPANASATI: no 3. ashkenn2k Dear Howard Aiyah, I do not think I want to go on a long discussion with you on what is effort because we are two opposite poles of a magnet. We have long differ on our intepretation of effort. I have to quote text then you quote another one. No end. < 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 secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, 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.' > Aiyah Buddha is telling a story of what is happening to him entering jhanas. Did he say he purposely enter jhana, he just mention he entering it. <> Oh, this is common story line. A person who is not ready for selusion cannot enter a forest alone, he will be distraughted, frightened. I remember there is sutta story about this. Ready means have the right understanding :-). Could one cleanse his mind without understanding. Could one put forth any kusala if the basis of his understanding is not there. If one understand, it is the conditions that put forth and since conditions are not self, where is there self to put forth. Put forth could be conditioned by right understanding. There is a pali word for it, I am not sure whether chanda is the correct word. cheers Ken O #97207 From: "Robert" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 9:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila avalo1968 Hello Ken, No offense taken and no apology necessary. If I had read what you wrote more carefully, I would have better understood what you meant. With metta, Robert A. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Robert > > Hmm superficial is meant for the dinosaurs in DSG, they would understand > #97208 From: westbankj@... Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness farrel.kevin Hi Robert, Everything proceeds from view. View is the most important thing (according to the texts in any Buddhist school). The mind is the forerunner, so whatever arises in the mind (whatever cetasikas) will condition the experience that is experienced (or seems to be). When panna develops and finally there is no moha, this is nothing but view. It's the same, like the view you have now. Meditation and view are not separate in any tradition-- Theravada, Mahayana, or Vajrayana. For example, jhana meditation proceeds from the view that is good to calm mind, and is the view, or is a view that progresses from the view that at this very moment you should meditate on a suitable object conducive to samatha. Of corse, this is all conditioned-- it's conditioned view. So to separate view and practice is a false dichotomy. Hello Sarah, Here is something to consider (or not, as you like): In the end, when we have these discussions, aren't we all talking about belief? When someone on this forum claims that their position is the 'correct' Theravada interpretation and the other person's is 'wrong', isn't it always true that there will be large numbers of other people who consider themselves to be Theravada practitioners and at the same time disagree with the prevailing view at DSG? Even if voluminous sutta and commentary quotes are provided, aren't these subject to varied interpretations? Doesn't all of this argue for perhaps a little less certainty in how views are expressed? #97209 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 9:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. ashkenn2k Hi Robert sorry to interrupt, just could not resist this <> Clinging is clinging to real objects. Imagine objects could conditioned pleasant and indifferent feelings by different paccaya to the real objects. It is through these clingings of these real objects that cause this confusion of clinging to imagine objects. Hence <>, it meant real objects and not imaginery objects. When we cling to a beautiful object like a pretty flower, it is not the flower we clings because it just a percusor. It is the pleasant feelings which have become the object that we cling. It is the cravings that produces the renewal of being accompanied by enjoyment and lust (extract from 4NT). Cheers Ken O #97210 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ANAPANASATI: no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/7/2009 12:10:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear Howard Aiyah, I do not think I want to go on a long discussion with you on what is effort because we are two opposite poles of a magnet. We have long differ on our intepretation of effort. I have to quote text then you quote another one. No end. < 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 secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, 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.' > Aiyah Buddha is telling a story of what is happening to him entering jhanas. Did he say he purposely enter jhana, he just mention he entering it. ----------------------------------------- Right. Like tripping over a log! ;-)) Why just the other day, while playing tennis, I ... . LOL! ----------------------------------------- <> Oh, this is common story line. A person who is not ready for selusion cannot enter a forest alone, he will be distraughted, frightened. I remember there is sutta story about this. Ready means have the right understanding :-). Could one cleanse his mind without understanding. Could one put forth any kusala if the basis of his understanding is not there. If one understand, it is the conditions that put forth and since conditions are not self, where is there self to put forth. Put forth could be conditioned by right understanding. There is a pali word for it, I am not sure whether chanda is the correct word. cheers Ken O =========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97211 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... sprlrt Hi mike, An intricate maze, the Dhamma, my understanding is that cetana cetasikas arising in javana series of cittas (kusala or akusala) which are (pakati, habitual) upanissaya paccaya can be, not necessarily I think, habitual (bahula, acinna) kamma paccaya as well, but the two paccaya have different functions. The function of kamma paccaya is that of conditioning the arising of vipaka citta through the 5 sense doors, as well as birth consciousness, in which case that same kamma would also condition the production of kammaja rupa until the arising of death consciousness. kammapaccayo (Patthana, paccayaniddeso) kusalaakusala.m kamma.m vipaakaana.m khandhaana.m ka.tattaa ca ruupaana.m kammapaccayena paccayo. kusala and akusala kamma (cetana cetasika) is related to (the four nama) vipaka khandhas and to stored up (kamma originated) rupas by kamma paccaya. cetanaa sampayuttakaana.m dhammaana.m ta.msamu.t.thaanaana~nca ruupaana.m kammapaccayena paccayo. This last line refers to cetana cetasika of different types of cittas (kusala, akusala, abyakata) conditioning co-nascent dhammas (arising together with it), apart from those mentioned in the previous line: nama dhammas, citta and the other cetasikas, rupa dhammas, vinnati rupa, body and speech intimation, originated by the citta cetana arises with) Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > > Hi Alberto (and All) > > sprlrt wrote: > ... > > Just a short summary of this paccaya first: > > Upanissaya means strong depedence and groups together 3 paccaya, > > anantara, arammana and pakatupanissaya. All three upanissaya paccaya > > refers to prior dhammas conditioning the arising of normally the same > > type of dhamma later/now. > > Is bahula acinna kamma (with its result) an example of upanissaya paccayaa? > > Thanks in advance. > > mike > #97212 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 4:11 pm Subject: Neither Lying, nor Deceiving, nor Pretending! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What are the 8 Training Rules (Precepts), which brings Divinity? The Blessed Buddha once said: The habitual praxis of the observance day endowed with eight features brings high reward and blessing, & is of sublime dignity and greatness! And which are these 8 features? In this, any Noble Disciple considers within himself: Throughout their life the Arahats avoid lying & refrain from any falsehood. They speak only the factual & actual truth, they are very devoted to valid accuracy, reliable, all honest, worthy of trust & confidence, and never neither deceiving, nor pretending! May I also, this day & night, avoid all lying & refrain from any fake falsehood... By that I will follow the track & traits of these perfected Arahats! I shall then have observed the Uposatha observance day perfectly. With this fourth praxis is the observance day enriched. Observed in this very way, brings the observance day endowed with eight features high - even divine - reward & blessing & is of sublime dignity and immense greatness... Behaviour that counts as ways of lying: Any falsehood, dishonesty, misrepresentation, fabrication, faking, evasion, pretending, deceiving, simulation, impersonation, misleading, mimicry, sham, double-dealing, imposting, imitation, cheating, fraud, swindling, trickery, forgery, fiction, perjury, untruthfulness, & any bending, colouring, cover up, concealing, disguising, hiding or obscuration of the facts! Honest Facts: There are those, who break the holy vows, who speak false, deceive, & pretend, who thus cannot hope for a good future, There is no evil such ones cannot do ... ! Dhammapada 176 Those who falsely declare: "That indeed happened", about what did not happen or: "I did not do that", about what they actually did, earn themselves a hot ticket to a future in Hell... Dhammapada 306 One can only convince the liar with truth.... Dhammapada 223 If one speaks only truth, one wins a divine future! Dhammapada 224 <...> Source (edited extract): Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 8:44 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Neither Lying, nor Deceiving, nor Pretending! #97213 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 9:49 pm Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Thanks for summarising my 'case' as you understand it. That's very helpful. Let me respond by giving a revised version of your summary: > > a. the suttas speak at length about dhammas > b. the suttas say that dhammas are to be understood > c. among the things to be understood about dhammas are the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anattaa > d. however, these characteristics are not seen to any degree at the beginning level; the understanding of dhammas begins with an understanding at an intellectual level (about what dhammas are, etc) and, at a direct level, understanding the difference between nama and rupa. Can you show me a sutta reference that says that intellectual understanding should lead experiential understanding? Is that what you understand "hearing the true dhamma" to mean? > It's for this reason that I said that whether the 3 characteristics are inherent in, or are just descriptive of, dhammas is immaterial to a beginning of the development of insight at this present moment. But it does make a difference to understand what they actually refer to, even on the pariyatti level. If you mistake the concepts about the three characteristics of all dhammas, you will be pointing down the wrong path, no? If anatta is a characteristic of a dhamma, that's okay as long as characteristic just means "something about it" and not "something that it actually has." You know, this has happened in some branches of Buddhism: nibbana is seen as a "place" in the cosmos somewhere, like Heaven; or anatta is seen as an actual existent, like "no-self" as an actual thing of some kind. "Nothingness" is sometimes turned into a positive existent as well. If I say "all things are impermanent" you do not understand this to mean that impermanence is "something" that I can see in an object. And it's not something that I see in a dhamma either. The way I observe "anicca" is that I see and register that the thing I am seeing is changing. A new rug becomes old. A friend dies. That is anicca. It's not *in* the object; it's something about how it functions. So if a dhamma is a single isolated quality, such as hardness, or a moment of jhana or a moment of thought, how do I see anicca? It only has anicca if I see it change. AT the moment something exists, it does not exhibit anicca. Anicca is a comparison from one moment to the next. I don't even need a sutta to tell me this. It is definitionally impossible for anicca to be seen in a single moment, since it represents impermanence. How can impermanence be seen in one moment, it being the one moment when something exists? > > --------------------------------------- > > Again, you criticize my "silly word," reification, but have nothing to say about my point - that anicca, which is the characteristic of "not having or being a self" should not be made into a 'something' when it's point is that the idea of a self or entity is 'nothing.' > > --------------------------------------- > > I don't follow this last bit. To my understanding, the point of the not-self characteristic is that the idea we have of a self is wrong, not that the idea of a self is 'nothing' (whatever that means). It means that it's not a thing, that's all. It's not observable as something; it is only observable by comparion with the concept of atta. If I have no atta I have no anatta. It's a negation, not an assertion. Only in samsara is it the nature of beings to assume a self; and it is only in samsara that anatta has any meaning. If one did not have a self-concept, anatta would not show up as a characteristic, because there would be nothing to negate. Dukkha also is a realization, not a thing. Over time one realizes that those things which one is attached to do not fulfill their promise or expectation. There is no dukkha inherent in the object. It's a result of clinging, not of the object! If one didn't cling to the object, dukkha would not arise. To say it is a characteristic of the object would suggest something akin to saying that the object itself has satisfaction or dissatisfaction. One can only suffer or be dissatisfied, if there is clinging or attachment or expectation. > If you are suggesting an inherent self-contradiction in the notion of *not-self* as a *characteristic* of dhammas, I'm afraid I'm unable to see the point you are trying to make. Sorry. Please explain to me how anatta appears as a characteristic of a dhamma? Is there a mechanical explanation for exactly how it occurs? > > --------------------------------------- > It doesn't matter whether the suttas mention the word "reification" or not. That really is a bogeyman! > > --------------------------------------- > > I agree, the fact that the suttas don't mention the expression "reification of dhammas" is not the point. The point is whether that notion (i.e., the notion of "reification of dhammas" or, in this case, "reification of the characteristic of anicca") is present or has a basis in the suttas in any shape or form, expressed in whatever terms. I'm not aware that it is or has. That idea might not be in sutta, because at the time of the suttas being given, no such conflict existed. "Anatta" and the other characteristics were not taken as attributes but as understandings about the nature of samsara. Okay, here's a sutta. In the Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.mend.html] Buddha discusses the nature of Anatta. The whole discussion is about how each of the kandhas is "not-self" because it is impermanent, unsatisfactory and subject to change and cannot be controlled by the will. So anatta is not seen here as a characteristic of dhammas, but as a realization about dhammas not being part of the self. Anatta about a nama or rupa consists of the realization that "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self." Anatta belongs to panna regarding the dhamma, not to the dhamma. Thanks for the good conversation, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97214 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 10:31 pm Subject: Question to Alberto szmicio Hi Alberto Nice to see you again. I hope you're well. You said to me once that SPD's questions at the end of each chapter help you to develop more understanding. Then you or Nina stress that strong firm understanding of Dhamma is a condition to right understanding. But what if it leads to more thinking and we forget about right understanding? Recently I ve got so strong doubts. My best wishes Lukas #97215 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 10:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: DSG photo album szmicio --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Dear Lukas, > > --- On Mon, 6/4/09, szmicio wrote: > >Recently I have a lot of dosa because of this strong lobha I experience in my life. > I was wondering If you could tell something about anatta in daily life. Still that's the best reminder I can appreciate for now. > ... > S: What about seeing and visible object now? No one's very interested in them, but if there were no seeing of visible objects, there'd be no attachment, no aversion on account of what's seen. The same applies to the other sense objects. We might so much about what is experienced through the senses, conjuring up long stories about what is experienced, forgetting that such experiences are just brief moments of vipaka. All dhammas are so very anatta - so unexpected and conditioned in ways we can never know about. None of them are atta in any sense. L: What I've found out in my life,is that I started to think about visible object, not see it as it is. Even when there is idea of 'putting attention' to visible object, thats not right effort, it cant be. but maybe when i would do this again and again it will condition right understanding with right effort? > I think the only way to undersand more about anatta is to understand such dhammas when they arise, when they appear now. The more understanding, the less 'lost in stories - slowly, slowly, without expectation, however. > ... > >I spend last few days on thinking about "me and my lobha", "me and my dosa". > .. > S: It's all about the story of 'Lukas' or 'Sarah' in my case.....You're pointing to the same as Queen Mallika - wherever we look, none is ever as dear as we are to ourselves. This is the opposite of metta and the other brahma viharas, when for once, our (wholesome)concern is with others. Of course, the highest kusala is the moment of insight. At moments of right understanding, no 'me', no 'others' at all....just dhammas. L: Yes, there is conception of Lukas. But I dont think so reading and thinking about Dhamma can eradicate this conception. Those are my recent doubts. My best wishes Lukas #97216 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 11:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Robert > > sorry to interrupt, just could not resist this > > <> > > Clinging is clinging to real objects. Imagine objects could conditioned pleasant and indifferent feelings by different paccaya to the real objects. It is through these clingings of these real objects that cause this confusion of clinging to imagine objects. Hence <>, it meant real objects and not imaginery objects. > > When we cling to a beautiful object like a pretty flower, it is not the flower we clings because it just a percusor. It is the pleasant feelings which have become the object that we cling. It is the cravings that produces the renewal of being accompanied by enjoyment and lust (extract from 4NT). Thanks, Ken, that is an interesting point. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - #97217 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 7, 2009 11:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 16: Aanaapaanasati and Accumulatations "If we think about time and place and the object of meditation, I think that we are selecting or trying not to know all..." ***** Sujin: If we think about time and place and the object of meditation, I think that we are selecting or trying not to know all [objects], not to be aware of all types of naama and ruupa, which is the opposite of the Buddha's purpose. Tony: It seems to me that the Buddha knew, for example, a person's particular accumulations - say this particular person had an accumulation for aanaapaanasati. Why would he encourage that person with that accumulatation? Wouldn't that just be him developing more accumulations for that type of satipa.t.thaaana, as opposed to everyday satipa.t.thaaana? Sujin: In one sutta, Sariputta taught Rahula to practise aanaapaanasati. In many other suttas, the Buddha taught him to be aware of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind. So why do we only read one sutta and wonder why Sariputta taught Rahula to be aware of aanaapaanasati? Tony: The fact that Sariputta taught Rahula aanaapaanasati, why did he... Sujin: Because he saw Rahula sitting in that position in the forest, appropriate for developing aanaapaanasati. So he taught him about aanaapaanasati, but he can not force or direct Rahula's sati to be aware of aanaapaanasati. It depends on Rahula's accumulatation alone to be aware of it. Ven Dhammadharo: In one way, practising meditation on breath, aanaapaanasati, is one of the few subjects that you can encourage anyone to practise anytime because you've always got your breath with you. You can't just go up to someone and say 'what you should be doing is concentrating on a red disc', because there's no red disc around....it's one form of meditation you could recommend to anyone anytime because you don't need anything extra. You've always got your object with you wherever you go. Sujin: It might have been very popular in those days. Tony(?): With regard to the development of satipa.t.thaaana, why did the Buddha encourage people with these different accumulatations? Why do you always generally speak with regard to six sense doors - 5 sense doors and the mind door? Sujin: It's all in the Suttas, in the Vinaya and in the Abhidhamma, about 6 doorways. Tony: Why did he encourage somebody with say, aanaapaanasati, with a view of satipa.t.thaaana in mind, so one could develop satipa.t.thaaana? Wouldn't that just be developing more accumulatations for this particular type of satipa.t.thaaana ... Jonothan: They already have the accumulatation for doing that particular kind of meditation. Isn't he teaching according to the particular accumulatation? Tony: In my mind that seems to set off more accumulatations for this kind of thing and therefore that cannot be conducive to the development wisdom, but I'm saying now that I can see that that's wrong. Jonothan: Because the Buddha was teaching how the person could develop satipa.t.thaana even though he was practising concentration on the breath or concentraton on something else. That was what the Buddha was showing. ***** Metta Sarah ====== #97218 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (17) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 17: The Gold Lotus "The Buddha knew what level that monk had reached. It doesn't mean that that monk knew nothing about naama and ruupa." ***** Ven Dhammadharo: Excuse me, Tan Evan (Ven G), you mentioned the details in the sutta about a goldsmith or a gold lotus. I would appreciate hearing about it. Peter: The one I heard mention about the goldsmith - the bhikkhu wanted to meditate on a gold louts and the Buddha, through magical powers perhaps, dissolved the gold lotus, but I don't know if that was the one. It wasn't a samatha object, it was a gold lotus.* Sujin: I think there are many levels of right understanding and the Buddha knew what level that monk had reached. It doesn't mean that that monk knew nothing about naama and ruupa. It doesn't mean that monk wasn't aware of eye door, ear door, nose door, tongue door, body door and mind door at all. The Buddha knew at what level that monk had reached pa~n~naa, right understanding. Even if he had reached some level of vipassanaa ~naana, it's not the level of vipassanaa ~naana that could perform the function of detachment yet. It needs time and more development of pa~n~naa before the pa~n~naa can reach the degree or level that it can perform the function of detachment. The Buddha knew about that monk's accumulation that would help or lead him to that level of pa~n~naa which can perform that function of detachment. It's because he knew the right conditions for that level of pa~n~naa to arise. ***** Metta, Sarah *[S: The Buddha created a beautiful golden lotus flower by using his psychic powers because in his previous five hundred existences prior to this present one, the monk had been a goldsmith's son and was very attached to the colour of gold. The flower disintegrated and the monk attained all stages of enlightenment through penetrating the characteristic of impermanence and realising the other characteristics.] ===== #97219 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 1:20 am Subject: Re: Question to Alberto sprlrt Hi Lukas, L:You said to me once that SPD's questions at the end of each chapter help you to develop more understanding. Then you or Nina stress that strong firm understanding of Dhamma is a condition to right understanding. Conditions for the arising of samma ditthi/satipatthana are hearing/studying the Dhamma with yoniso manasikara, considering it properly, with detachment (a kusala dhamma). L: But what if it leads to more thinking and we forget about right understanding? MN 22 compares the study of the Dhamma with ayoniso manasikara, considering it improperly, with attachment (an akusala dhamma), to trying to catch a poisonous snake by its tails... L: Recently I ve got so strong doubts. There's bound to be forgetfulness of the 4 NT (muttha sacca/miccha sati) until panna, gradually developing (along with samma sati), reaches the level of conditioning the arising of magga vithi citta, which experience nibbana as its object, the only dhamma capable of getting rid of akusala dhammas, including vicikiccha, for good. Alberto #97220 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 1:47 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh szmicio Dear friends Saccavibhanga continues: <<198. Tattha katamo upaayaaso? ~Naatibyasanena vaa phu.t.thassa bhogabyasanena vaa phu.t.thassa rogabyasanena vaa phu.t.thassa siilabyasanena vaa phu.t.thassa di.t.thibyasanena vaa phu.t.thassa a~n~natara~n~natarena byasanena samannaagatassa a~n~natara~n~natarena dukkhadhammena phu.t.thassa aayaaso upaayaaso aayaasitatta.m upaayaasitatta.m aya.m vuccati upaayaaso.>> 198. Therein what is despair? (That which) To one afflicted by misfortune through relatives or to one afflicted by misfortune through wealth or to one afflicted by misfortune through disease or to one afflicted by misfortune through wrong (corrupted) morality or one afflicted by misfortune through wrong view or to one possesed of one misfortune or another or to one afflicted by one painful thing or another is despondency, despair, the state of despondency, the state of despair. This is called despair. <<199. Tattha katamo appiyehi sampayogo dukkho? Idha yassa te honti ani.t.thaa akantaa amanaapaa ruupaa saddaa gandhaa rasaa pho.t.thabbaa, ye vaa panassa te honti anatthakaamaa ahitakaamaa aphaasukakaamaa ayogakkhemakaamaa; yaa tehi sa"ngati samaagamo samodhaana.m missiibhaavo aya.m vuccati appiyehi sampayogo dukkho.>> 199. Therein what is suffering that is association with the dislike? Herein whatever undesirable, disagreeable, unpleasant(objects) there are visible, audible, odorous, sapid, tangible; or those who are not wishers of welfare, not wishers of benefit, not wishers of comfort, or who do not wish(one) to be released from the bonds; that which is association (by visiting), association (by receiving), concoursing, collaborating therewith. This is called suffering that is associated with the disliked. <<200. Tattha katamo piyehi vippayogo dukkho? Idha yassa te honti i.t.thaa kantaa manaapaa ruupaa saddaa gandhaa rasaa pho.t.thabbaa, ye vaa panassa te honti atthakaamaa hitakaamaa phaasukakaamaa yogakkhemakaamaa maataa vaa pitaa vaa bhaataa vaa bhaginii vaa mittaa vaa amaccaa vaa ~naatii vaa saalohitaa vaa; yaa tehi asa"ngati asamaagamo asamodhaana.m amissiibhaavo aya.m vuccati piyehi vippayogo dukkho.>> 200. Therein what is suffering that is separation from the liked? Herein whatever desirable, agreeable, pleasant(objects) there are, visible, audible, odorous, sapid, tangible; or those who are wishers of welfare, wishers of benefit, wishers of comfort or who wish (one) to be released from the bonds, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, colleagues, relatives, or blood relations; that which is non- association (by visiting), non-association (by receiving), not concoursing, not collaborating therewith. This is called suffering that is separation from the liked. #97221 From: Ken O Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question to Alberto ashkenn2k Hi Lukas To me, first come thinking, the comes understanding. So dont worry about whether thinking is understanding or not, it does not help. The focus is thinking that you read and how it relate to your daily live. Do get caught over thinking is not understanding, I could feel it is not helpful to you right now. For eg, when I started, I also think a lot like how a visible object become an object, what citta, what cetasikas and the though process. It is through such repetitive process that you will slowly get the idea the difference between thinking and understanding. A very fine difference but that take times to develop. It is a habit hard to break even for me :-). But I do not care less as long as it helps me to understand, a little thinking will not harm me. As each as his own inclinations, so you must find yours and not from us. I am just a busy body thats all :-) Cheers Ken O #97222 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 3:37 am Subject: Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) abhidhammika Dear Sarah How are you? You reported K Sujin as saying: "Sujin: If we think about time and place and the object of meditation, I THINK that we are selecting or trying not to know all [objects], not to be aware of all types of naama and ruupa, which is the opposite of the Buddha's purpose." Suan asked: Did K Sujin still think as she did in the above statement? Do you also think the way K Sujin did? Sarah, you also reported K Sujin as saying: "Sujin: Because he saw Rahula sitting in that position in the forest, appropriate for developing aanaapaanasati. So he taught him about aanaapaanasati, but he can not force or direct Rahula's sati to be aware of aanaapaanasati. It depends on Rahula's accumulatation alone to be aware of it." Suan asked further: Did K Sujin use the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? Do you also understand the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? Thanking you in advance. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #97223 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 3:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self-view permutations MN131 antony272b2 Hi Sarah, Thanks for the detailed reply. Good to be back again. I'd better explain what I meant by the word "permutations". I studied Combinatorial Probability at University. The definition is: "Maths: an ordered arrangement of the numbers or terms of a set into specified groups: the permutations of a, b, and c, taken two at a time, are ab, ba, ac, ca, bc, cb" Here are some permutations in MN131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta: "looks upon form as self, or self as possessed of form, or form as in self, or self as in form." I figure that you can't look upon "form as in self" and "self as in form" simultaneously. My question is are the four permutations mutually exclusive and if so do people move between different ones in rapid succession or do they persist with particular ones as a personal philosophy? I'll reply to some of your other points in a separate thread. Thanks again for your response. With metta / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Antony, > > I always like to hear your reflections on suttas and the good questions you raise: > > --- On Mon, 6/4/09, Antony Woods wrote: > >Majjhima 131: > "And how is one drawn into present things? Herein, monks, an uninstructed ordinary man who takes no account of the Noble Ones, is unskilled in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, untrained in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, taking no account of the good men, unskilled in the Dhamma of the good men, untrained in the Dhamma of the good men, looks upon form as self, or self as possessed of form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He looks upon feeling as self, or self as possessed of feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.<....> > http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ mn/mn.131. nana.html > > >I've never been able to understand these self-views in my everyday experience. I suspect that a person doesn't walk around all day with a single self-view e.g. "looking upon form as self" but that in his/her confusion goes through many of the permutations in rapid succession. > > >Can anyone shed light on this topic? > .... > S: This is from the Bhaddekaratta Sutta. In the verse at the beginning, with regard to present dhammas, it says: > > "Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; > Let him know that and be sure of it, > Invincibly, unshakeably." > > [Paccuppanna~nca yo dhamma.m, tattha tattha vipassati; > Asa.mhiira.m asa.mkuppa.m, ta.m vidvaa manubruuhaye] > > So, it's referring to the understanding of presently appearing dhammas with insight (vipassanaa). > > Now, the further detail which you quote above begins with: "And how is one drawn into present things?". The Bodhi/Nanamoli translation gives: > "And how, bhikkhus, is one vanquished in regard to presently arisen states?" A footnote mentions that the MA glosses: "One is dragged in by craving and views because of the lack of insight." > > So what is there lack of insight into? Ruupa, vedana, sa~n~na, sa'nkhaara and vi~n~naana - in other words, into all dhammaa. > > Why? Because these dhammaa are taken for atta, for something or someone. This is referring to atta-vaadupaadaaana or atta-di.t.thi. We hear a sound and there's an idea that it's a vacuum-cleaner or siren that's heard. We see a visible object and there's an idea that it's a computer screen or book that's seen. The same applies to the other khandhas. There is not an understanding of just 'the seen' in 'the seen' or 'the heard' in 'the heard'. Furthermore, there's an idea of someone experiencing these objects, no understanding of seeing, hearing, feeling, thinking and other naamas. > > Of course, there isn't atta-di.t.thi arising all the time. However, for the 'uninstructed ordinary man' referred to in the quote, the underlying tendency (the anusaya) is there, accumulated with each citta, not yet eradicated. It'll manifest as atta-di.t.thi whenever there are conditions for it to arise. > > It's not a matter of going through any mental 'permutations', but of understanding the various dhammaa, including the atta di.t.thi when it arises, as conditioned realities. > > This is a start, an indication of how I read the lines. Is there any atta-di.t.thi now? Is the visible object being taken for some 'thing' now? If not, what is the reality appearing now? It's not a matter of selecting or of trying to find atta-view, but of developing insight into what appears now. > > Let me know what further thoughts you have on this, Antony. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ============ > #97224 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 6:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self-view permutations MN131 sarahprocter... Hi Antony, --- On Wed, 8/4/09, Antony Woods wrote: >Thanks for the detailed reply. Good to be back again. ... S: Good to see you back again too! ... >Here are some permutations in MN131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta: "looks upon form as self, or self as possessed of form, or form as in self, or self as in form." >I figure that you can't look upon "form as in self" and "self as in form" simultaneously. ... S: Right. ... >My question is are the four permutations mutually exclusive and if so do people move between different ones in rapid succession or do they persist with particular ones as a personal philosophy? ... S: Mutually exclusive and it depends on conditions which kind of atta-view (and concerned with which object) will arise at any time. When there's awareness and right understanding of such an atta-view, we can know (or rather the understanding can know)which atta-view it is at that moment. It's not a matter of speculating, but directly understanding it. For example, is the visible object now appearing taken as 'something', as atta? This would be a common one, I think, for most of us. Again, as I said, I don't think it's a matter of running through the various permutations, but of directly knowing the reality of such atta-view when it arises very naturally. ... >I'll reply to some of your other points in a separate thread. ... S: I'll look forward to that. Meanwhile, please question me further on this if you think I've still missed your point or what I say is not clear. Metta, Sarah ======== #97225 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 6:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) sarahprocter... Dear Suan, Thank you for responding. I appreciate the feedback. Good questions - --- On Wed, 8/4/09, abhidhammika wrote: >You reported K Sujin as saying: "Sujin: If we think about time and place and the object of meditation, I THINK that we are selecting or trying not to know all [objects], not to be aware of all types of naama and ruupa, which is the opposite of the Buddha's purpose." .... Sarah: Let me paraphrase the above comment as I think it's an important one and may be misconstrued: "If we have an idea of a particular time, place and object of meditation, we are limiting the namas and rupas which can be known. This is the opposite of the Buddha's purpose in teaching satipatthana." ... >Suan asked: Did K Sujin still think as she did in the above statement? Do you also think the way K Sujin did? ... Sarah: When she says "I think" above, (which you put in caps), it's just a polite way of speech, just as the "I think" I see I just put above when I wrote "I think it's an important one...". Neither she nor I would have any doubt about the comment above as being correct. When there's an idea of time, place or particular object for the development of satipatthana, it indicates a lack of understanding of dhammas now appearing by conditions, beyond anyone's control. ..... >Sarah, you also reported K Sujin as saying: "Sujin: Because he saw Rahula sitting in that position in the forest, appropriate for developing aanaapaanasati. So he taught him about aanaapaanasati, but he can not force or direct Rahula's sati to be aware of aanaapaanasati. It depends on Rahula's accumulation alone to be aware of it." >Suan asked further: >Did K Sujin use the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? ... S: Good question. It refers to the accumulation at that time when Sariputta taught him, at that moment as conditioned by all his previous accumulations by way of natural decisive support condition. Why are we interested in studying the Dhamma or in any other topic? Because of past accumulations which condition such interest or study now. ... >Do you also understand the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? .... S: I understand the term to refer to the mental states arising and 'accumulating' in the javana processes. Cittas and cetasikas are the accumulations conditioned by previous thoughts, deeds, experiences and even concepts. ... >Thanking you in advance. ... S: A pleasure and I mean that sincerely. Please ask any further questions on any of the extracts. Metta, Sarah ======= #97226 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: DSG photo album sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Wed, 8/4/09, szmicio wrote: >L: What I've found out in my life,is that I started to think about visible object, not see it as it is. ... S: Well, it's important to realise as you do, that the thinking is not the direct awareness. Also, without the wise reflection,the pariyatti, there will be no direct awareness. That's why there is no understanding of such dhammas if one hasn't heard the Buddha's Teachings. People in other teachings may talk about being aware of the present or the present object, but they don't understand what the present realities are. ... >Even when there is idea of 'putting attention' to visible object, thats not right effort, it cant be. ... S: No, it's wrong effort. It's Self again. ... >but maybe when i would do this again and again it will condition right understanding with right effort? ... S: Or more wrong effort and disturbance. Attachment and self-view leading to more dosa, remember:). It's not the middle way. ... >L: Yes, there is conception of Lukas. But I dont think so reading and thinking about Dhamma can eradicate this conception. ... S: No, only right understanding can, by directly knowing the realities appearing, whether it be seeing, wrong effort, doubt or thinking. Wrong effort or 'putting attention' on particular objects can never eradicate wrong views. ... >Those are my recent doubts. ... S: I think it's great that you raise them here and do everyone else a favour in the process. Your doubts are very common doubts, not belonging to anyone actually:). I'm glad to see you're also discussing with Alberto. You could ask him and Ken O some difficult questions to encourage them to stay around longer:-)). Metta, Sarah ====== #97227 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 6:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] vipassana in reading books (studying) sarahprocter... Dear Sachin, Nina will be glad to see you asking another question. I believe you are from the group in Indonesia, is that right? --- On Tue, 7/4/09, sachin bahade wrote: > sir, when reading a book for study, what should be the mind state, by continue reading . there may be we follow vipassana by which our mind become pure. .. Sarah: The mind state at any given moment will depend on many conditions. If we think it should always be pure, we don't understand how there will always be pure and impure states arising until one has become fully enlightened. Rather than thinking about how the mind state should be at any given time, it's more useful to understand it for what it is. Vipassana means the direct understanding of mental or physical realities when they are experienced. This is the way that the mind becomes pure. So first, we have to undersand what these mental and physical realities (namas and rupas) are. Do you know about namas and rupas? Would you like to discuss more about them? What's your idea about them? Metta, Sarah p.s Everyone, please sign off with your name at the end of all messages. ======== #97228 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness sarahprocter... Hi Robert A, I always appreciate your reflections and gentle reminders. I agree with you that it's not just a question of what is said, but also how it's said. In this regard, I think we all learn, somewhat clumsily for my part, as we go along. Sometimes, of course, our intentions may be misunderstood as well. For example, I've witnessed dozens (hundreds?) of mini-flare-ups here, often through mis-understandings about motives. A common one, is one you allude to when you suggest 'a little less certainty' expressed by some of us as a mark of respect...a little less 'correctness'. I agree that often a little more humility would be helpful. At the same time, there is only one path, one set of Noble Truths, one meaning of vipassanaa. So it's not possible that all interpretations could be right and I suppose we are all certain at some times about some things we say, aren't we? For example, if I say that there is seeing now, visible object that's seen and thinking about this object, is it necessary to suggest that this is only one possibility? Surely the teachings are there to be proved, not for endless speculating about? If someone says that according to the Buddha's teachings, contact and feeling arise with every citta, so to suggest otherwise is wrong, is that too 'correct' sounding? In the end, as Jessica and I discussed over tea, I think it always comes back to 'our own' mental states - I don't spend much time at all thinking or wondering about others' motives or intentions. I know people have different styles and some come across more strongly than others as you've found, but as with family and friends at home, we just learn to accommodate such traits. [I mean, I've never known Alex not sound 100% defintite about anything, even when it's directly contradicting what he wrote a week before! I still enjoy our exchanges.] Again, I think the reminders of being like a dustrag like Sariputta are helpful in this regard, if you follow me. Thanks for expressing your views and please get up on your soap box anytime. It's always good to hear such comments which help us all reflect further. This is just a ramble in response.... If it wasn't late, I'd try to add a quote, but I need to give my neck a rest. Pls let me know if there's anything here which you disagree with - I believe there are some Dhamma issues, but can't quite put my finger on them for now... Metta, Sarah ====== #97229 From: Ken O Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. ashkenn2k Hi Robert <> Objections your honour. You quote Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta. I remember in the same sutta, it mention feelings is not self...... And since feelings is not-self so it leads to affliction. Feeling can be unpleasant feelings and this could only arise with dosa akusala cittas. Anatta does not belong to panna. It is a characteristics of dhamma. One needs panna to look at anatta of dhamma in order to understand it. So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) Cheers Ken O #97230 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) abhidhammika Dear Sarah Thank you for your prompt answer. I noticed that you seem to have carefully avoided, in your answer, the inclusion of the expression "the purposeful actions" done by Rahula in his previous lives. So your answers are rather vague and not to the point. Perhaps, you seem to be not quite sure about what should be answered? Do you have any problem with the purposeful actions? By the way, purposeful actions are mindful, deliberate, intentional, and responsible actions that can produce results. Just to avoid ambiguity, actions are not limited to bodily ones. If the expression `purposeful actions' in the above sense are agreeable to you, what might be Rahula's purposeful actions done in his previous lives that now become conditions for his sati to recollect aanaapaa.na in this life? By the way, sati is not aware of anything, but helps the mind to be aware of an object such as breathing. When K Sujin said "It depends on Rahula's accumulation alone to be aware of it", did the term `accumulation' refer to Rahula's purposeful actions done in his previous lives alone? Or, if your answer includes Rahula's purposeful actions done in this life as well, what might be those actions that serve as the conditions for his sati to recollect aanaapaa.na? At this stage, do not worry about the Pali terms cittas, cetasikas, javana processes and so on as you did in your previous answer which is not very coherent: "S: I understand the term to refer to the mental states arising and 'accumulating' in the javana processes. (In this life or previous lives, or both?) Cittas and cetasikas are the accumulations conditioned by previous thoughts, deeds, experiences and even concepts." (In this life or previous lives, or both? You ought to be clear about these issues) All you need to do at this stage is, read carefully my questions and answer them in plain English so that I can see clearly if K Sujin and you understand or articulate these issues in light of Theravada teachings. Having said that, I wonder if you could supply the Pali terms for `accumulations' and `natural decisive support condition' if they were translations of the Pali terms and if you know them. I do hope that my questions are not unduly difficult. Thanking you in advance. Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Dear Suan, > > Thank you for responding. I appreciate the feedback. Good questions - ... > S: A pleasure and I mean that sincerely. Please ask any further questions on any of the extracts. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > #97231 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 10:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Ken O --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Hi Robert > > <> > > Objections your honour. :-) You quote Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta. I remember in the same sutta, it mention feelings is not self...... And since feelings is not-self so it leads to affliction. Feeling can be unpleasant feelings and this could only arise with dosa akusala cittas. > > Anatta does not belong to panna. It is a characteristics of dhamma. One needs panna to look at anatta of dhamma in order to understand it. So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) > > > Cheers > Ken O I did not say that well. Unfortunately I will now explain myself at length. :-) What I was trying to say was that anatta is indeed a characteristic of dhammas, but it is not a characteristic like a mole on your cheek or having two arms and legs. It is not an observable that sits on the dhamma like a part of it. It is something that panna discerns about the way that dhammas are and behave; what they have and what they don't have. If I say "Ken is always late to the meeting" that doesn't mean that "lateness" is something that I can see if I look at you; it is something that I observe about the way you function in a particular situation. Likewise, anicca is something that is observed about the way dhammas behave: they rise, change and dissolve. That is their nature, that is a characterstic of the dhamma, but it is a characteristic of what the dhamma does, what happens to it, etc., not of what it looks like or how it appears in the moment. If I experience "hardness" or "smoothness" in the a moment of citta, there is nothing in that single moment that will show me "anicca." Anicca is temporariness and it is only displayed over a series of moments, within the stream of time, and over a series of changes. Anatta might actually be discernable in the moment, because I can feel hardness and perhaps realize "This is nothing but hardness, it has no other substance or meaning - therefore it is not a self and is not part of my self; it is just what it is and nothing more," or as Buddha said, to see in the seen "only the seen." And nothing more. But anatta does not show up *in* the dhamma, it is not something that is observable about the dhamma itself. It is something that is absent in the dhamma and that absence is observed in contrast to the belief or assertion that there a dhamma is part of the self or has or is a self. It is a realization about the dhamma, not something that appears with it, in it or on it. Dukkha, dissatisfaction or suffering is created by the limitations of controlling, accessing, holding onto, or otherwise being satisfied by the dhamma. It is a relation between dhamma and the citta that suffers over it. Dukkha, "suffering" is not a characteristic of the dhamma in the sense that the dhamma suffers or the dhamma reaches out and causes suffering directly. The dhamma creates dukkha because of clinging. Without clinging to the dhamma there is no dukkha. My point is not that these characteristics do not exist, or that they are not important, but that they don't come with the dhamma itself; they are part of the relation between citta and dhamma. If there was no citta, there would be no temporariness to observe because the dhamma would not arise and fall for citta. Without a citta that thinks there is a self, there is no "anatta" in the dhamma, because anatta is the realization by citta that there is no "self" in the dhamma. Anatta points to an absence, not a presence. So it is not something present in the dhamma, it is something realized that is missing from the dhamma. Without citta that clings there would be no dukkha. Dukkha doesn't emanate off the dhamma, it is created by the citta that clings and then has the dhamma disappoint it or disappear on it. I hope this makes sense. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97232 From: "m_nease" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 11:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Precepts and Siila m_nease Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > The habitual praxis of the observance day endowed with eight features > brings high reward and blessing, & is of sublime dignity and greatness. > And which are these eight features? > Here, any Noble Disciple considers > within himself: Throughout their life the Arahats avoid the killing of any > living being, they do not hurt any of them. Without stick or any weapon, > tender-hearted, gentle, caring, & mild they think only of the welfare of > all living beings! **So will also I, this day and night, avoid the killing and > hurting of all living and breathing beings.** Without any cudgel or weapon, > tender-hearted, full of kindness, I will think only on the joyous welfare > of all living beings and creatures. In this regard I will follow the Arahats, > & **I shall observe this observance day praxis perfectly!** With this first > praxis is the observance day enriched. Observed in this very way, the > observance day endowed with eight features brings high - even divine - > reward & blessing & is of sublime dignity and immense greatness... I see nothing at all to dispute in this. Did you think I would? By the way (also to Sarah, Ken O and Alberto), apologies for slow replies--my computer seems to be dying. I'm on my second OS reinstallation in two days (having lost all my data including links, addresses, emails etc.) and this one doesn't seem very stable. I'll try to respond to each of your posts if and when I'm able. mike #97233 From: "colette" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 3:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. ksheri3 Is there something to look at? So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) > colette: (what fun), If I may, "The meaning of all phenomena being mere labels or designations is that they exist and acquire their identities by means of our denomination or designation of them." Simply put, I have no clue as to how to extricate yourself from the quagmire you've just placed yourself in. I tell you, though, it happens to me constantly! When ya apply that damned wisdom from the Abhidharma, as I always do (does that make me something since I always apply the Abhidharma but I also apply Tanra extensively, what label would be put upon me?). I'm not admitting inclusion in the Prasangika sect but: "For the Prasangikas, if anything exists objectively and is identified within the basis of designation, then that is, in fact, equivalent to saying that it exists autonomously, that it has an independent nature and exists in its own right...." So, what we people saying about Shunyata or/and Sunyata? Wasn't it the musician and/or Troubedor, STING that suggested "setting the battlements on fire"? Wasn't sting a member of the police? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Hi Robert > > <> > > Objections your honour. You quote Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta. I remember in > > #97234 From: "colette" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 4:20 pm Subject: Re: effort. ksheri3 Hi Jon, BABY, A MAN AFTER MY OWN HEART. Were you a demolitions expert in a previous life? I like the way you x-ray that foundation. > Can you show me a sutta reference that says that intellectual understanding should lead experiential understanding? <.....>WHAT IS "EXPERIENCE"? ---------------- > But it does make a difference to understand what they actually refer to, even on the pariyatti level. colette: whose understanding is being applied as the fulcrum and/or common denominator? Is it my understanding or is it your understanding or is it a third parties understanding or....? ------------------------------- >...a characteristic of a dhamma, colette: maybe I'm missing the point entirely since I couldn't read it all, time limitations. SLOW DOWN! "A Characteristic" actually means that this thing does exist and is permanent. It's floating and it's transient: "This is a philosophical tenet of the Yogacara school in which external reality is negated, that is, the atomically structured external world is negated. Because the proponents of the Yogacara philosophical system assert that things cannot exist other than as projections of one's own mind., they also maintain that there is no atomically structured external physical reality independent of mind. By analyzing along these lines, Yogacara proponents conclude that there is no atomicly structured external reality. This conclusion is reached because of not having understood the most subtle level of emptiness as expounded by the Prasangikas. In fact, Yogacarins assert that things have no inherent existence, and that if you analyze something and do not find any essence, then it does not exist at all. Prasangikas, on the other hand, when confronted with this un-findability of the essence of the object, conclude that this is an indication that objects do not exist inherently, not that they do not exist at all. This is where the difference lies between the two schools." gotta go, Jon, but I love this approach you've struck upon. It works so well with my "walk on the wild side" <....> toodles, colette <...> #97235 From: slnanda Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 5:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ANAPANASATI: no 3. silananda_t Dear Ken & Howard, I see clearly why the Path starts with Right View. If one considers the jhana as part of the Handful of Leaves, then one would work towards that. Otherwise, he wouldn't. And there is no point arguing after what needs to be said, has been said. Remember that these posts are not for those who posted only, but also for the few hundred in the list, who are possibly considering & verifying what has been said as well. [?] mahakaruna, ~silananda www.what-buddha-taught.net > Oh, this is common story line. A person who is not ready for selusion > cannot enter a forest alone, he will be distraughted, frightened. I > remember > there is sutta story about this. Ready means have the right understanding > :-). > Could one cleanse his mind without understanding. Could one put forth any > kusala if the basis of his understanding is not there. If one understand, > it is > the conditions that put forth and since conditions are not self, where is > there self to put forth. Put forth could be conditioned by right > understanding. > There is a pali word for it, I am not sure whether chanda is the correct > word. > > cheers > Ken O > =========================== > With metta, > Howard #97236 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 7:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Precepts and Siila jonoabb Hi Mike --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m_nease" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > The habitual praxis of the observance day endowed with eight features > > brings high reward and blessing, & is of sublime dignity and greatness. > > And which are these eight features? > > Here, any Noble Disciple considers > > within himself: Throughout their life the Arahats avoid the killing of any > > living being, they do not hurt any of them. Without stick or any weapon, > > tender-hearted, gentle, caring, & mild they think only of the welfare of > > all living beings! **So will also I, this day and night, avoid the killing and > > hurting of all living and breathing beings.** Without any cudgel or weapon, > > tender-hearted, full of kindness, I will think only on the joyous welfare > > of all living beings and creatures. In this regard I will follow the Arahats, > > & **I shall observe this observance day praxis perfectly!** With this first > > praxis is the observance day enriched. Observed in this very way, the > > observance day endowed with eight features brings high - even divine - > > reward & blessing & is of sublime dignity and immense greatness... > > I see nothing at all to dispute in this. Did you think I would? No, on the contrary I thought it tended to support what you were saying ... Doesn't it? > By the way (also to Sarah, Ken O and Alberto), apologies for slow replies--my computer seems to be dying. I'm on my second OS reinstallation in two days (having lost all my data including links, addresses, emails etc.) and this one doesn't seem very stable. I'll try to respond to each of your posts if and when I'm able. Sorry to hear that. You hav back-ups, of course (ha ha!). Jon (Sydney airport, in transit to HK) #97237 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:17 pm Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Colette: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > BABY, A MAN AFTER MY OWN HEART. Were you a demolitions expert in a previous life? I like the way you x-ray that foundation. > > > Can you show me a sutta reference that says that intellectual understanding should lead experiential understanding? > > <.....>WHAT IS "EXPERIENCE"? It is nothing other than that which is experienced. However, there is a difference between experiencing an idea about something, and experiencing the something itself. One can read about sati a thousand times, but that will not give one the experience of sati. However, it will give one the experience of the idea 'sati.' It's still an experience, just not the one you're thinking/reading about. > ---------------- > > > But it does make a difference to understand what they actually refer to, even on the pariyatti level. > > colette: whose understanding is being applied as the fulcrum and/or common denominator? Is it my understanding or is it your understanding or is it a third parties understanding or....? mine. :-) Best, Robert ------------------------------- #97238 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:27 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (continuing my reply to your msg #97124) > ----------------------- Well it can be a big problem to develop a concept about something that is absent, and then turn the absence into a positive characteristic that can supposedly itself be observed. > ----------------------- The fact that a characteristic is expressed in terms of a negative (anicca, anatta) does not make it a "concept about something that is absent". The 3 characteristics are, to my understanding, *attributes* of dhammas. > ----------------------- If a glass is "empty" the "emptiness" is not a thing, it's an observation about something that's not there. You can't observe something that's not there. So what you are really doing is comparing the current state of the object with a concept. There's no such thing as "anatta" unless you start out in samsara thinking that people and things have self-hood or entity. Anatta is the antidote for that; it's not a thing in its own right. It's a negative insight. > ----------------------- Yes, I appreciate this is the view being taken. But to my understanding, the teaching about anatta is almost invariably given in the context of talk about dhammas, and specifically of it being *dhammas* that are anatta. It is only by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas that the anatta spoken of in the teachings can be known. > ----------------------- > That the nature of reality is that it is unsatisfying, impermanent and lacking any positive entity or selfhood. [Dukkha, Anicca, Anatta.] When you make a characteristic or quality into a definite and real object, you are fighting anatta. > ----------------------- I was hoping to hear more about what you understand that "reality" to mean. Does it, for example, carry the same meaning as "dhammas"? (If not, what is the relationship between the two?) > ----------------------- > My sense of the three marks is that they are all-pervasive. In other words, anatta means that everything is empty of selfhood. If you make something a definite entity, you are fighting with anatta. > ----------------------- The idea of something (dhammas, the 3 characteristics) being an *entity* is an idea you are imputing to me; it's not anything I've actually said. I don't really know what it's supposed to mean, but I think it's a red herring ;-)) Dhammas are "not-self" because they are conditioned and impermanent. They are described in the texts as "mere impersonal elements". Whether or not a dhamma can be described as an entity is not pertinent (and not discussed in the texts). It's a red herring! > ----------------------- > Anicca means that everything is constantly changing and deteriorating, reforming and changing. If this is taken literally, there is no moment when something has a definite characteristic. It is never frozen in time. I think there is a tension between the idea of a paramatha dhamma that is definite and real, and the full sense of anicca being present through to the last drop of microscopic reality. I would be interested to see that tension explored. > ----------------------- Dhammas are real in the sense of having an inherent characteristic. And they are momentary in their rising and falling away. I don't see any "tension" here. > ----------------------- > Dukkha means that there is nothing to hold onto, that all attempts to cling are met with frustration and disappointment. That would go for holding onto the idea of paramattha dhammas as well. > ----------------------- That would also go for holding onto the idea that there is nothing to hold onto ;-)) Anyway, in my case most attempts to cling are, unfortunately, successful ;-)), so I disagree with your observation here. Phew, think I've responded on most of your points ... Jon #97239 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:31 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > My view of what "dhammas" are from the suttas so far is that they are impermanent and lacking in substantial identity or meaning [anatta.] Therefore clinging to objects of any kind within samsara causes suffering; and through insight and true seeing of their nature one can gradually let go of involvement and attachment to the dhammas and develop the awareness to experience nibbana. > > What do you think of that? Does that agree with your understanding of the Buddha's message? I agree that it is by insight into the true nature of dhammas that attachment is eventually eradicated. I also agree that dhammas are impermanent and not-self (anatta). But I'm doubtful about your characterisation of not-self as meaning "lacking in substantial identity or meaning". To my understanding of the texts, the attribute of anatta points to the nature of dhammas as mere impersonal elements. Jon #97240 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 8:46 pm Subject: Reuniting is Bak Poya Day! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How to be a Real Buddhist through Observance? The Bak Poya day is the full-moon of April. This holy day celebrates that the Buddha visits Ceylon for the second time to reconcile two local chiefs Mahodara and Cūlodara , uncle & nephew, who had fallen into war threatening hostility about a jewel-beset throne... The story shows the Buddha as fine diplomat & is given in full below! On such Full-Moon Uposatha Poya Observance days: Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, white-clothed, clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first 3 times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees & head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms at the heart, one recites these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I will hereby respect these Three Jewels for the rest of my life! I accept to respect & undertake these 5 training rules: I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts, I am thus protected by these 5 precepts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! A journey towards the deathless Nibbāna is thus started! This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Ease, to Happiness, initiated by Morality , developed further by Dhamma-Study and fully completed by training of Meditation ... Today indeed is Pooya or Uposatha Observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps also the Eight Precepts from sunrise until next dawn. <...> Reuniting those who are divided, by inducing harmony: Now the most compassionate Teacher, the Conqueror, rejoicing in the salvation of the whole world, when dwelling at Jetavana in the fifth year of his Buddhahood, saw that war, caused by a gem beset throne, was like to come to pass between the nagas Mahodara and Cūlodara , uncle and nephew and their followers! The SamBuddha , then on the Uposatha day of the dark half of the month Citta, in the early morning, took his sacred alms bowl and his robes, and, out of compassion for the nagas , sought the Nagadipa . At that time the same naga Mahodara was then king, gifted with miraculous powers, in a nagas kingdom in the ocean, that covered half a 1000 yojanas. His younger sister had been given in marriage to the naga king on the Kannavaddhamana mountain; her son was Cūlodara . His mother's father had given to his mother a splendid throne of jewels, then the naga had died and therefore was this war between nephew & uncle threatening! The nagas of the mountains were also armed with many miraculous powers. The deva Samiddhisumana took his rajayatana tree standing in Jetavana , his own fair habitation, holding it like a parasol over the Conqueror, he, with the Teacher's leave, attended him to that spot, where he had formerly dwelt. That very deva had been, in his latest birth, a man in Nagadipa . On the very spot where thereafter the rajayatana tree stood, he had seen PaccekaBuddhas taking their meal. And at the sight his heart was glad & he offered branches to cleanse their alms bowls. Therefore he was reborn in that very same tree in the pleasant Jetavana garden, outside of the gate rampart. The God of all gods saw in this an advantage for that deva, and, for the sake of the good, which should spring therefrom for Ceylon, he brought him there together with his tree. Hovering there in midair above the battlefield, the Master, who drives away spiritual darkness, called forth dreadful darkness over the nagas! Then comforting those who were distressed by terror, he once again spread light abroad. When they saw the Blessed One, they joyfully did reverence to the Masters feet. Then the Vanquisher preached to them the Dhamma that makes concord, & both nagas gladly gave up the throne to the Sage. When the Master, having alighted on the earth, had taken his place on a seat there, and had been refreshed with divine food and drink served by the naga kings, he, the Lord, established in the three refuges and in the 8 moral precepts eighty kotis of snake-spirits, dwellers in the ocean and on the mainland. The naga-king Maniakkhika of Kalyāni , maternal uncle to this naga Mahodara , who had come there to take part in the battle, and who before, at the Buddhas first coming, having heard the true Dhamma preached, had become established in the 3 refuges & in the moral duties, prayed now to the Tathagata: Great is the compassion that you have shown us here, Master! Had you not appeared we had all been consumed to ashes. May your compassion yet settle also and especially on me, you who are rich in friendly loving kindness, please peerless one, come again back here to my home country. When the Lord had consented by his silence to return, then he planted the rajayatana tree on that very spot as a sacred memorial, & the Lord of the Worlds gave over the rajayatana tree & the precious throne seat to the naga kings to do homage thereto: In remembrance that I have used these, do homage to them naga kings! This, well beloved, will bring to pass many blessings & happiness for you for a long time! When the Blessed One had uttered this and other exhortations to the nagas, he, the compassionate saviour of all the worlds, returned to the Jetavana monastery. Here ends the explanation of the Visit to Nagadipa . Source: Mahavamsa I:44. The Great Chronicle of Ceylon. Translated. By Wilhelm Geiger 1912; reprinted in 1980. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130010I Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Reuniting is Bak Poya Day! #97241 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 9:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Emptiness avalo1968 Hello Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Robert A, > > I always appreciate your reflections and gentle reminders. I agree with you that it's not just a question of what is said, but also how it's said. In this regard, I think we all learn, somewhat clumsily for my part, as we go along. > RA: Actually, I had not intended to appoint myself as speech police for DSG. What I was saying is that in some cases I will excuse myself from the conversation. I would agree that there is only one correct view, but I would be wary of claiming that I possess it. What I possess are beliefs. Nice to talk to you again Sarah. With metta, Robert A. #97242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 11:13 pm Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 6. nilovg Dear friends, The Visuddhimagga (Chapter VIII, 145-146) quotes the sutta about mindfulness of breathing in the Kindred Sayings (V, Mah-vagga, Book X, Chapter I, I). This sutta also occurs in other parts of the Tipiaka [1]. I will quote the sutta text and then refer to the word commentary of the Visuddhimagga, in order that this sutta will be more clearly understood. We should note that there is a division into four sections of four clauses each in this sutta which, in the Visuddhimagga, are marked from I-XVI. The sutta states: It has been described by the Blessed One as having sixteen bases thus: And how developed, bhikkhus, how practised much is concentration through mindfulness of breathing both peaceful and sublime, an unadulterated blissful abiding, banishing at once and stilling evil unprofitable thoughts as soon as they arise? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty place, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. (I) Breathing in long, he knows I breathe in long; or breathing out long, he knows I breathe out long. (II) Breathing in short, he knows I breathe in short; or breathing out short, he knows I breathe out short. (III) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body. (IV) He trains thus I shall breathe in tranquillizing the bodily activity; he trains thus I shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily activity. (V) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing happiness; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing happiness. (VI) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing bliss; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing bliss. (VII) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the mental formation; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the mental formation. (VIII) He trains thus I shall breathe in tranquillizing the mental formation; he trains thus I shall breathe out tranquillizing the mental formation. (IX) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the (manner of) consciousness. (X) He trains thus I shall breathe in gladdening the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness. (XI) He trains thus I shall breathe in concentrating the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out concentrating the (manner of) consciousness. (XII) He trains thus I shall breathe in liberating the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out liberating the (manner of) consciousness. (XIII) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence. (XIV) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating fading away; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating fading away. (XV) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating cessation; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating cessation. (XVI) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment. --------- 1. See the Mah-satipatthna sutta (Dgha Nikya, Dialogues 11, no. 22. ********* Nina. #97243 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 8, 2009 11:31 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 3. nilovg Dear pt, Op 3-apr-2009, om 7:19 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > What would be the experiential differences between > "peace" (manifestation of ekaggata in Vism), and, "inactivity and > coolness" (manifestation of passaddhi in Vism)? They seem the same > to me, so that's the real problem I guess. ------- N: Ekaggata cetasika accompanies each citta, but here the Visuddhimagga speaks about ekaggata that is kusala and a jhaanafactor. The two kinds of passaddhi are sobhana cetasikas and they accompany each kusala citta. Thus, the functions of these cetasikas are different. We cannot find out which is which without having developed insight. Then the true nature of cetasikas that are different from citta and different from each other can be penetrated. However, it depends on the understanding of the individual which realities are known as they are. When we just hear the word peace we may wonder what it is. First, the reality appearing now can be understood as a conditioned dhamma without naming or defining it. We cannot expect to know the nature of all cetasikas now. We can read their definitions and know that they are all different. But do continue your questions, you make good points. Nina. #97244 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Precepts and Siila sarahprocter... Hi Mike, --- On Thu, 9/4/09, m_nease wrote: >I see nothing at all to dispute in this. Did you think I would? .... [S: Jon's on his way back to Hong Kong now, exhausted, I believe -- his last few posts must have been from one airport or other -- so expect very slow further replies! More colourful Fiji Tales, but I'll let him slip them in, if he wishes] ... >By the way (also to Sarah, Ken O and Alberto), apologies for slow replies--my computer seems to be dying. I'm on my second OS reinstallation in two days (having lost all my data including links, addresses, emails etc.) and this one doesn't seem very stable. I'll try to respond to each of your posts if and when I'm able. .... S: Very sorry to hear this -- as I recall, not the first time either. A few dinosaur computers around causing trouble at the moment, it seems. Hope you get it working and no hurry to respond to anything I've ever written! Metta, Sarah ===== #97245 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 1:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) sarahprocter... Dear Suan, --- On Wed, 8/4/09, abhidhammika wrote: >I noticed that you seem to have carefully avoided, in your answer, the inclusion of the expression "the purposeful actions" done by Rahula in his previous lives. So your answers are rather vague and not to the point. Perhaps, you seem to be not quite sure about what should be answered? ... Sarah: "'The purposeful actions' done by Rahula in his previous lives" is rather a vague phrase to me. What realities exactly are you referring to? What is the Pali for these 'purposeful actions'? ... >Do you have any problem with the purposeful actions? ... Sarah: Let's see when you tell us the dhammaa you have in mind. As others have pointed out, it's not always clear whether you are referring to cittas, cetasikas or a Self that peforms various deeds. ... >By the way, purposeful actions are mindful, deliberate, intentional, and responsible actions that can produce results. Just to avoid ambiguity, actions are not limited to bodily ones. ... Sarah: Again, I'll wait for the Pali terms of the particular cittas and cetasikas you have in mind. ... >If the expression `purposeful actions' in the above sense are agreeable to you, what might be Rahula's purposeful actions done in his previous lives that now become conditions for his sati to recollect aanaapaa.na in this life? ... Sarah: The Proximate condition for sati is given as sa~n~naa, right remembrance. Conditions are complex, but I'd say that the main conditions for his sati to 'recollect aanaapaa.na in this life' are the accumulations of sa~n~naa, sati and pa~n~naa and other associated mental factors for such. Naturally there had to be the kusala vipaaka as well to hear the teachings, to hear about all kinds of dhammaa, not just about aanaapaa.na. I'm sure the Theragaathaa commentary will give a lot more detail about his previous lives and the kusala kamma accumulated in them. ... >By the way, sati is not aware of anything, but helps the mind to be aware of an object such as breathing. ... Sarah: Are you suggesting that sati does not have the function to be aware of any object itself? Again, I'll be interested to see your reference on this. I agree that the citta is the leader in experiencing the object. However, the citta just experiences, sati is aware of it. ... >When K Sujin said "It depends on Rahula's accumulation alone to be aware of it", did the term `accumulation' refer to Rahula's purposeful actions done in his previous lives alone? ... Sarah: No, as I've explained, it refers to the accumulated sati and pa~n~naa. ... >At this stage, do not worry about the Pali terms cittas, cetasikas, javana processes and so on as you did in your previous answer which is not very coherent: >"Sarah: I understand the term to refer to the mental states arising and 'accumulating' in the javana processes. (In this life or previous lives, or both?) Cittas and cetasikas are the accumulations conditioned by previous thoughts, deeds, experiences and even concepts." (Suan: In this life or previous lives, or both? You ought to be clear about these issues) ... Sarah: I'm trying to be precise because we both have an interest in Abhidhamma. To me, referring to 'cetasikas 'accumulating' in the javana processes' is more precise than referring to 'puposeful actions'. As to your last question, the tendencies, the aasaya, accumulate from moment to moment, life to life, so they've been accumulating for past aeons and are accumulating now. ... >All you need to do at this stage is, read carefully my questions and answer them in plain English so that I can see clearly if K Sujin and you understand or articulate these issues in light of Theravada teachings. ... Sarah: ;-) ... >Having said that, I wonder if you could supply the Pali terms for `accumulations' and `natural decisive support condition' if they were translations of the Pali terms and if you know them. ... Sarah: Ok, I'll give aasaya for accumulations in this context. Natural decisive support condition is the common translation of pakatuupanissaya paccaya, the broadest condition. Quoting from Nina's book on 'Conditions' (which was based on K.Sujin's very detailed series of lectures on the same), she writes: "With regard to the third decisive support-condition, pakatuupanissaya-paccaya, the commentary to the 'Pa.t.thaana' (the Pa~ncappakara.natthakathaa) explains the term 'pakata' in pakatuupanissaya. Pakata means done properly, done thoroughly. Kusala and akusala which were 'done thoroughly', often performed, can become firmly accumulated, they can become habitual. In this way they are a cogent reason, a powerful inducement for the arising of kusala and akusala later one, which are the dhammas conditioned by them, the paccayupanna dhammas." Perhaps you might like to look at the Paali terms used in this part of the commentary referred to here and share them with us. ... >I do hope that my questions are not unduly difficult. >Thanking you in advance. ... Sarah: Your questions are always challenging, Suan, but I appreciate them and hope I've passed your tests:) Btw, I noticed my last sets of questions to you in previous threads went unanswered - I think we all avoid certain questions! Metta, Sarah ====== #97246 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Emptiness sarahprocter... Hi Rob A, --- On Thu, 9/4/09, Robert wrote: >RA: Actually, I had not intended to appoint myself as speech police for DSG. What I was saying is that in some cases I will excuse myself from the conversation. ... S: Please feel very welcome to take up the vacant 'speech police' position! I perfectly understand your wishing to excuse yourself from various conversations, especially those with a little heat turned up. I sometimes think the same and I thought of doing so just now in my one with Suan, but it's interesting - often I learn something from these 'hot' threads and of course, they're always a good opportunity for showing metta and khanti (patience). Anyway, we all respond as we do according to various factors, including time! ... >I would agree that there is only one correct view, but I would be wary of claiming that I possess it. What I possess are beliefs. ... S: I think we can take it as a given that what is said here is what someone believes to be true with varying degrees of certainty. It's like when one teaches children (which I've done a lot of), one doesn't say in front of every statement, 'I believe...'. One just gives the facts to the best of one's knowledge, even though some may turn out to be wrong. Anyway, I appreciate your modest style - all to their own, I think. ... >Nice to talk to you again Sarah. ... S: To you too, Robert! Metta, Sarah ========= #97247 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 1:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Tue, 7/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >>S: At any moment, there is a citta (consciousness) arising and experiencing an object. This citta is always, always accompanied by a minimum of seven cetasikas (mental factors) experiencing the same object. The citta is the leader in experiencing the object, but could > not experience it without the assistance of the cetasikas. R:>So it sounds like they are "co-experiencing" the object, rather than experiencing it separately; ie, they are each a "part of" the experience, rather than being separate experiencers. If this is the case, it is easier to understand. ... S: Yes, they are 'co-experiencing' the object. They are separate dhammas which arise together to experience the same object. .... R:> I am breaking out the cetasikas below to highlight them for myself: > For example, it needs concentration to 'focus on' the object, contact to 'touch' the object, feeling to 'taste' the object and so on. Each cetasika has a particular function to perform. Each has a particular characteristic. Do these cetasikas arise simeoltaneously, or in a sequence? ... S: They arise simultaneously. Each citta arises with at least 7 cetasikas. For example, hearing consciousness cannot hear a sound unless such factors as those given above assist it. ... R:>I imagine that concentration focuses, then contact touches and then feeling tastes, and then the sense of the dhamma is given by these to the citta to experience? ... S: No, they preform their functions at the same time. I was going to link you to some very clear passages in the text Mike referred us to, but I can't access it now. Anyway, here's the link: http://www.archive.org/details/FundamentalAbidhamma ..... R:> Well, I see that the aim of describing the cetasikas the way you do is to take away any experiencing self, and it seems like I am trying to put it back in by giving these functions to consciousness. But my version of it is that consciousness is not a self; it itself is just a function and that the cetasikas are the way in which it is functioning at a different moment in relation to the dhamma. ... S: I agree with the first sentence anyway! I know you have your theories, but you might find it interesting and useful to really understand what the Abhidhamma says as well:-). As I say, the book above is quite clear, as is 'Survey' or 'ADL' or 'CMA'. I recommend you get a copy of the latter if you don't already have it. It's easily obtainable and very reasonable in price. Meanwhile, I'm glad the cittas are having a good work-out!! I'll look forward to more - all our cittas need the study and questioning to keep them on their toes:-)). Metta, Sarah ===== #97248 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 3:06 am Subject: SN35:235 "grasp the sign" need to understand antony272b2 Hello all, "And what, bhikkhus, is the Dhamma exposition on the theme of burning? It would be better, bhikkhus, for the eye-faculty to be lacerated by a red-hot iron pin burning, blazing, and glowing, than for one to grasp the sign through the features in a form cognizable by the eye. For if consciousness should stand tied to gratification in the sign or in the features, and if one should die on that occasion, it is possible that one will go to one of two destinations: hell or the animal realm. Having seen this danger, I speak thus." From: SN35:235 The Exposition on Burning Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi Antony: I've never understood what is meant by "grasp the sign". On Yahoo Answers someone used a topless photo as their avatar. My reaction was: "mammary glands". Am I on the right path? Thanks / Antony. #97249 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 3:48 am Subject: Re: SN35:235 "grasp the sign" need to understand antony272b2 The end of the sutta sheds some light: "In regard to this, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple reflects thus: "Leave off lacerating the eye faculty with a red-hot iron pin burning, blazing, and glowing. Let me attend only to this: So the eye is impermanent, forms are impermanent, eye-consciousness is impermanent, eye-contact is impermanent, whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that too is impermanent." Antony: This sounds like the disciple doesn't know what he/she is seeing. Or is impermanence different for different types of objects? Thanks / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Antony Woods" wrote: > > Hello all, > "And what, bhikkhus, > is the Dhamma exposition > on the theme of burning? > It would be better, bhikkhus, > for the eye-faculty to be lacerated > by a red-hot iron pin burning, blazing, and glowing, > than for one to grasp the sign > through the features > in a form cognizable by the eye. > For if consciousness should stand tied > to gratification in the sign or in the features, > and if one should die on that occasion, > it is possible that one will go > to one of two destinations: > hell or the animal realm. > Having seen this danger, I speak thus." > From: SN35:235 The Exposition on Burning > Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi > > Antony: I've never understood what is meant > by "grasp the sign". > On Yahoo Answers someone used > a topless photo as their avatar. > My reaction was: "mammary glands". > Am I on the right path? > > Thanks / Antony. > #97250 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 4:18 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (4) scottduncan2 Dear All, Following on last: #96949 Fours (1-3) (cy: #97056, #97072)... CSCD <ti tatiya.m jhaana.m [tatiyajjhaana.m (syaa. ka.m.)] upasampajja viharati. Sukhassa ca pahaanaa dukkhassa ca pahaanaa, pubbeva somanassadomanassaana.m attha'ngamaa, adukkhamasukha.m upekkhaasatipaarisuddhi.m catuttha.m jhaana.m [catutthajjhaana.m (syaa. ka.m.)] upasampajja viharati. Walshe DN 33.1.11(4) 'Four jhaanas: Here a monk, detached from all sense-desires, detached from unwholesome mental states, enters and remains in the first jhaana, which is with thinking and pondering, born of detachment, filled with delight and joy. And with the subsiding of thinking and pondering, by gaining inner tranquility and oneness of mind, he enters and remains in the second jhaana, which is without thinking and pondering, born of concentration, filled with delight and joy. And with the fading away of delight, remaining imperturbable, mindful and clearly aware, he experiences in himself that joy of which the Noble Ones say: "Happy is he who dwells with equanimity and mindfulness", he enters and remains in the third jhaana. And, having given up pleasure and pain, and with the disappearance of former gladness and sadness, he enters and remains in the fourth jhaana which is beyond pleasure and pain, and purified by equanimity and mindfulness. Olds [ 4.4 ] The Four Burnings Here friends a bhikkhu, separating himself from sense pleasures, separating himself from unskillful things, still thinking and reacting with the pleasurable enthusiasm born of detachment enters into and makes a habitat of the First Burning, then, with thinking and reacting having calmed down, attaining tranquility, becoming single-minded, without thinking and reacting, with the pleasurable enthusiasm born of High getting he enters into and makes a habitat of the Second Burning, then, dispassionate and detached from enthusiasm, living conscious and aware of bodily sense-reactions suchas those described by the aristocrats when they say 'Detached, with satisfied mind, he lives pleasantly,' he enters into and makes a habitat of the Third Burning then, letting go of his former experiences of pleasure and pain, allowing his experience of mental ease and discomfort to subside on their own, without pleasure or pain, with utterly pure detachment of mind, he enters into and makes a habitat of the Fourth Burning. RD's [ 4.4 ] Four Jhaanas. Herein, friends, a brother, aloof from sensuous appetites, aloof from evil ideas, enters into and abides in the First Jhaana, wherein there is initiative and sustained thought, which is born of solitude, and is full of zest and ease.4.4 Secondly, when suppressing initiative and sustained thought, he enters into and abides in the Second Jhaana, which is self-evoked, born of concentration, full of zest and ease, in that, set free from initial and sustained thought, the mind grows calm and sure, dwelling on high. Thirdly, when a brother, no longer fired with zest, abides calmly contemplative, while mindful and self-possessed he feel in his body that ease whereof Ariyans declare: He that is calmly contemplative and aware, he dwelleth at ease, so does he enter into and abide in the Third Jhaana. Fourthly, by putting aside ease and by putting aside mal-aise, by the passing away of the joy and the sorrow he used to feel, he enters into and abides in the Fourth Jhaana, rapture of utter purity of mindfulness and equanimity, wherein neither ease is felt nor any ill. **olds: [ 4.4 ] see Glossology: jhana for the Pali, PED definition, and comparisons of the various translators. ***rd: 4.4 Above, p. 123 f. (mo: omitted here; I have inserted the sequence into the text above) {vim: talk 4-4} Sincerely, Scott, connie, Nina. #97251 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 5:19 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh szmicio Dear friends Saccavibhanga, Vibhangapali continues: <<201. Tattha katama.m yampiccha.m na labhati tampi dukkha.m? Jaatidhammaana.m sattaana.m eva.m icchaa uppajjati aho vata, maya.m na jaatidhammaa assaama; na ca, vata, no jaati aagaccheyyaati! Na kho paneta.m icchaaya pattabba.m. Idampi yampiccha.m na labhati tampi dukkha.m. Jaraadhammaana.m sattaana.m byaadhidhammaana.m sattaana.m mara.nadhammaana.m sattaana.m pe sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupaayaasadhammaana.m sattaana.m eva.m icchaa uppajjati aho vata, maya.m na sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupaayaasadhammaa assaama; na ca, vata, no sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupaayaasaa aagaccheyyunti! Na kho paneta.m icchaaya pattabba.m. Idampi yampiccha.m na labhati tampi dukkha.m.>> 201.Therein what is, 'not to get what one wishes, that also is suffering'? In beings subject to birth such a wish arises, "Well indeed if we were not subject to birth; may birth not come to us"; this indeed is not to be attained by wishing. This is, 'not to get what one wishes, that also is suffering'. In beings subject to ageing. In beings subject to sickness. In beings subject to death. In beings subject to to sorrow-lamentation-pain(physical)-mental pain-despair, such a wish arises, "Well indeed if we were not subject to sorrow-lamentation-pain(physical)-mental pain-despair;may sorrow-lamentation-pain(physical)-mental pain-despair, not come to us"; this indeed is not to be attained by wishing. This also is, 'not to get what one wishes, that also is suffering.' <<202. Tattha katame sa.mkhittena pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa dukkhaa? Seyyathida.m ruupupaadaanakkhandho, vedanupaadaanakkhandho, sa~n~nupaadaanakkhandho, sa"nkhaarupaadaanakkhandho, vi~n~naa.nupaadaanakkhandho. Ime vuccanti sa.mkhittena pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa dukkhaa. Ida.m vuccati dukkha.m ariyasacca.m.>> 202. Therein what is, 'in brief the five aggregates(as object of) the attachments are suffering'? They are: The aggregate of material quality(as object of) the attachments, the aggregate of feeling(as object of) the attachments, the aggregate of perception (as object of) the attachments, the aggregate of mental concomitants(as object of) the attachments, the aggregate of consciousness(as object of) the attachments. These are called, 'in brief the five aggregates(as objects of) the attachments are suffering'. This is called the Noble Truth of suffering. --------------------------------- Best wishes Lukas #97252 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN35:235 "grasp the sign" need to understand nilovg Dear Anthony, Op 9-apr-2009, om 12:48 heeft Antony Woods het volgende geschreven: > So the eye is impermanent, > forms are impermanent, > eye-consciousness is impermanent, > eye-contact is impermanent, > whatever feeling arises > with eye-contact as condition > whether pleasant or painful > or neither-painful-nor-pleasant > that too is impermanent." > > Antony: This sounds like the disciple > doesn't know what he/she is seeing. > Or is impermanence different > for different types of objects? ------- N: Attending to the sign: in this context: the outward appearance of things, not the reality appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind-door. He attends to a concept of thing or person, instead of knowing one dhamma at a time as it appears through one doorway at a time. Knowing what one is seeing, thus, perceiving a person or thing, this is thinking, citta which thinks and this is also an impermanent reality. It is not forbidden to think, but let us learn the difference between reality and concept. Thinking itself is a reality and it falls away. The person or thing that is the object of thinking is not real in the ultimate sense. It does not have the characteristic of impermanence. People may not be inclined to accept this, since our whole life we are used to thinking of person and things as if they were really existing. Does this mean anything to you? Nina. #97253 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (18) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 18: Sa~n~naa(perception) as Proximate Cause for Sati(awareness) "It depends whether sa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana is strong enough to be condition for sati or not." ***** Ven Guttasila: The sammaa samaadhi of the eightfold path - the concentration is momentary concentration at the level of sammaa samaadhi.....Is that concentration arising ....or is it developed.? Sujin: Concentration or ekaggataa cetasika, one-pointedness, arises with each citta but it's not considered as sammaa samaadhi of the eightfold path. When it arises with kusala citta or a wholesome citta it's sammaa samaadhi but not of the eightfold path. It would be sammaa samaadhi of the eightfold path only when it accompanies sammaa sati which is aware of the characteristic of reality which appears. You are talking about the proximate cause for sati or what? Ven D: I think what you [Ven G] mean is that if we're talking about developing the eight fold path, we must have sati and we must have concentration both, so if if says the proximate cause for sati is strong perception then there must be strong perception to have that sati and that concentration. So it seems to you that if that strong perception is the cause of sati then everything else must be strong? Otherwise how can you have strong perception as the proximate cause of sati and have, say, weak sati and weak pa~n~naa? Ven G: I mean concentration... Sujin: Excuse me when it says that strong perception is the proximate cause of satipa.t.thaana, that's not wrong because we have heard about satipa.t.thaana many times a day but if sa~n~naa remembers something else there is no condition for sati to arise. [However] when sa~n~naa remembers what it has heard about satipa.t.thaana it can be a condition for sati to arise - Sa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana. There must be sa~n~naa of what it has heard about satipa.t.thaana as condition for sati to arise, because in a day there are many different sa~n~baas. One listens to satipa.t.thaana in the morning with weak sa~n~naa or with strong a~n~naa and after that moment there are many different sa~n~naas of different objects. It depends whether sa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana is strong enough to be condition for sati or not. And we do not have to say that now there is sa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana so satipa.t.thaana arises. Its not necessary. Whenever sati arises it indicates there is pa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana. ***** Metta, Sarah ===== #97254 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 9:55 am Subject: Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) abhidhammika Dear Sarah How are you? Thank you for your reply. You asked: "What is the Pali for these 'purposeful actions'?" The purposeful actions are known as kusalakamma (wholesome actions) and akusalakamma (unwholesome actions) in Pali. For example, "Sukhavedaniiyanti i.t.thaaramma.navipaakadaayakam kusalakammam." "The term "Sukhavedaniiyam" refers to the wholesome action that is the giver of desirable objects as the results." Section 7, Uparipa.n.naasa A.t.thakathaa, Majjhimanikaayo. I have already explained or defined the phrase "the purposeful actions" in my previous post as follows: "By the way, purposeful actions are mindful, deliberate, intentional, and responsible actions that CAN PRODUCE RESULTS. Just to avoid ambiguity, actions are not limited to bodily ones." Yet, Sarah, you wrote: "Sarah: "'The purposeful actions' done by Rahula in his previous lives" is rather a vague phrase to me." No, Sarah, it is very explicit phrase in plain English for everyone to understand. I think that you did not read my above explanation, or did not read it carefully. Perhaps, your resistance to actions with a purpose may have clouded your eyes? You ought to know that purposeful actions do not necessarily imply a self as the doer in the context of Theravada teachings. As you now know what the purposeful actions are, you can go ahead with answering my questions. You also asked: "Sarah: Are you suggesting that sati does not have the function to be aware of any object itself? Again, I'll be interested to see your reference on this. I agree that the citta is the leader in experiencing the object. However, the citta just experiences, sati is aware of it." No, Sarah, I am stating that sati is not aware of anything. "Apilaapanalakkha.naa sati, asammosanarasaa," Indriyaraasiva.n.nanaa, A.t.thasaalinii. Please look up the above Pali terms for the characteristic and function of sati. You will see they do not mean awareness. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #97255 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 10:35 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > (continuing my reply to your msg #97124) > > > ----------------------- > Well it can be a big problem to develop a concept about something that is absent, and then turn the absence into a positive characteristic that can supposedly itself be observed. > > ----------------------- > > The fact that a characteristic is expressed in terms of a negative (anicca, anatta) does not make it a "concept about something that is absent". The 3 characteristics are, to my understanding, *attributes* of dhammas. > > > ----------------------- > If a glass is "empty" the "emptiness" is not a thing, it's an observation about something that's not there. You can't observe something that's not there. So what you are really doing is comparing the current state of the object with a concept. > There's no such thing as "anatta" unless you start out in samsara thinking that people and things have self-hood or entity. Anatta is the antidote for that; it's not a thing in its own right. It's a negative insight. > > ----------------------- > > Yes, I appreciate this is the view being taken. But to my understanding, the teaching about anatta is almost invariably given in the context of talk about dhammas, and specifically of it being *dhammas* that are anatta. It is only by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas that the anatta spoken of in the teachings can be known. > > > ----------------------- Well that is a general answer to a specific statement. Sure, you can say we'll understand everything when panna level is high enough, but still, you say that for now we must have intellectual right understanding, and it is this pariyatti level that I am talking about. So please explain to me how it is possible that an absence of self, such as is represented by "anicca" can be a definite *attribute of* a dhamma? Does it wear a wristband that says anatta on it? I am not trying to be sarcastic but just highlight the fact that if you are going to say that it is a positive attribute of a dhamma according to the teachings then to achieve pariyatti level understanding about it you have to have some idea how this is possible. How does it appear to panna? What does it look like? I may not have seen Heaven, but those who have supposedly seen it can at least describe it. So how can anatta be an attribute that one perceives, rather than an understanding that something is not there that was previously thought to be there, ie, a being or entity? Is there an actual teaching about *what kind* of characteristic of a dhamma this is? Or is it just said in sutta, and understood by those who have insight, that dhammas are *not self* which is what I think it is. Buddha himself says the same thing over and over again: "Dhammas are not self; if they were self, you would be able to do x with them; they would give satisfaction, etc... Since they are not controllable and do not give satisfaction, etc., they are *not self.*" That is Buddha's argument about anatta. He never says that anatta is something you can perceive in its own right. So please explain to me what the teaching is about how it can appear as part of a dhamma - not in general that "this is seen by one with panna," but specifically how is it possible? That's all the time I have right now, so I will try to come back and answer the rest of the post later. Coming up next: Robert's view of what reality is. Do I really have to answer that? :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97256 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 12:05 pm Subject: Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... sprlrt Hi Howard, I found this sutta, it's specific about the wrong and the right path, but I hope you'll find it relevant to the subject of akusala dhammas conditioning akusala dhammas, and likewise for kusala ones. Alberto MN 126, Bhuumija Sutta, trans. Na.-BB ... 10. Suppose a man needing oil, seeking oil, wandering in search of oil, were to heap up gravel in a tub, sprinkle it all over with water, and press it. Then if he had made an aspiration and acted thus, he would be unable to procure any oil; if he made no aspiration and acted thus, he would still be unable to procure oil, ... . Why is that? Because [that way of acting] is not a proper method for procuring oil. So too whatever recluses or brahmins have wrong view, wrong intention, wrong speech, wrong action, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, and wrong concentration, and they lead the holy life, they are still unable to procure any fruit, ... . Why is that? Because that [wrong path] is not a proper method for procuring fruit. ..... 15. Suppose a man needing oil, seeking oil, wandering in search of oil, were to heap up sesamum flour in a tub, sprinkle it all over with water, and press it. Then if he had made an aspiration and acted thus, he would be able to procure any oil; if he made no aspiration and acted thus, he would still be able to procure oil, ... . Why is that? Because [that way of acting] is a proper method for procuring oil. So too whatever recluses or brahmins have right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration, and they lead the holy life, they are still able to procure fruit, ... . Why is that? Because that [right path] is a proper method for procuring fruit. ... #97257 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 8:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... upasaka_howard Hi, Alberto - In a message dated 4/9/2009 3:07:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sprlrt@... writes: Hi Howard, I found this sutta, it's specific about the wrong and the right path, but I hope you'll find it relevant to the subject of akusala dhammas conditioning akusala dhammas, and likewise for kusala ones. Alberto MN 126, Bhuumija Sutta, trans. Na.-BB ... 10. Suppose a man needing oil, seeking oil, wandering in search of oil, were to heap up gravel in a tub, sprinkle it all over with water, and press it. Then if he had made an aspiration and acted thus, he would be unable to procure any oil; if he made no aspiration and acted thus, he would still be unable to procure oil, ... . Why is that? Because [that way of acting] is not a proper method for procuring oil. So too whatever recluses or brahmins have wrong view, wrong intention, wrong speech, wrong action, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, and wrong concentration, and they lead the holy life, they are still unable to procure any fruit, ... . Why is that? Because that [wrong path] is not a proper method for procuring fruit. ..... 15. Suppose a man needing oil, seeking oil, wandering in search of oil, were to heap up sesamum flour in a tub, sprinkle it all over with water, and press it. Then if he had made an aspiration and acted thus, he would be able to procure any oil; if he made no aspiration and acted thus, he would still be able to procure oil, ... . Why is that? Because [that way of acting] is a proper method for procuring oil. So too whatever recluses or brahmins have right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration, and they lead the holy life, they are still able to procure fruit, ... . Why is that? Because that [right path] is a proper method for procuring fruit. =========================== This is all well and good. Nonetheless, experience shows that unwholesome actions can have wholesome consequences, and I believe that several Abhidhammikas here have said as much. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97258 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 3:41 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > Thanks for making the effort! I appreciate it. Not at all. My idea of fun! > - > > First, there is no "Abhidhamma perspective" that says anything different from what's found in the Suttas. > > Are you sure there is no interpretation involved when worldlings look at the suttas in one way or another? Do you and I have the same perspective on the anapanasati sutta? On what authority do either you or I think we have the "correct one." > - My point (not very well expressed, I know) was that there is nothing in the Abhidhamma that is inconsistent with the suttas, and that the traditional Theravada approach holds that the teaching found in both is one and the same teaching. I appreciate that nowadays that view is under challenge, but I don't think you're wanting to go into that whole thing (although we can if you'd like to ;-)). > - You interpret bhavana as an arising moment of understanding or of sati, I think. I interpret it as meditative awareness within meditation. > - It would be more correct to say that I've identified that meaning of bhavana (i.e., bhavana as an arising moment of understanding) as the position explained in the commentaries, and as a position that I'm happy to take as a reference point. > - Without Abhidhamma, how do you determine whether the Buddha is giving meditation instruction or describing arising cittas that happen to look a certain way? > - I think there is strong support for the traditional/orthodox position, even if we restrict our discussion to sutta materials (which I take it you'd prefer to do). For a start, it seems to me that for anyone taking up meditation in line with the perceived "instructions", the moments of consciousness will be mostly akusala, with relatively few (if any) moments of kusala. > - > I think to say there is no difference between "raw sutta" as they are understood by many and the Abhidhamma interpretation of sutta, is not really correct. I think that what you may really be saying is that the Abhidhamma view of sutta is the correct one. Fine for you to think that, but to say there is no other perspective possible is not, I think, looking at the whole picture. > - Well there are also the ancient commentarial writings, which present a similar interpretation to that of the Abhidhamma. And in any event, some of those "raw suttas" have material that is presented in terms very similar to the commentarial/Abhidhamma texts (I am thinking of some of the texts in KN). Pausing there for now. Jon #97259 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 3:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > > > Jon: So dhammas were to be classified according to whether they experience an object or not, you would put cetasikas into the "not" basket. Is that correct? > > Well it's not all or nothing. If I distinguished between my brain and my eye, or between my eye and my camera, that doesn't mean that the eye or the camera has no part in experiencing, just that the camera would not create an experience without an eye to see it, and the eye would not experience it without the brain to process it. > Only seeing consciousness can experience visible object. Neither brain nor camera does that. The importance of the different kinds of consciousness and their respective objects in the teachings cannot be underestimated (plenty of suttas on this one, I can assure you ;-)). > > Getting away from the physicalistic worldly example, the cetasika would not "touch" or "feel" the object without consciousness "experiencing" the touching and feeling. So I wouldn't say they have no part in the experience; I would like to say they are functions which allow citta to experience dhamma in a particular way. If that is wrong, then explain the mechanism to me if possible. How do they all experience the same dhamma and what is there relationship to each other, since they accompany each other? > I have no idea exactly *how* it is that cetasikas experience the same object as the citta they accompany, nor do I think that question to be a fruitful line of enquiry. But if that's the way it is, what does it matter how it happens? The answer may well be that that's just the way it is ;-)) > > It makes sense that concentration allows for touching which allows for tasting, which allows for experiencing, so I would see these functions as supporting each other in a sequence or something to that effect. > But what "makes sense" to you or me may not have anything to do with the way things really are. Come to think of it, what is the likelihood that it would? In any event, that's just a form of speculation, rather than investigation. > > > Jon: I'd be interested to know basis for this assertion (my understanding of the texts is otherwise: visible object impinges first on eye-sense, with eye-consciousness arising after that) > > > > How does it happen? Consciousness after all is just a word for experiencing, so how can the eye-door "experience" visible object without consciousness? It is a contradiction in terms, unless eye-door has its own eye-door consciousness, in which case you are getting a lot of functions each which has its own consciousness, and I see this as leading to a lot of trouble, because that makes them look like little independent entities to me. Not to you? > I did not mean to suggest that eye-door actually experienced the object, only that there was impingement of the object on it (or more precisely on the stream of consciousness), thereby beginning the process by which seeing consciousness then experienced the object. > > > Jon: Perhaps you read something whose author *claimed* it was based on a sutta ;-)). Do you by any chance remember the source? > > I am talking about sutta, not a secondary article or whatever. I don't read a lot of commentary about sutta; but yet can't remember the specific sutta. Sorry.... Will let you know if I figure it out. > This explanation has a familiar ring to it ;-)) Jon #97260 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 3:52 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > > I would translate dhamma as "experienced object." > Just to check that I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that the consciousness that experiences an object would not be considered a dhamma as that term is used by the Buddha in the suttas. Have I understood correctly? Do you see any correlation between "dhammas", on the one hand, and the khandhas, dhatus (elements), ayatanas (sense-fields) spoken of in the suttas, on the other? > ... However, I would say that whatever is specifically experienced in the moment is the dhamma, and then maybe we can disagree on how singular that experience of dhamma is. > Sorry, but I'm not with you here. > > Certainly a lot of what Buddha talks about in "clinging to objects" is clinging to the concepts we have of them and about them, so I think a lot of what passes for objects are really concepts or attachments, feelings and memories that surround the object in our way of thinking and feeling about them. > An example or two of what you mean by the Buddha talking about "clinging to objects" would make it a lot easier to respond. Are you talking about clining to spouse and children, that sort of thing, or to clinging to the objects through the different sense-doors? > The nature of samsara is to cling to imagined objects that have imagined meanings. Perhaps we can agree on that. > Yes, we can agree, but I don't think that is really getting to the nub of the teachings ;-)) Jon #97261 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 9:29 pm Subject: Re: chanda and cetana glenjohnann Dear Lukas and Sarah This discussion about chanda reminds me of an incident with Achan Sujin in Bangkok in February. After a Sat. discussion I got a ride home with Achan Sujin, her sister and others. We stopped at the shopping plaza in front of the Marriot Hotel so that Achan Sujin and her sister could go to the pharmacy there. As we arrived, others from the discussion group also arrived and we all walked into the plaza together. We had to go past several outdoor vendors on the way in. Like bees swarmimng a nest everyone stopped at a table with jewelry and other trinkets for sale - I was walking beside Achan Sujin and she just smiled and said "chanda". I think of this little story every time I hear the word "chanda", and sometimes when I find myself quickly attracted to something. Enjoying your discussions on this. Good to read about kusala chanda too! Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > > ---- > "Chanda is a necessary factor for all kinds of kusala, for dana, for sila and for bhavana. When we, for example, visit a sick person, when we want to console someone who is in trouble or when we try to save an insect from drowning, there has to be kusala chanda which assists the kusaIa citta. If there were no wholesome zeal, 'wish to act', we could not perform such acts of metta (loving kindness ) and karuna (compassion)." > > L: When insect is drowning. And we have instant intention to help it, there is cetana which "wills" kusala citta. There is chanda which condition kusala citta to act. Isnt it? > But what is a function of manasikara at that moment? > > My best wishes > Lukas > #97262 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 10:15 pm Subject: Re: chanda and cetana szmicio Dear Ann > Like bees swarmimng a nest everyone stopped at a table with jewelry and other trinkets for sale - I was walking beside Achan Sujin and she just smiled and said "chanda". > > I think of this little story every time I hear the word "chanda", and sometimes when I find myself quickly attracted to something. L: But lobha is attracted to object. What is a function of chanda there? My best wishes Lukas #97263 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 10:48 pm Subject: Re: chanda and cetana glenjohnann Dear Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Ann > > > Like bees swarmimng a nest everyone stopped at a table with jewelry and other trinkets for sale - I was walking beside Achan Sujin and she just smiled and said "chanda". > > > > I think of this little story every time I hear the word "chanda", and sometimes when I find myself quickly attracted to something. > > L: But lobha is attracted to object. > > What is a function of chanda there? After I sent the message, I thought about the relationship between lobha and chanda in the little story. You are right, lobha is attracted to the object. It is chanda that moves one towards it - in this case, literally, picking things up, examining and eventually buying them for "oneself". When Achan Sujin made the comment, I took it to mean people's interest in the things displayed. At the discussion that afternoon we had been talking about chanda as "interest in" something. Ann #97264 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 9, 2009 11:05 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E Jumping forward to this post of yours. Thanks for sounding off (in a very nice way;-)) about requests for sutta quotes and the like. I'd like to make some comments which I hope will help clear the air a little. 1. Regarding your requests for sutta quotes to support explanations taken from the ancient commentaries, it is of course a widely known fact that much of the detail in the commentaries is not directly stated in the suttas (that, after all, is the function of a commentary). For the most part, then, there are no handy quotes from the suttas (and it's not a matter of me ignoring your requests ;-)) 2. If I ask someone for the basis in the suttas, I'm not suggesting there has to be a single passage that says the same thing. I'm only asking for an indication of the kind of passage the supports the interpretation given. However, an answer along the lines that the proposition stated is a general "sense of things from a variety of sutta readings", while OK as a starting point, doesn't really help the discussion much. In the end, all views expressed are to be tested against the texts themselves; there is no other standard. 3. Having said that, there's never any obligation to respond in the specific way requested by another poster. OK, that's my turn at sounding off. Back to the discussion (unless you have any further comments on discussion methodology ;-)) Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Although I demand sutta quotes quite freely [and so far you haven't given me any, by the way,] like you, I am also less forthcoming with the appropriate quotes on a moment's notice, and I do not readily have a sutta that will support what is my sense of things from a variety of sutta readings. I even leave room for the possibility, that, with further discussion and clarification, I might amend portions of my statement that are unclear. > > I feel a teensy little bit "baited" in the sense that you asked me for *my* understanding of what a dhamma was, and I gave you my *sense* of this, rather than an official definition, which you then followed with this demand for a direct sutta justification. > #97265 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 12:16 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m szmicio Dear friends, Saccavibhanga, Vibhangapali continues: 2. The Truth of the cause (Samudayasacca.m) <<203. Tattha katama.m dukkhasamudaya.m ariyasacca.m? Yaaya.m ta.nhaa ponobhavikaa [ponobbhavikaa (syaa. ka.)] nandiraagasahagataa tatratatraabhinandinii, seyyathida.m kaamata.nhaa, bhavata.nhaa, vibhavata.nhaa.>> 203. Therein what is the Noble Truth of the cause of suffering? That craving, which is cause of becoming again, is accompanied by passionate lust, is strong passion for this and that. For example; craving for sense pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. <> This same craving when arising where does it arise; when settling where does it settle? Whatever in the world is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; Herein when settling settles. In the world is a lovely thing, pleasant thing? In the world eye is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world ear. In the world nose. In the world tonque. In the world body. In the world mind is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. <> In the world visible(objects) are lovely things, pleasant things; Herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world audible(objects). In the world odorous(objects).In the world sapid(objects). In the world tangible(objects). In the world ideational(objects) are lovely things, pleasant things; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. <> In the world eye consciousness is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world ear consciousness. In the world nose consciousness. In the world tongue consciousness. In the world body consciousness. In the world mind consciousness is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; ----------- Best wishes, Lukas #97266 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 1:09 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 7. nilovg Dear friends, The Visuddhimagga (VIII, 186) describes the procedure of someone who wants to develop mindfulness of breathing until he has attained the fourth jhna, and who then develops insight and through insight based on the fourth jhna attains arahatship. We should not misunderstand the words insight based on the fourth jhna. It does not mean that he can forego the different stages of insight-knowledge, starting with the defining of materialitymentality (nma-rpa pariccheda- na), which is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nma and the characteristic of rpa. For example, when there is hearing there is sound as well, but their characteristics are different and they can only be known one at a time. Right understanding of the reality appearing at the present moment should be developed until there is no longer confusion as to the difference between the characteristics of nma and rpa. So long as this stage of insight has not been reached yet we are not sure whether the reality which appears at the present moment is nma or rpa. Someone said that if one continues to concentrate on breathing the day will come when one realizes that this body is supported by mere breathing and that it perishes when breathing ceases. He said that in that way one fully realizes impermanence. However, the impermanence of conditioned realities will not be realized if the right cause has not been cultivated: awareness and understanding of different kinds of nma and rpa as they present themselves one at a time through the six doors. Those who develop both jhna and vipassan should, after the jhnacitta has fallen away, be aware of nma and rpa, clearly know their different characteristics and develop all stages of insight (Visuddhimagga VIII, 223 and following). It depends on the accumulated wisdom whether the different stages of insight can be realized within a short time or whether they are developed very gradually during a long period of time. In the word commentary to the above quoted sutta the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 223-226) mentions with regard to the first tetrad (group of four clauses, marked I-IV) of the sutta the different stages of insight-knowledge which are developed after emerging from jhna. We read: After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last attains to the nineteen kinds of Reviewing Knowledge, and he becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities. It is evident that only those who had accumulated great wisdom could attain jhna with mindfulness of breathing as meditation subject, and then attain arahatship. This is beyond the capacity of ordinary people. ******* Nina. #97267 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:01 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (5) scottduncan2 Dear All, Following on: CSCD 307. < Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. ashkenn2k Hi Colette <> if there is nothing to look at, how do we practise....nothingness...or just conditions. Even conditions are also something to look at :=) So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) > colette: (what fun), If I may, "The meaning of all phenomena being mere labels or designations is that they exist and acquire their identities by means of our denomination or designation of them." k: that is true. but the nature of things are truth. One cannot said pain is not there, anger is not there even though pain and anger are mere labels or names. <> k: that is my weak points, always get myself in such situation. I tell you, though, it happens to me constantly! When ya apply that damned wisdom from the Abhidharma, as I always do (does that make me something since I always apply the Abhidharma but I also apply Tanra extensively, what label would be put upon me?). I'm not admitting inclusion in the Prasangika sect but: "For the Prasangikas, if anything exists objectively and is identified within the basis of designation, then that is, in fact, equivalent to saying that it exists autonomously, that it has an independent nature and exists in its own right...." k: I do not agreed with them because this would meant all dammas exist independent as they exists objectively. Unpleasant feelings exist objectively as we cannot mix it up with pleasant feelings. Cheers Ken I #97270 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:28 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > That the nature of reality is that it is unsatisfying, impermanent and lacking any positive entity or selfhood. [Dukkha, Anicca, Anatta.] When you make a characteristic or quality into a definite and real object, you are fighting anatta. > > ----------------------- > > I was hoping to hear more about what you understand that "reality" to mean. Does it, for example, carry the same meaning as "dhammas"? (If not, what is the relationship between the two?) Okay Jon! :-) In the context above, I was using "reality" to refer not to ultimate reality, but to "reality" as it is defined within samsara. You could just as easily say that the "nature of dhammas"is that they are dukkha, anicca and anatta." So yes, I guess in this context it is the same, except that one would of course not perceive the dhammas as they are unless looking at them with panna. > > My sense of the three marks is that they are all-pervasive. In other words, anatta means that everything is empty of selfhood. If you make something a definite entity, you are fighting with anatta. > > ----------------------- > > The idea of something (dhammas, the 3 characteristics) being an *entity* is an idea you are imputing to me; it's not anything I've actually said. I don't really know what it's supposed to mean, but I think it's a red herring ;-)) I didn't say *you* were saying that; It's an assertion on my part. If my logic doesn't make sense to you, then this point will remain in stasis. > > Dhammas are "not-self" because they are conditioned and impermanent. They are described in the texts as "mere impersonal elements". Whether or not a dhamma can be described as an entity is not pertinent (and not discussed in the texts). It's a red herring! Only if you don't accept my argument, which either doesn't make sense to you, or is rejected. I think in this case, the language is so inadequate to distinguish between what is an "element" and what is an "entity" that it is difficult to discuss unless it is mutually understood. An "element" as you say, has no sense of personal self, while an "entity" does. What makes something have the illusory sense of selfhood, rather than just being an "objective event?" When something is subjective, when it has personal experience, it develops the sense of being an entity or self. When it is merely part of the mechanical nature of what is taking place, it is just an "element." When you assign awareness or consciousness to namas, you get closer to the possibility of assigning them self-hood. What are the requirements for a self? That it has experience and that it is conscious of that experience. The illusion of self is created by assigning events in "consciousness" to elements that don't really "own" it....such as the namas...? The fact that namas arise and fall in a brief period of time does not protect them from the false assignation of entity. > > ----------------------- > > Anicca means that everything is constantly changing and deteriorating, reforming and changing. If this is taken literally, there is no moment when something has a definite characteristic. It is never frozen in time. I think there is a tension between the idea of a paramatha dhamma that is definite and real, and the full sense of anicca being present through to the last drop of microscopic reality. I would be interested to see that tension explored. > > ----------------------- > > Dhammas are real in the sense of having an inherent characteristic. And they are momentary in their rising and falling away. I don't see any "tension" here. You haven't addressed the point. Dhammas are momentary, the characteristic of anicca only displays over time. So how can that characteristic exist in a single moment? If you fall back on doctrine that merely says this is the case, then you are neither affirming or refuting the point. My point relies on the nature of anicca - impermanence - not on doctrine for or against. Can you refute my logic? If you only state that it *is* a characteristic of a dhamma, you are not explaining how such is possible. And you increase the possibility that "anicca" is seen as a "thingy" that is somehow attached or displayed somewhere in the dhamma, than the real attribute of anicca. What Buddha taught about anicca was that all dhammas are temporary and thus unsatisfying and not self. That is the purpose of anicca - not to create a kind of transcendent characteristic that has no relationship to the original purpose. > > ----------------------- > > Dukkha means that there is nothing to hold onto, that all attempts to cling are met with frustration and disappointment. That would go for holding onto the idea of paramattha dhammas as well. > > ----------------------- > > That would also go for holding onto the idea that there is nothing to hold onto ;-)) Fair enough. I will abandon the medicine as soon as the disease is cured. I won't hold onto nothing, if you will stop making something out of nothing. > Anyway, in my case most attempts to cling are, unfortunately, successful ;-)), so I disagree with your observation here. I don't see how successful clinging disproves anything I've said. But disagreement does not surprise me that much. :-) > Phew, think I've responded on most of your points ... Thanks for the workout as well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97271 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:08 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > My view of what "dhammas" are from the suttas so far is that they are impermanent and lacking in substantial identity or meaning [anatta.] Therefore clinging to objects of any kind within samsara causes suffering; and through insight and true seeing of their nature one can gradually let go of involvement and attachment to the dhammas and develop the awareness to experience nibbana. > > > > What do you think of that? Does that agree with your understanding of the Buddha's message? > > I agree that it is by insight into the true nature of dhammas that attachment is eventually eradicated. > > I also agree that dhammas are impermanent and not-self (anatta). But I'm doubtful about your characterisation of not-self as meaning "lacking in substantial identity or meaning". To my understanding of the texts, the attribute of anatta points to the nature of dhammas as mere impersonal elements. I am delighted to have so many points of agreement. Usually my imprecise language and creative license assures disagreement, even when the concepts behind it may not be as different from yours as they seem. As for the single point of disagreement, the definition of anatta, I would agree that anatta points to the nature of dhammas as "mere impersonal elements." So we can agree on that too. However, if dhammas are mere impersonal elements, how does impersonality show up as a characteristic? Wouldn't we take for granted that they were impersonal and not even have this topic come up if we did not have a prior view of them being "personal" and creating a "self?" I am just taking the opportunity to point out again that anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought there was one. It only exists by comparison to an akusala citta [if I'm using the term correctly] that came before. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97272 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 5:16 am Subject: Addendum Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi again, Jon & Robert - When the Buddha taught "... don't go ... by traditions, by scripture, ..., by agreement through pondering views, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher'," I do NOT think that what he meant was the following : "... don't go ... by traditions (except for a tradition growing out of my words), by scripture (unless it is the recording of my words), ..., by agreement through pondering views (unless the views are mine or those of tradition-authorized spokespersons), or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher' (unless the teacher is me)." The Buddha taught ehipassiko. He pointed the way, correctly pointing, IMO, but the only standard of *truth* is one's own direct experience - the effect on the peace and understanding that arise in one's own mind stream. All else is mere conjecture and opinion. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, not in the advertising claims. Buddhist saddha is an earned confidence in a teaching, earned by direct experience of the truth, and not by dependence on tradition, scripture, pondering of views, or allegiance to a teacher. With metta, Howard /There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked... truly an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn't proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.'/ (Selected from the Canki Sutta, MN 95) #97273 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 6:11 pm Subject: Re: effort. kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Jon), Just interrupting briefly if I may: ---------- R: > I am just taking the opportunity to point out again that anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought there was one. ----------- Can you give any examples of this from conventional reality? There is an understanding that hydrogen, for example, is lighter than oxygen, isn't there? Is the mass (or weight) of an element an actual, inherent, characteristic of that element, or is it just an understanding? I feel sure that scientists will say it is an inherent characteristic or "property." The mass of hydrogen was set at the time of the Big Bang. It will always be the way it is - regardless of how it is thought to be. Similarly all dhammas are anatta. That is part of the Dhamma - "the way things are." By their own intrinsic nature dhammas will always be anatta and never atta - regardless of how we might think them to be. Ken H #97274 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 11:07 pm Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m szmicio Dear friends, Saccavibhanga, Vibhangapali continues: <> In the world eye contact is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world ear contact. In the world nose contact. In the world tongue contact. In the world body contact. In the world mind contact is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; <> In the world feeling born of eye contact is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world feeling born of ear contact. In the world feeling born of nose contact. In the world feeling born of tongue contact. In the world feeling born of body contact. In the world feeling born of mind contact is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; <> In the world perception of visible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world perception of audible(objects). In the world perception of odorous(objects). In the world perception of sapid(objects). In the world perception of tangible(objects). In the world perception of ideational(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; ---------------- Best wishes, Lukas #97275 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 11:48 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Khnadhavibhango, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m szmicio Dear Connie and friends For now, I've decided to omit Catubbidhena ruupakhandho(fourfold classification). ------------------------------------------------------------- Vibh continues: Pa~ncavidhena ruupakkhandho pathaviidhaatu, aapodhaatu, tejodhaatu, vaayodhaatu, ya~nca ruupa.m upaadaa. Eva.m pa~ncavidhena ruupakkhandho. Chabbidhena ruupakkhandho cakkhuvi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m, sotavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m, ghaanavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m, jivhaavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m, kaayavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m, manovi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m. Eva.m chabbidhena ruupakkhandho. --- The aggregate of material quality by way of fivefold division(Pa~ncavidhena ruupakkhandho): The element of extension;(pathaviidhaatu) the element of cohension;(aapodhaatu) the element of heat;(tejodhaatu) the element of motion;(vaayodhaatu) and the material quality derived(from these). (ya~nca ruupa.m upaadaa.) Thus is the aggregate of material quality by way of fivefold division. (Eva.m pa~ncavidhena ruupakkhandho.) - The aggregate of material quality by way of sixfold division(Chabbidhena ruupakkhandho): Material quality cognizable by eye; (cakkhuvi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m) material quality cognizable by ear; (sotavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m) material quality cognizable by nose; (ghaanavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m) material quality cognizable by tonque; (jivhaavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m) material quality cognizable by body; (kaayavi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m) material quality cognizable by mind; (manovi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m.) Thus is the aggregate of material quality by way of sixfold division. (Eva.m chabbidhena ruupakkhandho.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Questions: Vibh: "material quality cognizable by mind; (manovi~n~neyya.m ruupa.m.)" L: There is 5 kind of materiality cognizable by cittas of sense doors. There are visible objects, sounds, odorous, sapid, tangible objects. But what kind of materiality is cognized by manovinnyana? My best wishes Lukas #97276 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 10, 2009 11:49 pm Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 8. nilovg Dear friends, As regards the second tetrad (marked V-VIII), the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 226) comments: (V) He trains thus I shall breathe inshall breathe out experiencing happiness, that is, making happiness (pti, also translated as rapture) known, making it plain. Herein, the happiness is experienced in two ways: (a) with the object, and (b) with non- confusion. As regards happiness experienced with the object, the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 227) explains: How is happiness experienced with the object? He attains the two jhnas in which happiness (pti) is present [1]. At the time when he has actually entered upon them the happiness is experienced with the object owing to the obtaining of the jhna, because of the experiencing of the object. After the jhnacitta has fallen away pa realizes the characteristic of pti as it is: only a kind of nma, which is impermanent and not self. We read: How with non-confusion? When, after entering upon and emerging from one of the two jhnas accompanied by pti, he comprehends with insight that happiness associated with the jhna as liable to destruction and fall, then at the actual time of insight the happiness is experienced with non-confusion owing to the penetration of its characteristics (of impermanence, and so on). -------------- 1: Rpa-jhnas can be counted as four stages or as five stages. In the first and second stage of jhna of the fourfold system and in the third second and third stage of the five-fold system pti arises. It is abondoned in the higher stages of jhna. ---------- Nina. #97277 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:53 am Subject: Re: chanda and cetana christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > > Dear Lukas > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > > > Dear Ann > > > > > Like bees swarmimng a nest everyone stopped at a table with jewelry and other trinkets for sale - I was walking beside Achan Sujin and she just smiled and said "chanda". > > > > > > I think of this little story every time I hear the word "chanda", and sometimes when I find myself quickly attracted to something. > > > > L: But lobha is attracted to object. > > > > What is a function of chanda there? > > > After I sent the message, I thought about the relationship between lobha and chanda in the little story. You are right, lobha is attracted to the object. It is chanda that moves one towards it - in this case, literally, picking things up, examining and eventually buying them for "oneself". When Achan Sujin made the comment, I took it to mean people's interest in the things displayed. At the discussion that afternoon we had been talking about chanda as "interest in" something. > > Ann > Hello Lukas, Sarah, Ann, all, Perhaps K. Sujin was referring to the fact that Chanda can also be akusala .... 2. As an evil quality it has the meaning of 'desire', and is frequently coupled with terms for 'sensuality', 'greed', etc., for instance: kāma-cchanda, 'sensuous desire', one of the 5 hindrances (s. nīvarana); chanda-rāga, 'lustful desire' (s. kāma). It is one of the 4 wrong paths (s. agati). http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/chanda.htm metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #97278 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 4:57 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey buddhatrue Hi Sukin, Jon, Scott, and Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > I have a feeling James that you do not believe in the concept re: the relationship between pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha, but what of the Suttamaya panna, Cintamaya panna and Bhavanamaya panna relationship? What is your understanding of this, or is it that you dismiss this one as well? > I am feeling better; the medicine worked; so I am returning to this question as promised. You ask about the three types of panna (understanding) and the relationship between each of them. First, it has to be understood that just because a function of the mind has the Pali word "panna" associated with it, that doesn't mean it is wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. Turning to the Vism. XIV (2): What is Understanding? Understanding (panna) is of many sorts and has various aspects. An answer that attempted to explain it all would accomplish neither its intention nor its purpose, and would, besides lead to distraction; so we shall confine ourselves to the kind intended here, which is understanding consisting in insight knowledge associated with profitable consciousness. James: So, one should be careful about the use of "panna" as it is a very broad and general term. However, the Vism. details that there are three types of panna (understanding) associated with the path. Now, most importantly, realize that these are three DISTINCT AND DIFFERENT types of panna. Vism. XIV (7): As regards the triads, understanding acquired without hearing from another is that consisting in what is reasoned because it is produced by one's own reasoning. Understanding acquired by hearing from another is that consisting in what is heard, because it is produced by hearing. Understanding that has reached absorption, having been somehow produced by (meditative) development is that consisting in development. And this is said: `Herein, what is understanding consisting in what is reasoned? In the sphere or work invented by ingenuity, or in the spheres of craft invented by ingenuity, or in the sorts of science invented by ingenuity, any preference, view, choice, opinion, judgement, liking for pondering over things, that concerns ownership of deeds (kamma) or is in conformity with truth or is of such kind as to conform with (the axioms) "Materiality is impermanent" or "Feeling.perception.formations..consciousness is impermanent" that one acquires without hearing it from anotherthat is called understanding consisting in what is reasoned. (In the sphere) that one acquires by hearing it from anotherthat is called understanding consisting in what is learnt (heard). And all understanding in anyone who has attained (an attainment) is understanding consisting in development. So it is of three kinds consisting in what is thought out, in what is heard, and in development. James: So, there are three different types of panna and they each develop in different ways. Most importantly, this passage describes the conditions for each type to be different and separate for each. So, to state that reasoned panna or learnt (heard) panna is a condition for developed panna is stating a falsehood. These types of panna do not condition each other! Reasoning doesn't condition hearing; hearing doesn't condition reasoning; reasoning doesn't condition development; hearing doesn't condition development, etc. They don't condition each other because they are each different and of a different nature. The condition for developed panna (the most important as it is related to the paths and fruits) is further explained in the Vism. XIV (7): Understanding has the characteristic of penetrating the individual essences of states. Its function is to abolish the darkness of delusion, which conceals the individual essences of states. It is manifested as non-delusion. Because of the words `One who is concentrated knows and sees correctly' its proximate cause is concentration. Metta, James #97279 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:41 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey scottduncan2 Dear James, I'm glad to hear you have nearly recovered. Regarding: J: "...there are three types of panna (understanding) associated with the path. Now, most importantly, realize that these are three DISTINCT AND DIFFERENT types of panna...there are three different types of panna and they each develop in different ways...These types of panna do not condition each other...They don't condition each other because they are each different and of a different nature." Scott: My understanding is that pa~n~naa is only one, not three. The differences suggested are due to development - 'strength' - and do not represent three different mental factors, each called pa~n~naa. The mental factor (cetasiska) pa~n~naa arises with citta, takes the same object, is developed in this way, and then falls away. It's development accumulates, its strength increases as it continues to take objects and perform it's function according to it's characteristic; it's strength accumulates. The below describes pa~n~naa - a single mental factor with only the following as characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause: J: "Understanding has the characteristic of penetrating the individual essences of states. Its function is to abolish the darkness of delusion, which conceals the individual essences of states. It is manifested as non-delusion. Because of the words 'One who is concentrated knows and sees correctly' its proximate cause is concentration." Scott: This is the function and characteristic of pa~n~naa - only one mental factor with the same characteristic and function, but, through development, an increasing strength. Not three types of pa~n~naa. Sincerely, Scott. #97280 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:23 am Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > ---------------------- > Most Buddhists [and I know that is not a basis for you, but I mention it anyway, just to show the variety of perspective] see the Eightfold Path as something to do and practice in life and meditation. You see it, I take it, as a set of moments of panna that arise spontaneously all in a row when the conditions are right and create Path Consciousness. > ---------------------- Just to clarify, I see the factors of the Eightfold Path as mental factors (cetasikas) that accompany the moments of enlightenment (all 8 factors), or moments of satipatthana or mundane insight (5 or 6 of the factors). > ---------------------- My opinion from what little I know is that this is not only an Abhidhamma perspective but a com perspective in particular. Is this not where you get this view from, from studying Abhidhamma and com rather than sutta? > ---------------------- Actually, my understanding of the traditional interpretation comes mostly from attending discussions or listening to talks (or replying to messages), rather than from any formal study. But yes, one way or another, from all 3 pitakas and their commentaries. > ---------------------- Would you get this view by reading sutta only? > ---------------------- I very much doubt it. If there were no commentaries, there'd be no way of coming to see the suttas as saying what I now think they say. (And when the commentaries have disappeared, there will be no vestige of the traditional understanding of the teachings remaining.) However, this does not mean that the commentaries are presenting a teaching that is different from that found in the suttas (in my view). > ---------------------- It's not mentioned that way in sutta, but instead is given as a path to follow in life that gradually yields the fruits of the Buddhist life. > ---------------------- I don't agree with this assertion. I think the ideas you mention here (i.e., that the Eightfold Path is something to do and practice in life and meditation, or that it is a path to follow in life that gradually yields the fruits of the Buddhist life) are equally an interpretation of what is said in the suttas and not something specifically mentioned, just like the ideas you think of as the Abhidhamma / Commentaries position. > ---------------------- > So how can there be only one unified perspective? I think there is not just one interpretation of sutta, but a few valid ones that are in competition with each other. > > Now of course you can look at an alternate interpretation as "wrong view," but unless it flatly contadicts the literal suttas [word of the Buddha as he actually spoke it] then this is an attachment to your own view. > ---------------------- Right. I don't find it helpful to describe views that differ from my own as "wrong view". And I certainly don't consider all alternate readings of the texts as amounting to wrong view (for a start, it would have to be something that impinged on the development of the path). > ---------------------- > > There's a lot of material that is common to both Suttas and the Abhidhamma. It's just the manner of presentation that differs. > > > > Well, a lot of material in common and some important material, I take it, that is not in common. That makes a difference, especially when that which is not in common introduces terms and concepts that don't appear in the suttas at all, and ascribe them to the suttas. That is okay if one backs them up with clear material from the suttas, without editing the original sense out of them. But it is a dangerous endeavor as it does reinterpret the material according to a particular philosophy, and sometimes appears to contradict it. > ---------------------- It would be more useful here to be discussing specific instances, that is, if the matter is sufficiently important. > ---------------------- > I would like to have a few examples of how the examination of dhammas in the Abhidhamma supports an understanding that is "not any different" from that in the suttas. That would be very helpful. > ---------------------- The analysis of dhammas set out in the Abhidhamma helps the suttas to be understood in terms of impersonal elements rather than of people doing things, as a superficial reading might do. > ---------------------- For just one example, does Buddha say anything about the nature of citta during sleep or between experiences, and is his explanation same or different than that given by the concept of bhavanga cittas? > ---------------------- It is generally known that bhavanga cittas are not mentioned by name in the suttas (although I believe there is a reference to the function of bhavanga). > ---------------------- > Is his instruction on Satipatthana or the Noble Eightfold Path as explicitly given in sutta same or different than that given by Abhidhamma and com? > ---------------------- The language of the suttas tends to be in more general, and conventional, terms than the language of the Abhidhamma. But there is no inconsistency between the two, to my knowledge. > ---------------------- Is the concept of paramatha dhammas same or different than that given in sutta? I don't mean can you interpret it that way, but does it accord with what is said. > ---------------------- Yes, there is accordance between the dhammas of the suttas (classified as khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc) and the paramattha dhammas of the Abhidhamma (classified in just the same ways). Jon #97281 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:26 am Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > ---------------------- > That is fine. It seems we are trading challenges to come up with sutta quotes, and neither of us are taking up the challenge. I was hoping that you would find a sutta passage or passages that support one or more of the views that I identify from Abhidhamma: > ---------------------- There are a number of sources of references to sutta passages that are seen as providing the basis for some of the detail contained in the Abhidhamma (the back section of Nyanatiloka's dictionary is one such source). However, for reasons similar to those applying in the case of commentary materials, there is much in the Abhidhamma that does not correlate to a particular sutta passage. So if that was a challenge, I'm afraid I fail it ;-)). I would however, like to make a comment or two on the Abhidhamma views that you have identified. > ---------------------- > 1/ a dhamma is a single quality, such as hardness, arising for a moment all by itself, never a more complex experience, such as hardness and smoothness at the same moment [e.g., experience of a table top.] > ---------------------- It is not said that the rupa of hardness arises on its own. All rupas (hardness being one) arise in groups. It is however said that there is only one moment of consciousness arising at a time and only one object for each such moment of consciousness. Is this what you are referring to, by any chance? > ---------------------- > 2/ cittas are individual events that arise as one-time, one-moment occurences, that are not part of a "flow" of moments but are discrete independent happenings. > ---------------------- I think this is a slightly "enhanced" version ;-)). There is no specific reference that I'm aware of to cittas "individual events" or "discrete independent happenings". Cittas are those dhammas the function of which is to be the chief in experiencing an object. They arise and fall away continuously, without interval, each with its phases of arising, standing and ceasing. > ---------------------- > 3/ bhavana refers to a single moment of awareness, rather than the activity of meditation. > ---------------------- I've made a comment on this in an earlier post. Another comment: The dictionary meaning of bhavana is "development" (i.e., no necessary connection with an activity). Of course, it could also be that a particular context strongly suggests an activity, so if you have such a quote, please feel free to share it. > ---------------------- > 4/ meditation should not be undertaken as an activity directed towards developing satipatthana, because that would represent the wrong view that there is a self that can practice and make progress. > ---------------------- This statement is not one that is found in the Abhidhamma. It sounds like a paraphrase of something you might have read here. My way of saying this would be that nowhere in the texts is there prescribed a specific activity, or the selection of a specific object, to be undertaken as constituting the development of satipatthana. > ---------------------- > I will see if I can find any quotes myself. The whole anapanasati sutta contains instructions for breathing meditation leading to satipatthana in my view, but you of course don't interpret it that way. > ---------------------- Right. Both interpretations are arguable, on the bare words of the sutta. And the same goes for many, many other suttas. There's no clearly identifiable "raw suttas" position. As I see it, the suttas were generally pitched at those whose understanding was much more highly developed than our own, so the language is bound to be somewhat obscure. Jon #97282 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: RFC - Khnadhavibhango, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 11-apr-2009, om 8:48 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > But what kind of materiality is cognized by manovinnyana? ------ N: Each sense-doorprocess is followed by a mind-door process and the cittas in that process have as object the same rupa that was experienced in the preceding sense-door process. It has only just fallen away and it can still be the object of the cittas in the following mind-door process. There can be cittas with awareness and understanding of the visible object or sound that has just fallen away. Its characteristic is still 'present'. Nina. #97283 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:15 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey scottduncan2 Dear James, Regarding: "What is Understanding? Understanding (panna) is of many sorts and has various aspects. An answer that attempted to explain it all would accomplish neither its intention nor its purpose, and would, besides lead to distraction; so we shall confine ourselves to the kind intended here, which is understanding consisting in insight knowledge associated with profitable consciousness." Scott: Visuddhimagga XIV, 8 clarifies: "(iv) HOW MANY KINDS OF UNDERSTANDING ARE THERE (Katividhaa pa~n~naa)? 1. Firstly, as having the characteristic of penetrating the individual essence of states, it is of one kind. 2. As mundane and supramundane it is of two kinds. 3. Likewise as subject to cankers and free from cankers, and so on, 4. As the defining of mentality and materiality, 5. As accompanied by joy and equanimity, 6. As the planes of seeing and of development. 7. It is of three kinds consisting of what is reasoned, consisting in what is learnt (heard), and consisting in development. 8. Likewise as having a limited, exalted, or measureless object, 9. As skill in improvement, detriment, and means, 10. As interpreting the internal, and so on, 11. It is of four kinds as knowledge of the four truths, 12. And as four discriminations." Scott: When it is stated that pa~n~naa is 'of one kind' in terms of characteristic, this means that pa~n~naa always arises having this characteristic. Whether is is mundane or supramundane, for example, refers to the object. Pa~n~naa is still of the same characteristic. Which ever other mental factors accompany pa~n~naa - arise conascently - pa~n~naa is still of the same characteristic. In other words, pa~n~naa is always just pa~n~naa. Sincerely, Scott. #97284 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 3:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/11/2009 9:44:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Just to clarify, I see the factors of the Eightfold Path as mental factors (cetasikas) that accompany the moments of enlightenment (all 8 factors), or moments of satipatthana or mundane insight (5 or 6 of the factors). ============================ I think that seeing these as cetasikas is quite reasonable, including acts of abstaining etc, but even thinking of them that way, most of them occur in the midst of day-to-day life, not at moments of awakening. That is particularly clear, I think, for right speech, action, and livelihood. For example, the definition of right livelihood is the following, which involves abandoning dishonest livelihood, a mental action that may occur one or more times during one's life, but certainly prior to awakening, and also involves KEEPING one's life going with right livelihood, which is a repeated activity occurring throughout one's life: "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood." — SN 45.8 =========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97285 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:21 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear James, > > I'm glad to hear you have nearly recovered. Regarding: > > J: "...there are three types of panna (understanding) associated with the path. Now, most importantly, realize that these are three DISTINCT AND DIFFERENT types of panna...there are three different types of panna and they each develop in different ways...These types of panna do not condition each other...They don't condition each other because they are each different and of a different nature." > > Scott: My understanding is that pa~n~naa is only one, not three. The differences suggested are due to development - 'strength' - and do not represent three different mental factors, each called pa~n~naa. James: Well, your understanding is mistaken. > > The mental factor (cetasiska) pa~n~naa arises with citta, takes the same object, is developed in this way, and then falls away. It's development accumulates, its strength increases as it continues to take objects and perform it's function according to it's characteristic; it's strength accumulates. James: The Vism. states nothing about "strength" or "strength accumulating". This is just your own mistaken interpretation. > > The below describes pa~n~naa - a single mental factor with only the following as characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause: > > J: "Understanding has the characteristic of penetrating the individual essences of states. Its function is to abolish the darkness of delusion, which conceals the individual essences of states. It is manifested as non-delusion. Because of the words 'One who is concentrated knows and sees correctly' its proximate cause is concentration." > > Scott: This is the function and characteristic of pa~n~naa - only one mental factor with the same characteristic and function, but, through development, an increasing strength. Not three types of pa~n~naa. > James: Look Scott, I don't care how many times you say it, unless you can quote specifically from the Vism. anything about the "strength" of panna, this is just your mistaken interpretation. Panna is one many sorts, not just one of different strengths. Allow me to quote again from the Vism.: What is Understanding? Understanding (panna) is of many sorts and has various aspects. An answer that attempted to explain it all would accomplish neither its intention nor its purpose, and would, besides lead to distraction; so we shall confine ourselves to the kind intended here, which is understanding consisting in insight knowledge associated with profitable consciousness. > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Metta, James #97286 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:32 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Scott: Visuddhimagga XIV, 8 clarifies: > > "(iv) HOW MANY KINDS OF UNDERSTANDING ARE THERE (Katividhaa pa~n~naa)? > 1. Firstly, as having the characteristic of penetrating the individual essence of states, it is of one kind. > 2. As mundane and supramundane it is of two kinds. > 3. Likewise as subject to cankers and free from cankers, and so on, > 4. As the defining of mentality and materiality, > 5. As accompanied by joy and equanimity, > 6. As the planes of seeing and of development. > 7. It is of three kinds consisting of what is reasoned, consisting in what is learnt (heard), and consisting in development. > 8. Likewise as having a limited, exalted, or measureless object, > 9. As skill in improvement, detriment, and means, > 10. As interpreting the internal, and so on, > 11. It is of four kinds as knowledge of the four truths, > 12. And as four discriminations." > > Scott: When it is stated that pa~n~naa is 'of one kind' in terms of characteristic, this means that pa~n~naa always arises having this characteristic. James: No Scott, it is of "one kind" when it penetrates the individual essences of states. There is only one kind of panna which does that. This has nothing whatsoever to do with a "universal characteristic" of panna. Whether is is mundane or supramundane, for example, refers to the object. James: Mundane is that associated with the mundane path, supramundane is that associated with the supramundane path. The object of the panna is not included in the Vism. description. I'm not sure where you are getting that. Pa~n~naa is still of the same characteristic. Which ever other mental factors accompany pa~n~naa - arise conascently - pa~n~naa is still of the same characteristic. In other words, pa~n~naa is always just pa~n~naa. James: Again, I don't agree with your interpretations unless you can provide textual support. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Metta, James #97287 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:02 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey scottduncan2 Dear James, James: "Well, your understanding is mistaken..." Scott: Thanks for the reply. Sincerely, Scott. #97288 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey nilovg Dear Scott and James, Op 11-apr-2009, om 19:02 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > James: "Well, your understanding is mistaken..." > > Scott: Thanks for the reply. ------ N: Enjoying your witty and spirited conversation. James: understanding is the opposite of ignorance, not knowing. Understanding sees through the true nature of phenomena, no matter what level of understanding. Before we had no idea of what is kusala and what akusala, but thanks to the Buddha's teaching we can begin to develop some understanding, even a little. It is precious. Nina. #97289 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:31 pm Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey scottduncan2 Dear James, Regarding: J: "No Scott..." Scott: Okay. Sincerely, Scott. #97290 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:19 am Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear James, > > James: "Well, your understanding is mistaken..." > > Scott: Thanks for the reply. > Thanks for this reply also. I really don't feel like arguing about it either. Metta, James #97291 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:32 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > I'll look forward to more - all our cittas need the study and questioning to keep them on their toes:-)). :-) Best, Robert - - - - - - - - - #97292 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:41 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Rob E. wrote: > > Thanks for making the effort! I appreciate it. > > Not at all. My idea of fun! :-) > I think there is strong support for the traditional/orthodox position, even if we restrict our discussion to sutta materials (which I take it you'd prefer to do). I am not saying that Abhidhamma does not have a valuable perspective on Buddhist teaching - but I think the sutta body is more certain to be the words of the Buddha himself. There is no historical evidence that Buddha was the author of the Abhidhamma - which doesn't mean it is not of great value. > For a start, it seems to me that for anyone taking up meditation in line with the perceived "instructions", the moments of consciousness will be mostly akusala, with relatively few (if any) moments of kusala. You say "it seems to you" that such meditation will be mostly akusala, but what basis do you have for thinking that? Do you have a scriptural basis? An experiential basis? What is this based on? I know it is a very popular view in some Abhidhamma circles [though not others, and notwithstanding the fact that the Abhidhamma itself seems to advocate realization of the nature of dhammas within meditation in some books. I did have a reference for that, but can't find it right now, but I believe it was the Patthana as well as one of the other books.] > > - > > I think to say there is no difference between "raw sutta" as they are understood by many and the Abhidhamma interpretation of sutta, is not really correct. I think that what you may really be saying is that the Abhidhamma view of sutta is the correct one. Fine for you to think that, but to say there is no other perspective possible is not, I think, looking at the whole picture. > > - > > Well there are also the ancient commentarial writings, which present a similar interpretation to that of the Abhidhamma. And in any event, some of those "raw suttas" have material that is presented in terms very similar to the commentarial/Abhidhamma texts (I am thinking of some of the texts in KN). Any ones in particular that come to mind? > Pausing there for now. Well, I can't pause because there are three more posts from you waiting for me. :-) You have unfairly stockpiled them and now I am scurrying to catch up like a hamster on a treadmill. Such is the nature of conditions these days... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97293 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > > > > Jon: So dhammas were to be classified according to whether they experience an object or not, you would put cetasikas into the "not" basket. Is that correct? > > > > Well it's not all or nothing. If I distinguished between my brain and my eye, or between my eye and my camera, that doesn't mean that the eye or the camera has no part in experiencing, just that the camera would not create an experience without an eye to see it, and the eye would not experience it without the brain to process it. > > > > Only seeing consciousness can experience visible object. Neither brain nor camera does that. Trust me, I was not advocating the odd view that a camera can see. It was just a physicalistic analogy to make the point in a simple way. > The importance of the different kinds of consciousness and their respective objects in the teachings cannot be underestimated (plenty of suttas on this one, I can assure you ;-)). I don't fight this point..... > > Getting away from the physicalistic worldly example, the cetasika would not "touch" or "feel" the object without consciousness "experiencing" the touching and feeling. So I wouldn't say they have no part in the experience; I would like to say they are functions which allow citta to experience dhamma in a particular way. If that is wrong, then explain the mechanism to me if possible. How do they all experience the same dhamma and what is their relationship to each other, since they accompany each other? > > > > I have no idea exactly *how* it is that cetasikas experience the same object as the citta they accompany, nor do I think that question to be a fruitful line of enquiry. But if that's the way it is, what does it matter how it happens? The answer may well be that that's just the way it is ;-)) Is it fair to ask how one knows that "that's the way it is," if you cannot ascertain the mechanics of it, nor experience it oneself? If it is based on faith in the authors of the Abdhidhamma and commentaries, then that is something different than it being based on understanding or experience. And why assert it being this way if it is not important to understand how it works or that it works that way? > > > > It makes sense that concentration allows for touching which allows for tasting, which allows for experiencing, so I would see these functions as supporting each other in a sequence or something to that effect. > > > > But what "makes sense" to you or me may not have anything to do with the way things really are. Come to think of it, what is the likelihood that it would? In any event, that's just a form of speculation, rather than investigation. So how do you go about investigating it, rather than just accepting such a complex system on faith? > > > Jon: I'd be interested to know basis for this assertion (my understanding of the texts is otherwise: visible object impinges first on eye-sense, with eye-consciousness arising after that) > > > > > > > How does it happen? Consciousness after all is just a word for experiencing, so how can the eye-door "experience" visible object without consciousness? It is a contradiction in terms, unless eye-door has its own eye-door consciousness, in which case you are getting a lot of functions each which has its own consciousness, and I see this as leading to a lot of trouble, because that makes them look like little independent entities to me. Not to you? > > > > I did not mean to suggest that eye-door actually experienced the object, only that there was impingement of the object on it (or more precisely on the stream of consciousness), thereby beginning the process by which seeing consciousness then experienced the object. That is interesting. I would guess some of the texts go into detail on how this takes place. I now have a copy of Survey thanks to Nina and other friends, so I suppose I should be looking for this kind of detail in there... I have to read more... > > > Jon: Perhaps you read something whose author *claimed* it was based on a sutta ;-)). Do you by any chance remember the source? > > > > I am talking about sutta, not a secondary article or whatever. I don't read a lot of commentary about sutta; but yet can't remember the specific sutta. Sorry.... Will let you know if I figure it out. > > > > This explanation has a familiar ring to it ;-)) It should. It is along the lines of "the dog ate my homework," but it's not my fault that it sounds that way... :-) Best, Robert E. P.S. If someone can remind me of where to find some of the "ancient commentaries" I would appreciate it. Sarah gave me a clue the other week, but I can't find it now... = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97294 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:56 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > > > I would translate dhamma as "experienced object." > > > > Just to check that I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that the consciousness that experiences an object would not be considered a dhamma as that term is used by the Buddha in the suttas. Have I understood correctly? No, I just wasn't thinking clearly. What I described would be a rupa, not the dhammas that are part of the "perceptual/mental" apparatus. > Do you see any correlation between "dhammas", on the one hand, and the khandhas, dhatus (elements), ayatanas (sense-fields) spoken of in the suttas, on the other? Sure, they are just other ways of slicing the same cake. In fact I'm not sure what the difference is between khandas and dhammas. Dhatus and ayatanas are a little less familiar to me as nomenclatures. > > > ... However, I would say that whatever is specifically experienced in the moment is the dhamma, and then maybe we can disagree on how singular that experience of dhamma is. > > > > Sorry, but I'm not with you here. Replace dhamma with rupa. My mistake. > > Certainly a lot of what Buddha talks about in "clinging to objects" is clinging to the concepts we have of them and about them, so I think a lot of what passes for objects are really concepts or attachments, feelings and memories that surround the object in our way of thinking and feeling about them. > > > > An example or two of what you mean by the Buddha talking about "clinging to objects" would make it a lot easier to respond. Are you talking about clining to spouse and children, that sort of thing, or to clinging to the objects through the different sense-doors? > > > > The nature of samsara is to cling to imagined objects that have imagined meanings. Perhaps we can agree on that. > > > > Yes, we can agree, but I don't think that is really getting to the nub of the teachings ;-)) Are you saying you agree? I'm always happy if we have a moment of agreement. It seems to me that the nub of the teachings is about clinging to dhammas as either part of self or as a possession of some kind, and that the different associations we have with dhammas, including concepts of self, body, and other forms of identity, cause suffering. What do you think is the nub? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97295 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:07 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > Jumping forward to this post of yours. > > Thanks for sounding off (in a very nice way;-)) about requests for sutta quotes and the like. I'd like to make some comments which I hope will help clear the air a little. > > 1. Regarding your requests for sutta quotes to support explanations taken from the ancient commentaries, it is of course a widely known fact that much of the detail in the commentaries is not directly stated in the suttas (that, after all, is the function of a commentary). For the most part, then, there are no handy quotes from the suttas (and it's not a matter of me ignoring your requests ;-)) But you did say that much of what is said in Abhidhamma and commnentary are either similar stated in sutta or supported by sutta. Even if the detail is not directly stated in sutta, isn't there any corresponding support. For instance, if a sutta says something general that agrees with the Abhidhamma and then the Abhidhamma says it in more detail, introducing new terminology, you could still show that the Abhidhamma picks up logically where the sutta leaves off. That kind of thing... > 2. If I ask someone for the basis in the suttas, I'm not suggesting there has to be a single passage that says the same thing. I'm only asking for an indication of the kind of passage the supports the interpretation given. That's all I'm asking for. > However, an answer along the lines that the proposition stated is a general "sense of things from a variety of sutta readings", while OK as a starting point, doesn't really help the discussion much. Well let's have it as a starting point then. Give me something to hang my hat on, and I'll proceed from there. I mean, there must be some demonstrable harmony between something in the suttas and the Abhidhamma. Do you not sometimes look between them and see how they are related? > In the end, all views expressed are to be tested against the texts themselves; there is no other standard. Which texts, sutta, or any scriptural material? > 3. Having said that, there's never any obligation to respond in the specific way requested by another poster. Of course, no obligation implied. But: if you make a statement saying that it is your understanding that the suttas and the Abhidhamma and commentary are giving the same message and are not in contradiction, it will seem quite odd if there is not a single sutta that can be cited to support this view. If you don't wish to cite a single sutta in support of such a view, then perhaps you can tell me why? You have no obligation to do this either, of course, You are free to tell me to go meditate. :-) But why not? I'm sure you read sutta and find harmony with Abdhidhamma since you have stated such, so why not give me a clue as to how this is supported? As in any discussion, obligation has nothing to do with it. It's totally 100% voluntary, except for the fact that we have no volition, nor a self to do anything... :-) > OK, that's my turn at sounding off. Back to the discussion (unless you have any further comments on discussion methodology ;-)) Well, at the moment the discussion is about support for Abhidhamma in sutta. I mentioned several specific concepts that I would like to see at least suggested by the language of sutta. What is it that we are moving on to, if we are at a standstill on this point? To close it off, I would love to hear you say that either you aren't aware of a particular sutta in which these concepts have any root, and that your sense of the harmony between the two is general, or that it is an article of faith or whatever, or that there is a sutta but for one reason or another you don't wish to cite it. But if you prefer me to drop the subject, I guess I will, for at least a minute.... :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97296 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 7. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > The Visuddhimagga (VIII, 186) describes the procedure of someone who > wants to develop mindfulness of breathing until he has attained the > fourth jhna, and who then develops insight and through insight based > on the fourth jhna attains arahatship. We should not misunderstand > the words "insight based on the fourth jhna". It does not mean that > he can forego the different stages of insight-knowledge, starting > with the "defining of materialitymentality" (nma-rpa pariccheda- > na), which is knowing the difference between the characteristic of > nma and the characteristic of rpa. For example, when there is > hearing there is sound as well, but their characteristics are > different and they can only be known one at a time. Right > understanding of the reality appearing at the present moment should > be developed until there is no longer confusion as to the difference > between the characteristics of nma and rpa. So long as this stage > of insight has not been reached yet we are not sure whether the > reality which appears at the present moment is nma or rpa. > Someone said that if one continues to concentrate on breathing the > day will come when one realizes that this body is supported by mere > breathing and that it perishes when breathing ceases. He said that in > that way one fully realizes impermanence. However, the impermanence > of conditioned realities will not be realized if the right cause has > not been cultivated: awareness and understanding of different kinds > of nma and rpa as they present themselves one at a time through the > six doors. > Those who develop both jhna and vipassan should, after the > jhnacitta has fallen away, be aware of nma and rpa, clearly know > their different characteristics and develop all stages of insight > (Visuddhimagga VIII, 223 and following). It depends on the > accumulated wisdom whether the different stages of insight can be > realized within a short time or whether they are developed very > gradually during a long period of time. > In the word commentary to the above quoted sutta the Visuddhimagga > (VIII, 223-226) mentions with regard to the first tetrad (group of > four clauses, marked I-IV) of the sutta the different stages of > insight-knowledge which are developed after emerging from jhna. We > read: > > `After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and > has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last > attains to the nineteen kinds of "Reviewing Knowledge", and he > becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its > deities.' > > It is evident that only those who had accumulated great wisdom could > attain jhna with "mindfulness of breathing" as meditation subject, > and then attain arahatship. This is beyond the capacity of ordinary > people. Whether one draws the conclusion that anapanasati should only be started after already attaining great wisdom or whether it can help lead to that point, the information you give above is quite interesting and seems very valuable, so thank you. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97297 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:18 am Subject: Synthetic Serenity & Chemical Calm... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What are the 8 Rules, which brings Divinity? The Blessed Buddha once said: The habitual praxis of the observance day endowed with eight features brings high reward and blessing, & is of sublime dignity and greatness! And which are these eight features? In this, any Noble Disciple considers within himself: Throughout their life the Arahats avoid all alcoholic drinks, such as beer, wine, and liquor! May I also, this day & night, avoid alcoholic & intoxicating drinks... By that I will follow the track and traits of the perfected Arahats! I shall then have observed the Uposatha observance day perfectly! With this fifth praxis is the observance day enriched. Observed in this very way, the observance day endowed with eight features brings high - even divine - reward & blessing & is of sublime dignity and immense greatness... The innocent fluid down-the-drain-brain happy-maker: Alcohol! Addiction to alcohol and drugs is often a need for tranquilization! The side-effects are much worse than the restlessness they cure... Drinking & drugging - though pleasant - leads to lazy carelessness... This lax neglect of the real world problems are often catastrophic! Bodily decay, social isolation and steady fall is inevitable, though often violently denied or actively ignored by the addicted person... Compared to the calm bliss of meditation is drugged sedation banal! Many addicted persons may have experienced the serene bliss of deep meditative states in an earlier life and is thus now prone to search for, & become addicted to a similar chemical calm, which however is a blurred haze lacking the cool clarity of meditation... Tobacco => Lung-cancer and Marijuana => lazy no-brain zombie! <...> Ecstacy and Cocaine: High Tempo, but No genuine Emotions... <...> Pills: A Chemical Calm Calamity! Source (edited extract): Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 8:44 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm Synthetic Serenity spells Death! Neither Drinking nor Drugging! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Synthetic Serenity & Chemical Calm... #97298 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:21 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Robert E (and Jon), > > Just interrupting briefly if I may: > > ---------- > R: > I am just taking the opportunity to point out again that anatta > cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that > comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought > there was one. > ----------- > > Can you give any examples of this from conventional reality? > > There is an understanding that hydrogen, for example, is lighter than > oxygen, isn't there? Is the mass (or weight) of an element an actual, > inherent, characteristic of that element, or is it just an > understanding? > > I feel sure that scientists will say it is an inherent characteristic or > "property." The mass of hydrogen was set at the time of the Big Bang. It > will always be the way it is - regardless of how it is thought to be. > > Similarly all dhammas are anatta. That is part of the Dhamma - "the way > things are." By their own intrinsic nature dhammas will always be anatta > and never atta - regardless of how we might think them to be. Your examples are all ones of existent properties. Anatta is not. "Lighter than" is a comparison, not a characteristic. The actual "weight" of something is a characteristic, however. Does "anatta" have substance, a shape or a weight? Does it have a form? Of course not. It is a negation of "atta." What anatta says is that there is *not* a form, not an atta. How can you perceive an absence? Please say how you would do this. If I am bald, you can say, "that man has no hair," but you can see the lack of hair. But "lack of hair" is only a characteristic in comparison to the expectation of hair. It is not a "something," it is the perception of something missing. Likewise, to say that "no self" is a perceivable characteristic is like saying that "I can see that there is nothing in this glass." Sure you can, but only by comparison to "something." You don't perceive the "nothing" in the glass, as it does not exist. You perceive the "lack of something." It doesn't exist, it is a perception of absence, by comparison to a missing object. If you never had a concept of self, there would be no such thing as anatta. Please test and see if there is any way to perceive something that isn't there. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97299 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:30 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E Hi! We are having quite an extensive talk. Thanks again for sticking with all of this. I hope you are still enjoying the discussion, despite my lack of clarity at times. > > Is his instruction on Satipatthana or the Noble Eightfold Path as explicitly given in sutta same or different than that given by Abhidhamma and com? > > ---------------------- > > The language of the suttas tends to be in more general, and conventional, terms than the language of the Abhidhamma. But there is no inconsistency between the two, to my knowledge. > > > ---------------------- > Is the concept of paramatha dhammas same or different than that given in sutta? I don't mean can you interpret it that way, but does it accord with what is said. > > ---------------------- > > Yes, there is accordance between the dhammas of the suttas (classified as khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc) and the paramattha dhammas of the Abhidhamma (classified in just the same ways). Well, I would love to see a positive comparison with the suttas some time, but I guess I will have to wait until such becomes apparent.... I appreciate your answers in any case. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97300 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:38 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > It is not said that the rupa of hardness arises on its own. All rupas (hardness being one) arise in groups. Are they groups that arise in a sequence that creates the illusion of a particular object? Such as: hardness followed by movement, followed by smoothness, that would create the impression of a tabletop if we do not see the rupas as being individual experiences of properties? > It is however said that there is only one moment of consciousness arising at a time and only one object for each such moment of consciousness. Is this what you are referring to, by any chance? Sounds right. > > > ---------------------- > > 2/ cittas are individual events that arise as one-time, one-moment occurences, that are not part of a "flow" of moments but are discrete independent happenings. > > ---------------------- > > I think this is a slightly "enhanced" version ;-)). There is no specific reference that I'm aware of to cittas "individual events" or "discrete independent happenings". Cittas are those dhammas the function of which is to be the chief in experiencing an object. They arise and fall away continuously, without interval, each with its phases of arising, standing and ceasing. Okay. Rob E.: The whole anapanasati sutta contains instructions for breathing meditation leading to satipatthana in my view, but you of course don't interpret it that way. > > ---------------------- > > Right. Both interpretations are arguable, on the bare words of the sutta. And the same goes for many, many other suttas. There's no clearly identifiable "raw suttas" position. Well, then, as you say, it's a matter of interpretation. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97301 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 6:45 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m szmicio Dear friends, Saccavibhanga continues: <> In the world volition concerning visible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world volition concerning audible(objects). In the world volition concerning odorous(objects). In the world volition concerning sapid(objects). In the world volition concerning tangible(objects). In the world volition concerning ideational (objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; <> In the world craving for visible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world craving for audible(objects). In the world craving for odorous(objects). In the world craving for sapid(objects). In the world craving for tangible(objects). In the world craving for ideational(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; --------------- Best wishes Lukas #97302 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:40 am Subject: Serene Calm! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Imperturbable Calm! The Blessed Buddha once said: Knowing that the other person is angry, The one who remains aware and calm acts in and for his own best interest, and for the other's interest, too! Samyutta Nikaya I, 162 Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages: One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! Udana IV, 7 Calm is his mind. Calm is his speech. Calm is his action. So is the tranquillity; So is the equanimity; of one freed by the insight of right understanding... Dhammapada 96 <...> Have a nice calm Sunday! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Serene Calm! #97303 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:40 am Subject: Re: effort. kenhowardau Hi Robert, ----------------- <. . .> R: > Your examples are all ones of existent properties. Anatta is not. ----------------- It seems straightforward to me. Just as elements in the conventionally known world have 'characteristics' or 'properties' so too do elements in the absolutely real world. A quick Google search shows that elements generally have the properties of mass, weight, impenetrability and inertia. Some, I think, have porosity, form-and-shape, and volume. I might have got the details wrong, but the point is, do you accept that hydrogen (e.g.) has inherent properties? And if you do, why can't you accept that paramattha dhammas have inherent properties? Another complication: Maybe you do accept that dhammas have inherent characteristics but just deny that anatta is one of them. Sorry if you have already made your position on that clear, I often get you confused with other DSG members. -------------------------------------------------- R: > "Lighter than" is a comparison, not a characteristic. The actual "weight" of something is a characteristic, however. -------------------------------------------------- Yes, and the different weights of elements makes them behave in different ways. When oxygen settles at the bottom of a jar and hydrogen at the top we can say that hydrogen has less mass and weight than oxygen. I don't know if I am extending the metaphor too far but, according to the Anattalakhana Sutta, the presence of anatta in dhammas makes them behave in certain ways too. It makes them beyond control. It means we can't decree, "Let consciousness (etc) not be the way it is. Let it be another way." ----------------------------- R: > Does "anatta" have substance, a shape or a weight? Does it have a form? Of course not. ----------------------------- No, of course it doesn't. Does "weight" have substance, a shape or weight, or form? Of course not. (Dhammas, on the other hand, do have characteristics, and that is what we are talking about here - 'the characteristics of dhammas,' not 'the characteristics if characteristics.') ------------------------------------ R: > It is a negation of "atta." ------------------------------------ As I have tried to explain, it may be observed to negate atta (or control) but so what? It is still anatta. -------------------------------------- R: > What anatta says is that there is *not* a form, not an atta. ---------------------------------------- I will agree it says there is not an atta. But it doesn't say there is not a form. Why did you try to sneak that in? :-) ------------------------------ R: > How can you perceive an absence? Please say how you would do this. ------------------------------ Panna perceives the anatta characteristic. That's all. I don't see any problem in that. ------------------------------------ E: > If I am bald, you can say, "that man has no hair," but you can see the lack of hair. But "lack of hair" is only a characteristic in comparison to the expectation of hair. It is not a "something," it is the perception of something missing. Likewise, to say that "no self" is a perceivable characteristic is like saying that "I can see that there is nothing in this glass." Sure you can, but only by comparison to "something." You don't perceive the "nothing" in the glass, as it does not exist. You perceive the "lack of something." It doesn't exist, it is a perception of absence, by comparison to a missing object. If you never had a concept of self, there would be no such thing as anatta. Please test and see if there is any way to perceive something that isn't there. -------------------------------------- This is where the discussion started, and I tried to explain the characteristics of dhammas by analogy with the characteristics of hydrogen. But without success! Have my further attempts had any more success? Ken H #97304 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:39 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 9. nilovg Dear friends, In a similar way the words of the second tetrad are explained: (VI) I shall breathe inbreathe out experiencing bliss (sukha) Sukha occurs in three stages of jhna (of the fourfold system); it does not arise in the highest stage of jhna where there is equanimity instead of sukha. Sukha accompanies the jhnacitta of the three stages of jhna and is, after the jhnacitta has fallen away, realized by pa as impermanent. As regards the words in the third tetrad: (X) I shall breathe in...breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness, the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 231) states that there is gladdening in two ways, namely through concentration and through insight. We read: How through concentration? He attains the two jhnas in which happiness is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon them he inspires the mind with gladness, instils gladness into it, by means of the happiness associated with the jhna. How through insight? After entering upon and emerging from one of the two jhnas accompanied by happiness he comprehends with insight that happiness associated with the jhna as liable to destruction and to fall, thus at the actual time of insight he inspires the mind with gladness, instils gladness into it by making the happiness associated with jhna the object. As regards the clause: (XII) I shall breathe inbreathe out liberating the (manner of) consciousness, the Visuddhimagga explains that this also must be understood as pertaining to jhna as well as to insight. In the first jhna one is liberated from the hindrances, although they are not eradicated, and in each subsequent stage of jhna one is liberated from the jhna-factors, specific cetasikas which are developed in order to eliminate the hindrances. The jhna-factors are subsequently abandoned when one is no longer dependent on them and one is able to attain a higher and more subtle stage of jhna. After emerging from jhna the jhnacitta is comprehended with insight. We read (Visuddhimagga VIII, 233): at the actual time of insight he delivers, liberates the mind from the perception of permanence by means of the contemplation of impermanence, from the perception of pleasure by means of the contemplation of dukkha (suffering), from the perception of self by means of the contemplation of not self... ******* Nina. #97305 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:15 am Subject: akusala kamma-patha and regrets about it szmicio Dear Ann, Alberto, Ken O and all friends What do you think about dosa which causes akusala kamma-patha? Is there something wrong in this kind of course dosa? I feel regrets about it. I've tried to change my behaviours, but there is only more suffering. It cannot be change unless the kusala cetasikas will start to perform it's own functions. But it imposible to make it arise. Even when i want to start speak in the right way, it cant be done until kusala citta wont appear. Best wishes Lukas #97306 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: chanda and cetana sarahprocter... Dear Chris, Ann & Lukas, Good to read your input and I enjoyed Ann's anecdote. (Ann, like the shoe-less one, you tell them well!) --- On Sat, 11/4/09, Christine Forsyth wrote: > > >A: Like bees swarmimng a nest everyone stopped at a table with jewelry and other trinkets for sale - I was walking beside Achan Sujin and she just smiled and said "chanda". > > > > > > I think of this little story every time I hear the word "chanda", and sometimes when I find myself quickly attracted to something. ... C:>Perhaps K. Sujin was referring to the fact that Chanda can also be akusala .... ... S: Yes, definitely akusala chanda that was being referred to in the above example. Chanda arises with most cittas (all except 18 ahetuka cittas and the 2 moha-mula-cittas, as I recall). Most of the day we're pursuing what we are interested in, what we like doing, motivated by chanda. Our thinking, our actions are motivated by chanda, as in the example. Looking at the subject heading, cetana, on the other hand, urges the other cittas and cetasikas to perform their functions, like the senior prefect. As we know, it arises with every citta. Of course, when we point out 'chanda' or 'lobha' in an obvious example of when they are predominant, we're just talking generally. This like when someone hurts themselves and we say 'akusala vipaka'. In fact, only developed panna can know precisely what the characteristic is of any mental factor when it occurs. Most of the time, there's just an impression and it's impossible to distinguish precisely 'this is lobha', 'this is chanda', 'this is cetana'. I'll look forward to anymore good daily life examples/anecdotes. Chris, good to see you joining in and adding the helpful quote from the dict. Metta, Sarah =========== #97307 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: RFC - Khnadhavibhango, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Lukas, Lukas, I appreciate your quotes with good questions as always: --- On Sat, 11/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >>L: But what kind of materiality is cognized by manovinnyana? ------ >N: Each sense-doorprocess is followed by a mind-door process and the cittas in that process have as object the same rupa that was experienced in the preceding sense-door process. It has only just fallen away and it can still be the object of the cittas in the following mind-door process. There can be cittas with awareness and understanding of the visible object or sound that has just fallen away. Its characteristic is still 'present'. ... S: This is all true, but I think the text must also be referring to all the other rupas only experienced through the mind-door. "Thus the aggregate of material quality by way of sixfold division (eva.m chabbidhena ruupakkhandho)" to include all rupas, I'd understand. Metta, Sarah ====== #97308 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alberto), --- On Fri, 10/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >This is all well and good. Nonetheless, experience shows that unwholesome actions can have wholesome consequences, and I believe that several Abhidhammikas here have said as much. ... S: I haven't seen 'Abhidhammikas here' say this. I think only when we think very generally in terms of situations - for example, someone might say that it was because someone was helping their neighbour that they got attacked by the dog. However, in terms of dhammas, in terms of Abhidhamma, kusala kamma can only bring kusala vipaka and vice versa. What you may be referring to is how unwholesome states can be a condition for wholesome states by way of natural decisive support condition. A good example of this is avijja (as in D.O.) as condition for wholesome states to arise. No avijja, no birth, no kusala of any kind. Metta, Sarah ===== #97309 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Alberto) - In a message dated 4/12/2009 6:54:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (& Alberto), --- On Fri, 10/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >This is all well and good. Nonetheless, experience shows that unwholesome actions can have wholesome consequences, and I believe that several Abhidhammikas here have said as much. ... S: I haven't seen 'Abhidhammikas here' say this. --------------------------------------------- My recollection is otherwise. -------------------------------------------- I think only when we think very generally in terms of situations - for example, someone might say that it was because someone was helping their neighbour that they got attacked by the dog. However, in terms of dhammas, in terms of Abhidhamma, kusala kamma can only bring kusala vipaka and vice versa. ---------------------------------------------- What you say next contradicts this. ---------------------------------------------- What you may be referring to is how unwholesome states can be a condition for wholesome states by way of natural decisive support condition. ------------------------------------------------ So???? Is this not supportive of what I said? If not, why not? My point was that among conditions for wholesome states can be unwholesome states. I still believe that, and I consider what you wrote above as showing that it is a belief supported by the Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------------------- > A good example of this is avijja (as in D.O.) as condition for wholesome states to arise. No avijja, no birth, > no kusala of any kind. Metta, Sarah ============================ With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97310 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) sarahprocter... Dear Suan, Thank you for your further reply as well. I'm replying in two parts. 1. 'Purposeful Actions' and 'Accumulations': >Suan: You asked: >"What is the Pali for these 'purposeful actions'?" >The purposeful actions are known as kusalakamma (wholesome actions) and akusalakamma (unwholesome actions) in Pali. .... Sarah: Thank you. [I'm not familiar with the use of 'purposeful' in the translation of kamma. After all, cetana arises with all cittas, not just with kusala and akusala kamma!] In any case, your original question was this: >>>Sarah:"Sujin: Because he saw Rahula sitting in that position in the forest, appropriate for developing aanaapaanasati. So he taught him about aanaapaanasati, but he can not force or direct Rahula's sati to be aware of aanaapaanasati. It depends on Rahula's accumulation alone to be aware of it." >>Suan: Did K Sujin use the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? ... Sarah: I replied: "It refers to the accumulation at that time when Sariputta taught him, at that moment, as conditioned by all his previous accumulations by way of natural decisive support condition [pakatuupanissaya paccaya]. Why are we interested in studying the Dhamma or in any other topic? Because of past accumulations which condition such interest or study now." So, as I said, what was being referred to were primarily the tendencies, the inclinations by way of pakatuupanissaya paccaya, not kamma condition. (As I later made clear, however, kamma condition is also important). You further asked: >>>Suan: Do you also understand the term "accumulation" to refer to the purposeful actions done by Rahula in his previous lives? .... I answered: >>Sarah: I understand the term to refer to the mental states arising and 'accumulating' in the javana processes. Cittas and cetasikas are the accumulations conditioned by previous thoughts, deeds, experiences and even concepts. Sarah: So, to stress again "accumulation" refers to the mental states 'accumulating' now as we speak. These include, but are not limited to, kusala and akusala kamma (-patha). You further asked: Suan:>>>If the expression `purposeful actions' in the above sense are agreeable to you, what might be Rahula's purposeful actions done in his previous lives that now become conditions for his sati to recollect aanaapaa.na in this life? ... Sarah: I replied: "The Proximate condition for sati is given as sa~n~naa, right remembrance. Conditions are complex, but I'd say that the main conditions for his sati to 'recollect aanaapaa.na in this life' are the accumulations of sa~n~naa, sati and pa~n~naa and other associated mental factors for such. Naturally there had to be the kusala vipaaka as well to hear the teachings, to hear about all kinds of dhammaa, not just about aanaapaa.na. I'm sure the Theragaathaa commentary will give a lot more detail about his previous lives and the kusala kamma accumulated in them." I hope I've clarified my understanding on this point. [More in 'Useful Posts' on 'accumulations' and 'decisive support condition', I'm sure!] Metta, Sarah ======== #97311 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 12:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (16) sarahprocter... Dear Suan, Part 2: The function of Sati: Suan:> You also asked: >"Sarah: Are you suggesting that sati does not have the function to be aware of any object itself? Again, I'll be interested to see your reference on this. I agree that the citta is the leader in experiencing the object. However, the citta just experiences, sati is aware of it." >No, Sarah, I am stating that sati is not aware of anything. >"Apilaapanalakkha. naa sati, asammosanarasaa, " >Indriyaraasiva. n.nanaa, A.t.thasaalinii. >Please look up the above Pali terms for the characteristic and function of sati. You will see they do not mean awareness. .... Sarah: You suggested before that "sati is not aware of anything, but helps the mind to be aware of an object such as breathing." I suggested that it is sati itself which has the function of being aware/mindful/unforgetful of its object as it arises with all sobhana cittas. The citta itself merely experiences the object. Anyway, back to your quote and awareness/mindfulness/unforgetfulness as function, I checked as you suggested: "Mindfulness has 'not floating away' as its characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding or the state of facing the object, as its manifestation, firm perception, or application in mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause...." "Apilaapana-lakkha.naa sati asammosanarasaa aarakkha-paccupa.t.thaanaa visayaabhimukha-bhaava-paccupa.t.thaanaa vaa, thira-sa~n~naa-pada.t.thaanaa kaayaadi-satipa.t.thaana-pada.t.thaanaa vaa...." In other words, it's function is to be 'unforgetful', to be 'aware' of its object. It 'remembers' to be kusala: "so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act (sati kusalakamma.m sallakkhaapeti saareti)". From the Vibhanga and repeated in the Satipatthana Sutta commentary: "satimaati tattha katamaa sati? yaa sati anussati...pe0... sammaasati. aya.m vuccati sati. imaaya satiyaa upeto hoti...pe0... samannaagato. tena vuccati satimaati." " 'Mindful' means: Therein what is mindfulness? That which is mindfulness, constant mindfulness,....Pe....right mindfulness. This is called mindfulness. Of this mindfulness he is possessed, well possessed, attained, well attained, endowed, well endowed, furnished. Therefore this is called 'mindful'. [As you well know from your studies, all cetasikas share the same object as the citta, so there has to be mindfulness/awareness of *an object* whenever sati arises, with all sobana cittas.] And further in the commentary: "Satimaa = "Mindful." Endowed with mindfulnes that lays hold of the body as a subject of meditation, because this yogaavacara contemplates with wisdom after laying hold of the object with mindfulness. Verily there is nothing called contemplation without mindfulness. Therefore the Master said: "Mindfulness is necessary in all circumstances, o hikkhus, I decleare." (satimaati kaayapariggaahikaaya satiyaa samannaagato. aya.m pana yasmaa satiyaa aaramma.na.m pariggahetvaa pa~n~naaya anupassati, na hi sativirahitassa anupassanaa naama atthi. tenevaaha``sati~nca khvaaha.m, bhikkhave, sabbatthika.m vadaamii''ti (sa.m0 ni0 5.234).) We may not agree, but I hope you at least understand some of the basis for what I've written. Metta, Sarah ======= #97312 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:39 am Subject: Kusala conditioned by Akusala/Sarah upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - The following from the Upanissa Sutta has bracketed comment-tags inserted by me: "Thus, monks, ignorance is the supporting condition for kamma formations, kamma formations are the supporting condition for consciousness, consciousness is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality, mentality-materiality is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base, the sixfold sense base is the supporting condition for contact, contact is the supporting condition for feeling, feeling is the supporting condition for craving, craving is the supporting condition for clinging, clinging is the supporting condition for existence, existence is the supporting condition for birth, birth is the supporting condition for suffering, suffering is the supporting condition for faith, faith is the supporting condition for joy, joy is the supporting condition for rapture, rapture is the supporting condition for tranquillity, tranquillity is the supporting condition for happiness, happiness is the supporting condition for concentration, concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment kusala] is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassionis the supporting condition for emancipation, and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers)." Every one of the akusala cetasikas listed here is a condition for every one of the kusala cetasikas. Most specifically, ignorance, craving, clinging, and suffering, all akusala, are, each, a supportive condition for each of faith, joy, rapture, tranquillity, concentration, knowledge and vision of things as they really are, disenchantment, dispassion, emancipation, and knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers), all kusala. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97313 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 12:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Sun, 12/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S:However, in terms of dhammas, in terms of Abhidhamma, kusala kamma can only bring kusala vipaka and vice versa. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ------- H:> What you say next contradicts this. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ------- S: I don't think so. We have to distinguish between akusala kamma (patha) which brings results in the form of akusala vipaka only and what I refer to next (and which you were referring to), i.e. akusala cittas which condition kusala cittas (NOT vipaka) by way of natural decisive support condition, not kamma condition: S:>>What you may be referring to is how unwholesome states can be a condition (exceptionally) for wholesome states by way of natural decisive support condition. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- H:> So???? Is this not supportive of what I said? If not, why not? My point was that among conditions for wholesome states can be unwholesome states. I still believe that, and I consider what you wrote above as showing that it is a belief supported by the Abhidhamma. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- - S:>> A good example of this is avijja (as in D.O.) as condition for wholesome states to arise. No avijja, no birth, > no kusala of any kind. ... S: OK, all agreed....:-)) Metta, Sarah ======= #97314 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:03 pm Subject: Re: effort. scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., Ken, Jon, Regarding: R: "...anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought there was one...Does 'anatta' have substance, a shape or a weight? Does it have a form? Of course not. It is a negation of 'atta.' What anatta says is that there is *not* a form, not an atta. How can you perceive an absence? ... It is not a 'something,' it is the perception of something missing. Likewise, to say that 'no self' is a perceivable characteristic is like saying that 'I can see that there is nothing in this glass.' Sure you can, but only by comparison to 'something.' You don't perceive the 'nothing' in the glass, as it does not exist. You perceive the 'lack of something.' It doesn't exist, it is a perception of absence, by comparison to a missing object...If you never had a concept of self, there would be no such thing as anatta." Scott: Consider the PTS PED entry for 'lakkha.na' (characteristic): "Lakkha.na (nt.) 1. sign, characteristic, mark ... 5. ... specific attribute, characteristic (mark). In contrast to nimitta more a substantial attribute or primary characteristic ... The 3 properties (tilakkha.na.m) of existing things or of the phenomenal world are anicca, dukkha, anatta, or impermanence, suffering, unreality ... (through contemplating them arises vipassanaa & pacceka -- bodhi -- ~naa.na). -- abl. lakkha.nato 'by or qua characteristic,' 'in its essential qualification,' often found in exegetical analysis in Commentary style combined with various similar terms (atthato, kamato, nimittato etc.)..." Scott: Keeping in mind that a definition may not contain the subtlety of doctrine which I believe Jon and Ken are attempting to demonstrate, one can at least see from the above that, for some, the word 'lakkha.na' has the connotation of 'presence' not 'absence.' In other words, the characteristic of 'anatta' is present in and inherent in all dhammaa. Furthermore, 'knowing' or 'penetrating' a dhamma in such a way as to 'understand' that it has 'anatta' as characteristic is a function of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa is not mere thinking or reasoning. Where you say that 'anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic,' I would suggest that it might be more precise to state that the characteristic of anatta is not known by mere perception (nor, for that matter, by mere cognizing). Consider Visuddhimagga, XIV, for a statement concerning the specific nature of the function of pa~n~naa: "... It is understanding (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding (pajaanana). What is this act of understanding? It is knowing (jaanana) in a particular mode separate from the modes of perceiving (sa~njaanana) and cognizing (vijaanana). For though the state of knowing (jaanana-bhaava) is equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~naa.na), and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the mere perceiving of an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot bring about the penetration of its characteristic as impermanent, painful, and not-self." Scott: Anatta is not to be perceived or thought about, but is to be known by pa~n~naa. Hence, and contrary to your above statement, the characteristic of anatta will not yield to perception or cognition. It is not, as I see it, a perception of, nor a reasoning about, an absence. Sincerely, Scott. #97315 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:09 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > ---------------------- > My question to you was: "Do you agree with this basic sense of how the Buddha talks about attachment to objects" and objects being illusory and conceptual in the way that we see them. You have not answered this. Should I assume you totally disagree with it, and that you think the way we ordinarily see dhammas is quite directly and real, without illusion or interceding concepts? > ---------------------- I've since responded on the original question (at least, I think I have. Not easy to keep track of where I am these days ;-)). If I'm mistaken on this, please say so. > ---------------------- > I don't mind the request for sutta material, but I would love it if you would: > > a/ answer my question as to where you agree or disagree with my understanding as expressed here; and > > b/ give me a sutta quote if you have one that defines dhamma the way it is defined in Abhidhamma, or supports the Abhidhamma view of a dhamma as a single quality arising all by itself for a moment, such as "hardness," "motion," etc. > ---------------------- Likewise for this. > ---------------------- > Keep in mind, just to settle this one issue, that when you ask me what I think of this or that, I do not rely on articles or commentaries. I do rely on translations - a necessary evil - but I am only interested in what the suttas say in this kind of very specific discussion, and if I do go to a commentary, comment or article to support a position, I will clearly specify what it is and refer to it. Otherwise, it is my own sense of things based on my [not always so great] reading and understanding of sutta, or a direct reading of a specific sutta [such as anapanasati] that I am relying on. > > I mention this, since you sort of suggested that I might have been borrowing someone else's view from an article or elsewhere in a recent exchange. > ---------------------- Well it's just that there are some distinct similarities between views expressed and points made by you and those of certain other members, and which I understood had originated in the writings of certain modern commentators. I'm sure everyone who is active on internet discussion groups has been exposed to these views and comments at some stage. And I see no problem whatsoever with repeating things one has picked up because they have appeal (I certainly was not suggesting you were wrongly appropriating another's views as your own). Jon #97316 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Precepts and Siila jonoabb Hi Ken O > ---------------------- > yes though it is possible to have restraint without understanding. To me, it is not very helpful other than a giving a person a better kamma in future lives. It does not lead to salvation. > ---------------------- Well it is kusala and so not to be underrated, but it is not restraint of the highest kind as taught by the Buddha. > ---------------------- > Just like to be long winded and repeat myself :-). Hope you do not mind. Restraint in the sutta is just a descriptive portion of the teachings. It is only the superficial part. > ---------------------- Not sure if I follow you here. I think the restraint mentioned in the suttas is almost invariably the restraint that is associated with satipatthana, regardless of the conventional nature of the circumstances being described in the sutta. > ---------------------- Underlying restraint is a stream of citta that must be conditioned by panna. Without understanding, mere following of restraint will result a good rebirth but not lead to the end of rebirth. > ---------------------- Yes, agreed. > ---------------------- > Sutta purpose is to reinforce our understanding of the dhamma. It is like a good story book. It is the meaning of what is written in the commentaries which is the most helpful. Few will buy this ideas. But we are the dinosaurs and we love to read them. > ---------------------- Right, the commentaries have no appeal to those who follow the modern-day interpretation of the suttas. But I do not see quite the dichotomy you suggest here between the suttas and the commentaries. Remember that, at the time the suttas were given, they were understood by the original audience (in most cases) in terms of the explanations that appeared in the later commentaries. Thanks for being long-winded and repetitious! Nice to have you back! Jon #97317 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:19 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E > ---------------------- > Can you show me a sutta reference that says that intellectual understanding should lead experiential understanding? Is that what you understand "hearing the true dhamma" to mean? > ---------------------- My understanding is that: a. hearing the true dhamma (appropriately explained for our particular circumstances) is a prerequisite for gaining intellectual understanding; b. intellectual understanding is a prerequisite for direct (experiential) understanding; c. direct understanding in turn leads to the further development of intellectual understanding. > ---------------------- > But it does make a difference to understand what they actually refer to, even on the pariyatti level. If you mistake the concepts about the three characteristics of all dhammas, you will be pointing down the wrong path, no? > ---------------------- That would depend on the nature of the mistaken view. A mistake as to whether the 3 characteristics applied to dhammas in particular (as opposed to everything in general) would I think be an obstacle to the gaining of understanding at the pariyatti level. > ---------------------- > If anatta is a characteristic of a dhamma, that's okay as long as characteristic just means "something about it" and not "something that it actually has." You know, this has happened in some branches of Buddhism: nibbana is seen as a "place" in the cosmos somewhere, like Heaven; or anatta is seen as an actual existent, like "no-self" as an actual thing of some kind. "Nothingness" is sometimes turned into a positive existent as well. > ---------------------- Yes, and so is "emptiness", it seems to me ;-)) > ---------------------- > If I say "all things are impermanent" you do not understand this to mean that impermanence is "something" that I can see in an object. And it's not something that I see in a dhamma either. The way I observe "anicca" is that I see and register that the thing I am seeing is changing. A new rug becomes old. A friend dies. That is anicca. It's not *in* the object; it's something about how it functions. So if a dhamma is a single isolated quality, such as hardness, or a moment of jhana or a moment of thought, how do I see anicca? It only has anicca if I see it change. AT the moment something exists, it does not exhibit anicca. Anicca is a comparison from one moment to the next. > ---------------------- Yes, we are familiar with this line of thinking. It assumes that anicca of the 3 characteristics carries the conventional meaning of "noticeable change in condition over time". Obviously, however, that is not an appropriate model for anicca. > ---------------------- > It means that it's not a thing, that's all. It's not observable as something; it is only observable by comparion with the concept of atta. If I have no atta I have no anatta. It's a negation, not an assertion. Only in samsara is it the nature of beings to assume a self; and it is only in samsara that anatta has any meaning. If one did not have a self-concept, anatta would not show up as a characteristic, because there would be nothing to negate. > ---------------------- Well this argument could be applied to any quality or attribute (including anicca and dukkha), namely, that it is only because of conventional concepts that it has meaning. However, that ignores the fact that a characteristic cannot be described otherwise than by means of conventional concepts, notwithstanding that the characteristic is an inherent quality of a dhamma. > ---------------------- > Dukkha also is a realization, not a thing. Over time one realizes that those things which one is attached to do not fulfill their promise or expectation. There is no dukkha inherent in the object. It's a result of clinging, not of the object! If one didn't cling to the object, dukkha would not arise. > ---------------------- Dhammas are dukkha because they cannot be the basis for lasting satisfaction, they are not a refuge. This applies regardless of whether the dhamma is the object of consciousness of a person with clinging or of an arahant. > ---------------------- To say it is a characteristic of the object would suggest something akin to saying that the object itself has satisfaction or dissatisfaction. > ---------------------- That is only so if dukkha is taken to mean something like dissatisfaction;-)) > ---------------------- One can only suffer or be dissatisfied, if there is clinging or attachment or expectation. > ---------------------- There are different kinds of dukkha mentioned in the teachings. Dukkha as a characteristic of dhammas has nothing to do with a person suffering or being dissatisfied. > ---------------------- > > If you are suggesting an inherent self-contradiction in the notion of *not-self* as a *characteristic* of dhammas, I'm afraid I'm unable to see the point you are trying to make. Sorry. > > Please explain to me how anatta appears as a characteristic of a dhamma? Is there a mechanical explanation for exactly how it occurs? > ---------------------- As far as I know there is no explanation of the mechanics of the characteristic of dukkha appearing. > ---------------------- > That idea might not be in sutta, because at the time of the suttas being given, no such conflict existed. "Anatta" and the other characteristics were not taken as attributes but as understandings about the nature of samsara. > ---------------------- If the idea of reification (of dhammas/of the characteristic of anicca) is not in the suttas, then what would be the source of, or basis for, it? > ---------------------- > In the Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.mend.html] Buddha discusses the nature of Anatta. The whole discussion is about how each of the kandhas is "not-self" because it is impermanent, unsatisfactory and subject to change and cannot be controlled by the will. So anatta is not seen here as a characteristic of dhammas, but as a realization about dhammas not being part of the self. > ---------------------- Thanks for the sutta quote. However, that part of the sutta is not about anattaa as a characteristic of dhammas, as I see it. It's about how, for consciousness that is accompanied by right understanding, there is no attachment, conceit or wrong view ("This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self"), > ---------------------- > Anatta about a nama or rupa consists of the realization that "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self." Anatta belongs to panna regarding the dhamma, not to the dhamma. > ---------------------- The expression "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is not used to explain anatta as a characteristic of dhammas > ---------------------- > Thanks for the good conversation, > ---------------------- And thanks to you for your part in it ;-)) Jon #97318 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kusala conditioned by Akusala/Sarah sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Our posts crossed .... --- On Sun, 12/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >Every one of the akusala cetasikas listed here is a condition for every one of the kusala cetasikas. Most specifically, ignorance, craving, clinging, and suffering, all akusala, are, each, a supportive condition for each of faith, joy, rapture, tranquillity, concentration, knowledge and vision of things as they really are, disenchantment, dispassion, emancipation, and knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers), all kusala. ... S: Yes, the Upanissa Sutta is a very good example of (pakatu)upanissaya paccaya - decisive support condition. As I said, without avijja conditioning birth, no kusala cittas can follow. I don't think there's any disagreement here. Good to chat to you, Howard. Metta, Sarah ======== #97319 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kusala conditioned by Akusala/Sarah upasaka_howard Hi again, Sarah - In a message dated 4/12/2009 8:40:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: The following from the Upanissa Sutta has bracketed comment-tags inserted by me: ========================== Sorry - that was only true in an initial draft. :-) With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97320 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin in Bangkok, 197... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/12/2009 8:46:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, --- On Sun, 12/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S:However, in terms of dhammas, in terms of Abhidhamma, kusala kamma can only bring kusala vipaka and vice versa. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ------- H:> What you say next contradicts this. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ------- S: I don't think so. We have to distinguish between akusala kamma (patha) which brings results in the form of akusala vipaka only and what I refer to next (and which you were referring to), i.e. akusala cittas which condition kusala cittas (NOT vipaka) by way of natural decisive support condition, not kamma condition: ---------------------------------------------------- I didn't mean to imply the "kamma --> vipaka" relation, but merely conditionality. Sorry for the confusion. -------------------------------------------------- S:>>What you may be referring to is how unwholesome states can be a condition (exceptionally) for wholesome states by way of natural decisive support condition. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- H:> So???? Is this not supportive of what I said? If not, why not? My point was that among conditions for wholesome states can be unwholesome states. I still believe that, and I consider what you wrote above as showing that it is a belief supported by the Abhidhamma. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- - S:>> A good example of this is avijja (as in D.O.) as condition for wholesome states to arise. No avijja, no birth, > no kusala of any kind. ... S: OK, all agreed....:-)) --------------------------------------------- :-) ---------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97321 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kusala conditioned by Akusala/Sarah upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/12/2009 9:33:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, Our posts crossed .... --- On Sun, 12/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >Every one of the akusala cetasikas listed here is a condition for every one of the kusala cetasikas. Most specifically, ignorance, craving, clinging, and suffering, all akusala, are, each, a supportive condition for each of faith, joy, rapture, tranquillity, concentration, knowledge and vision of things as they really are, disenchantment, dispassion, emancipation, and knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers), all kusala. ... S: Yes, the Upanissa Sutta is a very good example of (pakatu)upanissaya paccaya - decisive support condition. As I said, without avijja conditioning birth, no kusala cittas can follow. I don't think there's any disagreement here. ------------------------------------------ Nor do I! ----------------------------------------- Good to chat to you, Howard. ------------------------------------------ Likewise! :-) ---------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ========================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97322 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:59 pm Subject: kaya-vinnatti and vaci-vinnatti szmicio Dear friends, Do bodily intimation and speach intimation arise only with javana-processes? My best wishes, Lukas #97323 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:36 pm Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Robert, > > ----------------- > <. . .> > R: > Your examples are all ones of existent properties. Anatta is not. > ----------------- > > It seems straightforward to me. Just as elements in the conventionally > known world have 'characteristics' or 'properties' so too do elements in > the absolutely real world. That may be so, but if someone tells me that the inherent property of horses in the real world is that they are really unicorns I will require some sort of logical explanation, rather than accepting this fairy tale as fact. Buddhism is based on a set of rational explanations that make perfect sense, even to someone who is just understanding it as a theory or story before actually experiencing it. If you tell me that the explanations that the Buddha gives that make so much sense turn into nonsensical paradoxical elements in the so-called "real world" I will say that you are functioning under a delusional philosophy. I expect that what will happen in the "real world" when it is perceived by panna is that one will actually perceive 'that which they have heard about,' but it doesn't mean that 1 + 1 will suddenly equal 3, when Buddha taught that 1 + 1 = 2. Anatta has a specific meaning. It is not obscure. The Buddha teaches it over and over again. Anatta means that dhammas are not self. It is never said that "anatta is a positive, inherent perceivable characteristic that dhammas wear like a mark or a uniform." It is not a "something" that rides along on a dhamma. It is a statement on the part of the Buddha that dhammas are not self, not that they have a weird "no self thingy" that panna sees with its xray specs. So, no, it does not make sense to me to turn a sensible and understandable characteristic of "not having something" into a "something" that dhammas "have." It is nonsense. By what philosophical principle and on whose authority do you understand and accept that anatta is a "something" rather than a "lack of something," namely, that of being a self or entity? > A quick Google search shows that elements generally have the properties > of mass, weight, impenetrability and inertia. Some, I think, have > porosity, form-and-shape, and volume. I might have got the details > wrong, but the point is, do you accept that hydrogen (e.g.) has inherent > properties? And if you do, why can't you accept that paramattha dhammas > have inherent properties? Sure, I can accept that they have inherent properties, but the three marks in Buddhism are all *negatives.* Try to take a good look at what they are, not the general status that you think they have. Anatta is NO self. Anicca is NO permanence. Dukkha is NO satisfaction. When you say no self, impermanence and dissatisfaction, those are all responses to what is "beings" cling to in dhammas, not things in the dhammas themselves. The statement of these properties is a response on the part of the Buddha to the beliefs of supposed beings [cittas] within samsara, to tell them that the delusions about dhammas that they hold dear are false. These three are not themselves dhammas; they are not things in their own right; they are corrections for delusion. All of the examples that you gave of properties of chemicals, etc., were positive actualities that one can understand logically. And so I ask you once again: how can an absence be a presence? How can a statement that something *is not there* be a perceivable characteristic, except by comparison to a property that you *thought* was there and then discovered was not, as the Buddha did. > Another complication: Maybe you do accept that dhammas have inherent > characteristics but just deny that anatta is one of them. Sorry if you > have already made your position on that clear, I often get you confused > with other DSG members. Thanks! :-) Don't worry, we're all the same. I sometimes confuse you with yourself, so no offense taken. :-) > -------------------------------------------------- > R: > "Lighter than" is a comparison, not a characteristic. The actual > "weight" of something is a characteristic, however. > -------------------------------------------------- > > Yes, and the different weights of elements makes them behave in > different ways. When oxygen settles at the bottom of a jar and hydrogen > at the top we can say that hydrogen has less mass and weight than > oxygen. Exactly my point, "lighter than" only has meaning as a comparison; same for anatta and anicca; there is no "lighter than" visible in hydrogen itself. It is only relative to oxygen. > I don't know if I am extending the metaphor too far but, according to > the Anattalakhana Sutta, the presence of anatta in dhammas makes them > behave in certain ways too. It makes them beyond control. It means we > can't decree, "Let consciousness (etc) not be the way it is. Let it be > another way." Take a look at it the way the Buddha did in sutta: the fact that dhammas are not controllable is one of the demonstrations that they are "not self." That is how he puts it. Why not follow along, since it makes perfect sense. He defines self in a way that leads to the conclusion that any conditioned dhamma is not self. > > ----------------------------- > R: > Does "anatta" have substance, a shape or a weight? Does it have a > form? Of course not. > ----------------------------- > > No, of course it doesn't. Does "weight" have substance, a shape or > weight, or form? Of course not. Yes it does. Weight is weight, and it is a measurement of substance. It has a measurable quantity that is discernable and varies from one object to another. Anatta has nothing like this. It is an observation of something that is not there. Not only that, but it points to the absence of something that is *never* there. There is no such thing as "self," therefore anatta points to the clarification of a delusion, not a thing at all. > (Dhammas, on the other hand, do have characteristics, and that is what > we are talking about here - 'the characteristics of dhammas,' not 'the > characteristics if characteristics.') Try talking about these characteristics in a way that makes sense to what the Buddha talked about - not reinvent them as mythological thingies. > ------------------------------------ > R: > It is a negation of "atta." > ------------------------------------ > > As I have tried to explain, it may be observed to negate atta (or > control) but so what? It is still anatta. Then tell me something about anatta as a positive characteristic. How is it perceived? When one perceives anatta, what does one see, feel, hear, taste, or touch? If you can't describe it then you are talking about a concept and turning it into a characteristic to match a substantialist philosophy that has created a conceptual something out of nothing. > -------------------------------------- > R: > What anatta says is that there is *not* a form, not an atta. > ---------------------------------------- > > I will agree it says there is not an atta. But it doesn't say there is > not a form. Why did you try to sneak that in? :-) Not the form that one thinks of as atta. That is ALL anatta says, not-self, nothing more. It doesn't have some other substance to it, it is just a refutation of atta, period, a negation. > ------------------------------ > R: > How can you perceive an absence? Please say how you would do this. > ------------------------------ > > Panna perceives the anatta characteristic. That's all. I don't see any > problem in that. Then tell me what the "anatta characteristic" is, if you know that; and tell me what it is, other than a negation. How can a negation be a characteristic? Please explain. The fact that you "don't see a problem with it" doesn't mean that it is true. You have to have a reason why it is not a problem. I've explained why it is a problem. Now it's your turn to explain why I'm wrong and why it is not a problem, not just state it as a fact. I can say 1 + 1 = 3 all day long and that I don't have a problem with it. It is still incorrect. > ------------------------------------ > E: > If I am bald, you can say, "that man has no hair," but you can see > the lack of hair. But "lack of hair" is only a characteristic in > comparison to the expectation of hair. It is not a "something," it is > the perception of something missing. Likewise, to say that "no self" is > a perceivable characteristic is like saying that "I can see that there > is nothing in this glass." Sure you can, but only by comparison to > "something." You don't perceive the "nothing" in the glass, as it does > not exist. You perceive the "lack of something." It doesn't exist, it is > a perception of absence, by comparison to a missing object. > > If you never had a concept of self, there would be no such thing as > anatta. > > Please test and see if there is any way to perceive something that isn't > there. > -------------------------------------- > > This is where the discussion started, and I tried to explain the > characteristics of dhammas by analogy with the characteristics of > hydrogen. But without success! Have my further attempts had any more > success? No, because you are not saying anything about why an absence is a presence. It is an unsupportable statement. Weight is a positive, it is measurable, anatta is a philsophical understanding or realization of something that is *not there.* It has no measurement or any other reality other than pointing out an absent self that is not there. You can't make up a reality that isn't there without explaining what it consists of. Even on the level of pariyatti, it has to be a coherent understanding, not just a vague belief. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97324 From: "colette" Date: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. ksheri3 Hi Everyone, My problem is that I only have a few seconds on my roomates' computer, today, so let me get some notes down now as a means of being able to better respond to you Ken and to Robert. Trekchod: "differentiating samsara and nirvana. Trekcho is the thorough cut of a consciousness: "If you cut a rosary in a few places, at some point it doesn't work any longer" which is the stream of consciousness manifested (boy am I gonna work that word tomorrow) that the PAST DHARMA has conditioned the mind to uphold/support/slave for, et al. Yoga Nidra yogic sleep, dream yoga. Looking at the MIND-BODY connection. RUTGERS: some Phil. class that I got the notes for. Emptiness: (sunyata) Boy, another word, SVABHAVA, that I'm gonna work tomorrow. RUTGERS: some Phil. class that I got the notes for. Emptiness: Causation. What fun, I'll work Nagarjuna, the Sankhya, and the Vaisesikas in a single movement of the blade (conservation of energy) ROUTLEDGE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY. 12 sINICIZING BUDDHIST CONCEPTS: EMPTINESS. Thank You Dan Lusthaus, you work pops up quite a bit in the Vijnanavada school or the Chan School, or the Zen School or the Yogacara school with Mr. Muellers name. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Hi Colette > > <> > > if there is nothing to look at, how do we practise....nothingness...or just conditions. Even conditions are also something to look at :=) > > So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) > > > > colette: (what fun), If I may, > > "The meaning of all phenomena being mere labels or designations is that they exist and acquire their identities by means of our denomination or designation of them." > > k: that is true. but the nature of things are truth. One cannot said pain is not there, anger is not there even though pain and anger are mere labels or names. <...> #97325 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:18 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > ---------------------- > > Can you show me a sutta reference that says that intellectual understanding should lead experiential understanding? Is that what you understand "hearing the true dhamma" to mean? > > ---------------------- > > My understanding is that: > a. hearing the true dhamma (appropriately explained for our particular circumstances) is a prerequisite for gaining intellectual understanding; > b. intellectual understanding is a prerequisite for direct (experiential) understanding; > c. direct understanding in turn leads to the further development of intellectual understanding. I get it that this is your understanding, but I am asking you, what is the source of that understanding. If it doesn't come from sutta, then please give me an appropriate Abhidhamma citation or link. > > ---------------------- > > But it does make a difference to understand what they actually refer to, even on the pariyatti level. If you mistake the concepts about the three characteristics of all dhammas, you will be pointing down the wrong path, no? > > ---------------------- > > That would depend on the nature of the mistaken view. A mistake as to whether the 3 characteristics applied to dhammas in particular (as opposed to everything in general) would I think be an obstacle to the gaining of understanding at the pariyatti level. Not my point. My question is about the nature of the characteristics and 'not understanding them correctly,' not what they are applied to. > > ---------------------- > > If anatta is a characteristic of a dhamma, that's okay as long as characteristic just means "something about it" and not "something that it actually has." You know, this has happened in some branches of Buddhism: nibbana is seen as a "place" in the cosmos somewhere, like Heaven; or anatta is seen as an actual existent, like "no-self" as an actual thing of some kind. "Nothingness" is sometimes turned into a positive existent as well. > > ---------------------- > > Yes, and so is "emptiness", it seems to me ;-)) Yes, same thing. Point? I don't turn "emptiness" into a thing, do you? > > ---------------------- > > If I say "all things are impermanent" you do not understand this to mean that impermanence is "something" that I can see in an object. And it's not something that I see in a dhamma either. The way I observe "anicca" is that I see and register that the thing I am seeing is changing. A new rug becomes old. A friend dies. That is anicca. It's not *in* the object; it's something about how it functions. So if a dhamma is a single isolated quality, such as hardness, or a moment of jhana or a moment of thought, how do I see anicca? It only has anicca if I see it change. AT the moment something exists, it does not exhibit anicca. Anicca is a comparison from one moment to the next. > > ---------------------- > > Yes, we are familiar with this line of thinking. Right, it's called "what the Buddha taught." > It assumes that anicca of the 3 characteristics carries the conventional meaning of "noticeable change in condition over time". Obviously, however, that is not an appropriate model for anicca. Really? Are you able to say something specific about the *correct* view in your opinion, other than saying "it is a characteristic" which is nothing but a belief? What is the content of this belief? Any detail will be gratefully accepted. How does "anicca" look when you see it as a characteristic of a dhamma? It is obviously not a literal mark that says "impermanent" on it like a stamp, so what is it? > > ---------------------- > > It means that it's not a thing, that's all. It's not observable as something; it is only observable by comparion with the concept of atta. If I have no atta I have no anatta. It's a negation, not an assertion. Only in samsara is it the nature of beings to assume a self; and it is only in samsara that anatta has any meaning. If one did not have a self-concept, anatta would not show up as a characteristic, because there would be nothing to negate. > > ---------------------- > > Well this argument could be applied to any quality or attribute (including anicca and dukkha), namely, that it is only because of conventional concepts that it has meaning. That's right. Buddha's point was that conventional thinking was wrong because the three marks were not understood. It is correction for deluded thinking, and not itself conventional. I only take medicine if I have an illness. Buddha said "I teach only suffering and the end of suffering, and nothing more." The three marks are part of the teaching on what causes suffering and how to end it, not on what is real and necessary even if there were no suffering caused by delusional thinking. He also said to abandon the raft after crossing to the other shore. All of this points to the path being a corrective to delusion, not an end in itself. If there were no delusory attachments to a real, permanent and satisfying dhamma that would complete "oneself," then there would be no teaching on anatta, anicca and dukkha. They are not an end in themselves, some sort of permanent shining characteristics of dhammas; they are just correctives for delusion. There is an example given in Eastern teachings sometimes about mistaking a rope for a snake, and the mischief that this causes as people run around trying to escape the snake, which is really just a lifeless rope. Once you know it is a rope, is there still a snake anywhere? No, it is gone. Does the rope bear a permanent characteristic of not-snake? Of course not, it is just a rope after all. There is no self. It is not necessary to carry anatta around like a holy relic once you know that. > However, that ignores the fact that a characteristic cannot be described otherwise than by means of conventional concepts, notwithstanding that the characteristic is an inherent quality of a dhamma. Jon, respectfully, you keep talking about general principles without ever showing any evidence. A "characteristic cannot be described otherwise than by means of conventional concepts" does not say anything about whether anatta is actually an inherent characteristic. If you want to say "We can't talk about anything real" then that will end all conversations, not just this one. If there is value in pariyatti, then you should be able to say something about why anatta qualifies as an inherent characteristic, and not just a correction as I am saying it is. Generalities about what a characteristic is in general does not make any point at all about the subject at hand. > > ---------------------- > > Dukkha also is a realization, not a thing. Over time one realizes that those things which one is attached to do not fulfill their promise or expectation. There is no dukkha inherent in the object. It's a result of clinging, not of the object! If one didn't cling to the object, dukkha would not arise. > > ---------------------- > > Dhammas are dukkha because they cannot be the basis for lasting satisfaction, they are not a refuge. This applies regardless of whether the dhamma is the object of consciousness of a person with clinging or of an arahant. I agree. How is that a characteristic, other than something recognized by the kind of understanding that you have just rightly expressed? It is a realization about the nature of dhammas, not a mark upon the dhamma itself. It is seeing that the rope is just a rope, not a snake. Ropes do not have an inherent characteristic that they carry around with them of "not-snake." And when I wake up from a nightmare, I don't realize that my waking state is inherently "not-nightmare." Maybe that is important for a half a second; after that the big realization is that *I am awake.* > > ---------------------- > To say it is a characteristic of the object would suggest something akin to saying that the object itself has satisfaction or dissatisfaction. > > ---------------------- > > That is only so if dukkha is taken to mean something like dissatisfaction;-)) What do you take it mean? It is translated as dissatisfaction, suffering, etc., etc. What is your favorite translation? You shouldn't be so withholding of your knowledge! Give me some specifics from time to time. > > ---------------------- > One can only suffer or be dissatisfied, if there is clinging or attachment or expectation. > > ---------------------- > > There are different kinds of dukkha mentioned in the teachings. Dukkha as a characteristic of dhammas has nothing to do with a person suffering or being dissatisfied. What does it have to do with? It is frustrating to have you say it is "not this/not this" and not say what you think it *is.* Pretty soon I am going to accuse you of practicing Advaita Vedanta and saying neti/neti to everything I say. > > ---------------------- > > > If you are suggesting an inherent self-contradiction in the notion of *not-self* as a *characteristic* of dhammas, I'm afraid I'm unable to see the point you are trying to make. Sorry. > > > > Please explain to me how anatta appears as a characteristic of a dhamma? Is there a mechanical explanation for exactly how it occurs? > > ---------------------- > > As far as I know there is no explanation of the mechanics of the characteristic of dukkha appearing. Well then what is it? Do you have any idea how it exists as a characteristic? > > > ---------------------- > > That idea might not be in sutta, because at the time of the suttas being given, no such conflict existed. "Anatta" and the other characteristics were not taken as attributes but as understandings about the nature of samsara. > > ---------------------- > > If the idea of reification (of dhammas/of the characteristic of anicca) is not in the suttas, then what would be the source of, or basis for, it? It's a philosophical term. It's not an idea that has a source or basis. It's a topic of discussion, that things that are not objects are objectified and thought to be something that they are not. I am making the assertion and arguing specifically about what that assertion consists of. That is the conversation. It's not in a sutta, because it is something that occurs, if it occurs, after the suttas were written. It's happening now, not then. If you understand the concept then you can argue against it. If you don't, I don't know what to say. > > ---------------------- > > In the Anatta-Lakhanna Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.mend.html] Buddha discusses the nature of Anatta. The whole discussion is about how each of the kandhas is "not-self" because it is impermanent, unsatisfactory and subject to change and cannot be controlled by the will. So anatta is not seen here as a characteristic of dhammas, but as a realization about dhammas not being part of the self. > > ---------------------- > > Thanks for the sutta quote. However, that part of the sutta is not about anattaa as a characteristic of dhammas, as I see it. It's about how, for consciousness that is accompanied by right understanding, there is no attachment, conceit or wrong view ("This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self"), > > > ---------------------- > > Anatta about a nama or rupa consists of the realization that "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self." Anatta belongs to panna regarding the dhamma, not to the dhamma. > > ---------------------- > > The expression "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is not used to explain anatta as a characteristic of dhammas. Again, I would request that instead of saying "it's not used to explain anatta as a characteristic of dhammas, please go on to say how anatta *is* explained as a characteristic of dhammas. Obviously this is something that you are familiar with for many years, so please say something about it. Otherwise, the conversation is rather empty. Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97326 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:17 am Subject: 4 x Ultra-Aware! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How to reach the Certainty of Final Knowledge? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these 4 Foundations of Awareness. What four? The ever calmly self reminding awareness of: 1: Body is just a mass of disgusting impurities... 2: Feelings are only a repeating emotional noise... 3: Mind is simply a conditioned set of weird moods... 4: Phenomena are mentally baked & faked appearances... While always acutely alert and clearly comprehending, thereby removing all lust, desire, envy, jealousy, frustration, & any kind of discontent rooted in this world... When, Bhikkhus, these 4 Foundations of Awareness have been developed, trained & well established, one of two fruits may be expected: Either Final Knowledge in this very life, or if there is residual clinging, the exalted state of Non-Return ...! <..> Awareness is Always Advantageous! <...> The 4 Great Frames of Reference! Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 181] 47. Foundations of Awareness: 36 Final Knowledge.. Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Ultra-Awareness of 4 Objects! #97327 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (19) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 19: The Very Beginning "What about one moment of being aware of the characteristic which appears, on and on, until it becomes powerful?" ***** Ven Dhammadharo: I think that one of the problems for all of us in developing satipa.t.thaana is that perhaps we don't want to be beginners, we just want to be attainers or to have results. We don't want to be a beginner, where in the beginning, there is difficulty and doubt and wrong understanding. Sujin: Another thing is that one may not know the difference between being a beginner and [being] advanced. So when we talk about satipa.t.thaana it seems that we should reach that advanced stage of developing satipa.t.thaana, [whereas] one should be at the very beginning. For example when we talk about pa~n~naa, one knows about the power [bala] - pa~n~naa which is a power or an indriya [faculty] - or of a high level which can distinguish naama from ruupa and directly experience the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa. [However], what about one moment of being aware of the characteristic which appears, on and on, until it becomes powerful? If we cannot be aware of any object in daily life, it cannot become powerful at all. ***** Metta, Sarah ======= #97328 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kaya-vinnatti and vaci-vinnatti nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 12-apr-2009, om 21:59 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Do bodily intimation and speach intimation arise only with javana- > processes? ------- N: Yes. For non-arahats, either kusala citta or akusala citta originates these rupas. Nina. #97329 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:39 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m szmicio Dear friends Saccavibhanga continues: <> In the world thinking of visible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world thinking of audible(objects). In the world thinking of odorous(objects). In the world thinking of sapid(objects). In the world thinking of tangible(objects). In the world thinking of ideational(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; <> In the world examination of visible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world examination of audible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world examination of odorous(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world examination of sapid(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world examination of tangible(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles. In the world examination of ideatioanal(objects) is a lovely thing, pleasant thing; herein this craving when arising arises; herein when settling settles; <> This is called The Noble Truth of the cause of suffering. ----------------------------- My best wishes, Lukas #97330 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:44 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. nilovg Dear friends, As regards the words of the fourth tetrad, (XIII) I shall breathe in breathe out contemplating impermanence, the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 234) states: Impermanence is the rise and fall and change in those same khandhas, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. Contemplation of impermanence is contemplation of materiality, etc., as impermanent in virtue of that impermanence... Further on the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 237) states about the fourth tetrad, This tetrad deals only with pure insight while the previous three deal with serenity and insight. As regards the clause: (XIV) I shall breathe inbreathe out contemplating fading away, the Visuddhimagga states that there are two kinds of fading away, namely: fading away as destruction which is the momentary dissolution of formations (conditioned realities) and absolute fading away which is nibbna. The text (Visuddhimagga VIII, 235) states: Contemplation of fading away is insight and it is the path, which occur as the seeing of these two. It is when he possesses this twofold contemplation that it can be understood of him He trains thus, I shall breathe inshall breathe out contemplating fading away. The same method of explanation is applied to the clause contemplating cessation. And with regard to the clause (XVI) contemplating relinquishment, the Visuddhimagga states: relinquishment is of two kinds too, that is to say, relinquishment as giving up, and relinquishment as entering into. Giving up is the giving up of defilements, and entering into is the entering into nibbna, the Visuddhimagga explains. Also this clause pertains to insight alone. ******** Nina. #97331 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:04 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sprlrt Hi, I'd like to add some comments to Lukas quotes. 1. The Truth of suffering (Dukkhasacca.m) <<190. Tattha katama.m dukkha.m ariyasacca.m? Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkha.m, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupaayaasaapi dukkhaa, appiyehi sampayogo dukkho, piyehi vippayogo dukkho, ya.m piccha.m na labhati tampi dukkha.m, sa.mkhittena pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa dukkhaa.>> <> ... <<196. Therein what is (physical) pain? That which is bodily uneasiness, bodily pain, uneasy painful experiences born of bodily contact, uneasy painful feeling born of bodily contact. That is called pain.>> A: This is akusala kayavinnana, body consciousness, a vipaka citta, the result of past akusala kamma, and is the only (akusala) vipaka citta to arise with unpleasant feeling. <<197. Tattha katama.m domanassa.m? Ya.m cetasika.m asaata.m cetasika.m dukkha.m cetosamphassaja.m asaata.m dukkha.m vedayita.m cetosamphassajaa asaataa dukkhaa vedanaa ida.m vuccati domanassa.m.>> <> A: These are dosamula akusala citta, rooted in aversion, the only (two) citta that arise along with mental unpleasant feeling, but they are not the direct and unavoidable result of any past kamma, they arise mainly because of pakatupanissaya paccaya, habits accumulated during all the aeons we've been spending in samsara. They arise in series of seven, accumulating as kilesa first, and then as kamma, which will result in future akusala vipaka, causing the contact with unpleasant object through the 5 sense doors at some point in the future (and also rebirth consciousness and kammaja rupa such as eye-sense). When some past (done a second or less ago or an aeon or more ago, we don't know) akusala kamma conditions an akusala sotavinnana, ear consciousness, to arise just for the shortest of the istants, experiencing, just for the shortest of the istants, upleasant sound object, atitta sadda arammana, it does so accompanied with neutral feeling, upekkha vedana, i.e. no dukkha, yet; but countless cittas rooted in dosa of various degrees, which can only be accompanied by domanassa vedana of various degrees, are most likely to follow immediately, just the same as in the case of body consciousness arising with dukkha vedana. And only panna can start breaking the habits accumulated in an uncountable number of lifetimes, by beginning to see sankhara dhammas as such, dhammas conditioned to arise & fall one after the other, in continuation, non-stop; instead then as unpleasant/pleasant sights, sounds, tastes, odours, body contacts or thoughts punishing/rewarding one's self. In the 1st ariya sacca all the three vatta/rounds that make up samsara are already in place: vipaka, kilesa and kamma, all three akusala in this case. Alberto #97332 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala kamma-patha and regrets about it nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 12-apr-2009, om 11:15 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > What do you think about dosa which causes akusala kamma-patha? > > Is there something wrong in this kind of course dosa? I feel > regrets about it. I've tried to change my behaviours, but there is > only more suffering. It cannot be change unless the kusala > cetasikas will start to perform it's own functions. But it > imposible to make it arise. Even when i want to start speak in the > right way, it cant be done until kusala citta wont appear. ------- You give the answer yourself: if there are no sobhana cetasikas performing their functions we cannot change our behaviour. Self is in the way: changing 'my' behaviour. Remember Sarah's post: Phra Dhammadhara saying: And Kh S: In that case awareness and understanding cannot be powerful. Just now we know the name akusala kamma and we think long stories about it with aversion, but then that kamma has fallen away and we accumulate new dosa while thinking about it. In order to abandon akusala, it must be known as only a dhamma. This is not thinking of a name or term, it is attending to its characteristic when it appears. This is only a very gradual process. By listening and considering we accumulate a little more understanding, and it is understanding that knows the danger of akusala. Knowing the danger can be a condition to refrain from akusala, but this cannot occur at will. It is sati that guards the six doorways and prevents the committing of akusala kamma. But remember: we are beginners. Nina. #97333 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:09 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E. (and Jon), Regarding: R: "...My question is about the nature of the characteristics and 'not understanding them correctly,' not what they are applied to...How does 'anicca' look when you see it as a characteristic of a dhamma?...you should be able to say something about why anatta qualifies as an inherent characteristic...please go on to say how anatta *is* explained as a characteristic of dhammas... Scott: I wonder if this might be of interest - I find it quite clear - from the Sammohavinodanii (Vol. I, pp. 58-60; I'll break it into two parts due to length): "But what is taught by the Tathaagata in this Suttanta Division? The characteristic of no-self in the twelve bases. For the Fully Enlightened One, when teaching the characteristic of no-self, teaches it by means of the impermanent, or by means of suffering, or by means of [both] the impermanent and suffering. "Herein, in the following sutta passage: 'Should anyone assert that the eye is self, it would be untenable. The arising and passing away of the eye are obvious. But since its arising and passing away are obvious, he would thus have to conclude that 'my self arises and passes away', therefore it is untenable, ... therefore the eye is no-self' (M iii 282), he taught the characteristic of no-self by means of the impermanent. "In the following sutta passage he taught the characteristic of no-self by means of suffering: 'Materiality, bhikkhus, is not the self. If materiality, bhikkhus, were the self, this materiality would not lead to sickness, and one would say of materiality: 'Let my material form be thus; let my material form not be thus.' But because, bhikkhus, materiality is not the self, therefore materiality leads to sickness and one cannot say of materiality: 'Let my material form be thus; let my material form not be thus' (S iii 67). "In such passages as: 'Materiality, bhikkhus, is impermanent; what is impermanent is painful, what is painful is not self; what is not self is not mine, that I am not, that is not my self' (S iii 82), he taught the characteristic of no-self by means of both the impermanent and suffering. "Why? Because of the obviousness of impermanence and suffering. For when a plate or a saucer or whatever it may be falls from the hand and breaks, they say: 'Ah, impermanence,' thus impermanence is obvious. But as regards the person (attabhaava), when boils and carbuncles and the like have sprung up, or when pierced by splinters and thorns, etc., they say: 'Ah, the pain.' Thus pain is obvious. The characteristic of no-self is unobvious, dark, unclear, difficult to penetrate, difficult to illustrate, difficult to make known..." Scott: The rest of the passage in Part II... Sincerely, Scott. #97334 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:10 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E. (and Jon), Part II: "The characteristics of impermanence and pain are made known with or without the arising of the Tathaagatas. The characteristic of no-self is not made known without the arising of the Enlightened Ones; it is made known only on the arising of the Enlightened Ones. For such wanderers and ascetics (taapasa) as the master Sarabha.nga are mighty and powerful and are able to express 'the impermanent and the painful': [but] they are unable to express 'no-self'. For if they were able to express 'no-self' in a present assembly, there would be penetration of path and fruition in the present assembly. For the making known of the characteristic of no-self is not the province of anyone else; it is the province of the Fully Enlightened Ones only. Thus the characteristic of no-self is unobvious. That is why the Master, when teaching the characteristic of no-self, taught it by means of impermanence or by means of pain or by means of both impermanence and pain. But here it should be understood that he taught it by means of both impermanence and pain. "But it is owing to not keeping in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment by what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati). The characteristic of pain does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating continuous oppression and owing to its being concealed by postures (iriyaapatha). The characteristic of no-self does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the resolution into the various elements (naanaadhaatuvinibbhoga) owing to its being concealed by compactness. But when continuity is dissected by laying hold of rise and fall, the characteristic of impermanence appears in accordance with its true essential nature. When postures are exposed (ugghaa.tita) by keeping in mind continual oppression, the characteristic of pain appears in accordance with its true essential nature. When resolving of the compact (ghanavinibbhoga) is effected by resolution into the various elements, the characteristic of no-self appears in accordance with its true essential nature. "And here the following difference should be understood: impermanence and the characteristic of impermanence, pain and the characteristic of pain, no-self and the characteristic of no-self. "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or because of their absence having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words 'what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But those same aggregates are no-self because of the words 'what is painful is no-self'(S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." Scott: Cool, eh? Sincerely, Scott. #97335 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:10 pm Subject: So dve vedanaa vedayati – kaayika~nca, cetasika~nca szmicio Hi Alberto > <<196. Therein what is (physical) pain? That which is bodily uneasiness, bodily pain, uneasy painful experiences born of bodily contact, uneasy painful feeling born of bodily contact. That is called pain.>> > > A: This is akusala kayavinnana, body consciousness, a vipaka citta, the result of past akusala kamma, and is the only (akusala) vipaka citta to arise with unpleasant feeling. L: This kind of citta arise with vedana which feels bodily ruupas. In CMA there is a quote that citta experience an object and all cetasikas experience it also but no completly, they are just sampling their object. But vedana is different because it experience/feels object completly. In CMA there is an example that vedana is similar to king who enjoys completly a meal, while other cetasikas just samples the food. Here is a quote: "In this respect, the others factors are compared to a cook who prepares a dish for a king and only samples a food while preparing it, while feeling is compared to the king who enjoys the meal as much as likes" Here is also Sallatha Sutta about two kinds of feelings and yoniso and ayoniso manasikara. That's always a good reminder: Sallatha Sutta 36.6 254. Assutavaa, bhikkhave, puthujjano sukhampi vedana.m vedayati [vediyati (sii. pii.)], dukkhampi vedana.m vedayati, adukkhamasukhampi vedana.m vedayati. Sutavaa, bhikkhave, ariyasaavako sukhampi vedana.m vedayati , dukkhampi vedana.m vedayati, adukkhamasukhampi vedana.m vedayati. Tatra, bhikkhave, ko viseso ko adhippayaaso [adhippaayo (sii. ka.), adhippaayaso (syaa. ka.m.), adhippaayoso (pii.)] ki.m naanaakara.na.m sutavato ariyasaavakassa assutavataa puthujjanenaati? Bhagava.mmuulakaa no, bhante, dhammaa pe assutavaa. Bhikkhave, puthujjano dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano socati kilamati paridevati urattaa.li.m kandati sammoha.m aapajjati. So dve vedanaa vedayati kaayika~nca, cetasika~nca. Seyyathaapi, bhikkhave, purisa.m sallena vijjheyya [sallena anuvijjheyyu.m (sii. syaa. ka.m. pii.)]. Tamena.m dutiyena sallena anuvedha.m vijjheyya [sallena anuvijjheyyu.m (sii.), sallena anuvedha.m vijjheyyu.m (syaa. ka.m.), sallena vijjheyyu.m (pii.)]. Eva~nhi so, bhikkhave, puriso dvisallena vedana.m vedayati. Evameva kho, bhikkhave, assutavaa puthujjano dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano socati kilamati paridevati urattaa.li.m kandati sammoha.m aapajjati. So dve vedanaa vedayati kaayika~nca, cetasika~nca. Tassaayeva kho pana dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano pa.tighavaa hoti. Tamena.m dukkhaaya vedanaaya pa.tighavanta.m, yo dukkhaaya vedanaaya pa.tighaanusayo, so anuseti. So dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano kaamasukha.m abhinandati. Ta.m kissa hetu? Na hi so, bhikkhave, pajaanaati assutavaa puthujjano a~n~natra kaamasukhaa dukkhaaya vedanaaya nissara.na.m, tassa kaamasukha~nca abhinandato, yo sukhaaya vedanaaya raagaanusayo, so anuseti. So taasa.m vedanaana.m samudaya~nca attha"ngama~nca assaada~nca aadiinava~nca nissara.na~nca yathaabhuuta.m nappajaanaati. Tassa taasa.m vedanaana.m samudaya~nca attha"ngama~nca assaada~nca aadiinava~nca nissara.na~nca yathaabhuuta.m appajaanato, yo adukkhamasukhaaya vedanaaya avijjaanusayo, so anuseti. So sukha~nce vedana.m vedayati, sa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Dukkha~nce vedana.m vedayati, sa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Adukkhamasukha~nce vedana.m vedayati, sa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Aya.m vuccati, bhikkhave, assutavaa puthujjano sa~n~nutto jaatiyaa jaraaya mara.nena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upaayaasehi, sa~n~nutto dukkhasmaati vadaami. Sutavaa ca kho, bhikkhave, ariyasaavako dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano na socati, na kilamati, na paridevati, na urattaa.li.m kandati, na sammoha.m aapajjati. So eka.m vedana.m vedayati kaayika.m, na cetasika.m. Seyyathaapi , bhikkhave, purisa.m sallena vijjheyya. Tamena.m dutiyena sallena anuvedha.m na vijjheyya. Eva~nhi so, bhikkhave, puriso ekasallena vedana.m vedayati. Evameva kho, bhikkhave, sutavaa ariyasaavako dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano na socati, na kilamati, na paridevati, na urattaa.li.m kandati, na sammoha.m aapajjati. So eka.m vedana.m vedayati kaayika.m, na cetasika.m. Tassaayeva kho pana dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano pa.tighavaana hoti. Tamena.m dukkhaaya vedanaaya appa.tighavanta.m, yo dukkhaaya vedanaaya pa.tighaanusayo, so naanuseti. So dukkhaaya vedanaaya phu.t.tho samaano kaamasukha.m naabhinandati. Ta.m kissa hetu? Pajaanaati hi so, bhikkhave, sutavaa ariyasaavako a~n~natra kaamasukhaa dukkhaaya vedanaaya nissara.na.m. Tassa kaamasukha.m naabhinandato yo sukhaaya vedanaaya raagaanusayo, so naanuseti. So taasa.m vedanaana.m samudaya~nca attha"ngama~nca assaada~nca aadiinava.m ca nissara.na~nca yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati. Tassa taasa.m vedanaana.m samudaya~nca attha"ngama~nca assaada~nca aadiinava~nca nissara.na~nca yathaabhuuta.m pajaanato, yo adukkhamasukhaaya vedanaaya avijjaanusayo, so naanuseti. So sukha~nce vedana.m vedayati, visa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Dukkha~nce vedana.m vedayati , visa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Adukkhamasukha~nce vedana.m vedayati, visa~n~nutto na.m vedayati. Aya.m vuccati, bhikkhave, sutavaa ariyasaavako visa~n~nutto jaatiyaa jaraaya mara.nena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upaayaasehi , visa~n~nutto dukkhasmaati vadaami. Aya.m kho, bhikkhave, viseso, aya.m adhippayaaso, ida.m naanaakara.na.m sutavato ariyasaavakassa assutavataa puthujjanenaati. Na vedana.m vedayati sapa~n~no Sukhampi dukkhampi bahussutopi; Aya~nca dhiirassa puthujjanena, Mahaa [aya.m (syaa. ka.m. ka.)] viseso kusalassa hoti. Sa"nkhaatadhammassa bahussutassa, Vipassato [sampassato (sii. pii.)] lokamima.m para~nca; I.t.thassa dhammaa na mathenti citta.m, Ani.t.thato no pa.tighaatameti. Tassaanurodhaa athavaa virodhaa, Vidhuupitaa atthagataa na santi; Pada~nca ~natvaa viraja.m asoka.m, Sammaa pajaanaati bhavassa paaraguuti. cha.t.tha.m; ----------------------- "Monks, an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person feels feelings of pleasure, feelings of pain, feelings of neither-pleasure-nor-pain. A well-instructed disciple of the noble ones also feels feelings of pleasure, feelings of pain, feelings of neither-pleasure-nor-pain. So what difference, what distinction, what distinguishing factor is there between the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person?" "For us, lord, the teachings have the Blessed One as their root, their guide, & their arbitrator. It would be good if the Blessed One himself would explicate the meaning of this statement. Having heard it from the Blessed One, the monks will remember it." "In that case, monks, listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "When touched with a feeling of pain, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught. So he feels two pains, physical & mental. Just as if they were to shoot a man with an arrow and, right afterward, were to shoot him with another one, so that he would feel the pains of two arrows; in the same way, when touched with a feeling of pain, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught. So he feels two pains, physical & mental. "As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is resistant. Any resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he delights in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person does not discern any escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure. As he is delighting in sensual pleasure, any passion-obsession with regard to that feeling of pleasure obsesses him. He does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling. As he does not discern the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then any ignorance-obsession with regard to that feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain obsesses him. "Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it as though joined with it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it as though joined with it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it as though joined with it. This is called an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person joined with birth, aging, & death; with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is joined, I tell you, with suffering & stress. "Now, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones, when touched with a feeling of pain, does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught. So he feels one pain: physical, but not mental. Just as if they were to shoot a man with an arrow and, right afterward, did not shoot him with another one, so that he would feel the pain of only one arrow. In the same way, when touched with a feeling of pain, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught. He feels one pain: physical, but not mental. "As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is not resistant. No resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he does not delight in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns an escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure. As he is not delighting in sensual pleasure, no passion-obsession with regard to that feeling of pleasure obsesses him. He discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, and escape from that feeling. As he discerns the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, and escape from that feeling, no ignorance-obsession with regard to that feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain obsesses him. "Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress. "This is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor between the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person." The discerning person, learned, doesn't sense a (mental) feeling of pleasure or pain: This is the difference in skillfulness between the sage & the person run-of-the-mill. For a learned person who has fathomed the Dhamma, clearly seeing this world & the next, desirable things don't charm the mind, undesirable ones bring no resistance. His acceptance & rejection are scattered, gone to their end, do not exist. Knowing the dustless, sorrowless state, he discerns rightly, has gone, beyond becoming, to the Further Shore. ------------------ My best wishes Lukas #97336 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:30 pm Subject: Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] szmicio Dear friends, Does this chapter on mindfulness of death is expound here as a condition to samatha only or also to vipassana? On the beginning there is said that death should be considered as interruption of life faculty and it shouldnt be considered as a conventional death. So this kind of exposition implies that it can be object for vipassana also. Best wishes, Lukas #97337 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott, excellent passage to consider and reconsider. I saved it in my files. And also the next one. Op 13-apr-2009, om 14:09 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > The characteristic of no-self is unobvious, dark, unclear, > difficult to penetrate, difficult to illustrate, difficult to make > known..." ------- N: But pain being concealed by postures may give rise to misunderstandings: Maybe Sarah can help here. We had discussions with Kh sujin: when there is mindfulness, there is no posture only different rupas that arise and fall away. I think that is the oppression? Nina. #97338 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 13-apr-2009, om 18:30 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Does this chapter on mindfulness of death is expound here as a > condition to samatha only or also to vipassana? > > On the beginning there is said that death should be considered as > interruption of life faculty and it shouldnt be considered as a > conventional death. So this kind of exposition implies that it can > be object for vipassana also. ------ N: In several suttas the Buddha speaks about mindfulness of death and this reminds us not to be neglecful. As to death as a subject: as you know there is conventional death, momentary death and the final passing away of an arahat. Momentary death occurs now, as nama and rupa arise and fall away. Each citta that arises is new and then it falls away never to return. This is the object of vipassana: nama and rupa that are impermanent. You will find that many of the samatha subjects can remind us of reality now. Take the Parts of the Body. They are with us all the time and we can be reminded that they are only impermanent elements. ------ Nina. #97339 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:42 pm Subject: Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] szmicio Dear Nina, > N: In several suttas the Buddha speaks about mindfulness of death and > this reminds us not to be neglecful. L: Not to be neglectful of what is kusala? Or not to be neglectful of nama-ruupa? Sati arise with each kusala and still there can be neglectful of what is nama and ruupa. sati which arise with each kusala performs different function then sati in vipassana , isnt it? As to death as a subject: as you > know there is conventional death, momentary death and the final > passing away of an arahat. > Momentary death occurs now, as nama and rupa arise and fall away. > Each citta that arises is new and then it falls away never to return. > This is the object of vipassana: nama and rupa that are impermanent. > You will find that many of the samatha subjects can remind us of > reality now. Take the Parts of the Body. They are with us all the > time and we can be reminded that they are only impermanent elements. L: Death as interruption of life faculty is really good reminder to vipassana. But being reminded of performing dana, siila and another kusala can be also a condition to vipassana, even if there is no speaking about paramattha dhammas? Best wishes Lukas #97340 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:51 pm Subject: The Nature of "Source Code"? ksheri3 Good Morning Robert, Boy, last night I was in prime shape/condition for meditation and was really cookin' on a meditation but, at approx 2:20 a.m. as I lay there I began to want my lips coated with a substance so that they would not dry out during sleep. After about an half hour of debate on whether I was gonna un-wrap myself from the nice warm blankets I finally made the move to get out of bed. As I stumbled about my tiny room in the basement I just had to open the file folder marked YOGACARA. We, you and I, are debating this thing called "emptiness" or shunyata, no? You suggest that "understanding" is something since it came from something other i.e. dependent origination? What have we here? <...> Okay, what does it mean "to exist"? Isn't that what the Abhidharma is all about: EXISTANCE? Is the sound tangible? Is a thought tangible? What is non-existant? Is it possible to build something that does not exist? I'm having fun with you here since what I really wanted to get at was that John Y. Cha gave me a tremendous piece of work on 12/31/2005 that I loved reading and only last night RE-discovered it in that file folder marked YOGACARA: "On The Construction Of Non-Existent Objects" by John Y. Cha. I was freezing so I only had a moment to read the first page, again. It looks very promising! Your problem seems to stem from your desire to "substantiate" everything. At first glance I might say that this is a common characteristic of the Western practitioner, yet I hesitate BECAUSE "Trekchod" is a preliminary practice of learning how the mind works. In this practice the students objective is to "differentiate samsara from nirvana". Sure it's complete OBJECTIFICATION and substantiation of a hallucinatory object yet this is how it works. In differentiating samsara from nirvana the student gets the practice of noticing their mind, as if outside itself, in action so as to speak of this kusala and akusala state of being, for instance. Once the student has accomplished this THEN the student can begin to attempt that monumental task of KADAG TREKCHO which is a "thorough cutting" to "primordial purity" or "purity" without additatives, contamination. > I get it that this is your understanding, but I am asking you, what is the source of that understanding. If it doesn't come from sutta, then please give me an appropriate Abhidhamma citation or link. > Remember the sound that you think comes from the bell or those bells that whores seem to have on their toes to announce their presence and have people look at them. Where does the sound come from? Where does the thought come from? toodles, colette <...> > Again, I would request that instead of saying "it's not used to explain anatta as a characteristic of dhammas, please go on to say how anatta *is* explained as a characteristic of dhammas. Obviously this is something that you are familiar with for many years, so please say something about it. Otherwise, the conversation is rather empty. > > Thanks, > Robert E. > > = = = = = = = = > #97341 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. ksheri3 Good Morning Ken, A few weeks ago I suggested to a Kagyu member that I was going to attempt to try a yogic technique by Niguma on him and his second-in-command in that Kagyu forum. I fumbled and attempted to "set" the right conditions myself before I finally realized that I was merely trying to do this/that as a means of protection since I've done astral projection before and know that it's not always a nice place to be "playing" in. Before coming here, to answer this question, I ran into THE TIBETAN BOOK OF THE DEAD and the Shangpa Kagyu who both gave me very clear insight into THEIR understanding of what I wanted to attempt to do. After reading their opinions and treatises I came here and am stuck in a rut at the moment, confounded by your question. > <> > > if there is nothing to look at, how do we practise....nothingness...or just conditions. Even conditions are also something to look at :=) > colette: you are interpreting what you see, hear, taste, etc., as being definitative of what it actually is and is not. Maya is the do of ILLUSIONS and in Buddhism we are certain that the world we experience is ILLUSIONARY. Shunyata or emptiness is nothing more than a term we apply as a means of expressing our conceptualization. STILL, it does exist. This is why I raised the issue of Trekcho and the need to seperate one's mind and thoughts from that IGNORANCE that we have previously been programmed by, programmed with. Your phraseology of "conditions" is nothing more than Dependent Origination. The conditions existed only because they were CAUSED by something else, something other, and the conditions that exist then, in turn, cause other effects which is nothing more than SAMSARA. The more you search for Nirvana the more you will find nothing more than Samsara. And that's only because THEY ARE THE SAME THING. They do not exist one without the other. ---------------------------------------- > So if anatta only exclusive to panna how do we look at other dhammas :-) colette: What, prey-tell, are you doing with that paint brush and that can of paint? Think you'll get me in a corner do ya? Lets start with your use of the term "exclusive" which is meant to describe a certain "exclusivity". I take it that you're trying to "differentiate" things one from another. My view of "anatta" is that of no Svabhava. Anything that does not possess Svabhava is dependent on something other or something else. ALL DHARMAS HAVE NO SVABHAVA, LACK SVABHAVA. ALL DHARMAS ARE ANATTA. -------------------------------- > > > > colette: (what fun), If I may, > > "The meaning of all phenomena being mere labels or designations is that they exist and acquire their identities by means of our denomination or designation of them." > > k: that is true. but the nature of things are truth. colette: now you've got a baseball bat and you look as though you're trying to fit your SELF into the shadow of Tony "Joe Batters" Accardo as he beets people to death with his bat. what is "nature"? what is "truth"? Two very different and controversial concepts. Define them before going off on me, please. -------------------- One cannot said pain is not there, anger is not there even though pain and anger are mere labels or names. > colette: <.....>You actually have to experience them. Each in their own "being". Pain, why my body is so decorated with surgical scars that are clear evidence of the amount of work my body has gone through and the pain that I have actually experienced and existed through is clearly an TRUTH that I have EXPERIENCED AND KNOW PAIN. I even have a scar that goes from an ear over the top of my head to the other ear. The Abhidharma can guide you to pain if you seek to experience pain but lets focus on something that I'm sure bothers you non-stop each and every day, ANGER or is that Mosa? Anger is Hate. IF, as you theorize, Anger does not exist THEN WHY DO YOU HAVE IT AND WHY DO YOU PROTECT IT AND WHY DO YOU GIVE ANGER SUCH A WELCOMED HOME TO RESIDE IN i.e. your consciousness? Why is it that you can recognize a beggar or bhiku and you turn them away constantly since they are not worthy of your money, your baubles, your trinkets, YET YOU WELCOME HATE AND ANGER AS THOUGH THEY ARE YOUR PARENTS? <...> ------------------------------ > <> > > k: that is my weak points, always get myself in such situation. colette: I was once afflicted with such natures but all ya gotta do is stay focused on the actual practices. Right now it's hard but getting easier, to not see Western kabbalism and esoteric practices as I focus more consistantly on Varjayana and Dzogchen, et al. ---------------------------- Sorry gotta go do some quick research. toodles, colette > > > I tell you, though, it happens to me constantly! When ya apply that damned wisdom from the Abhidharma, as I always do (does that make me something since I always apply the Abhidharma but I also apply Tanra extensively, what label would be put upon me?). I'm not admitting inclusion in the Prasangika sect but: > > "For the Prasangikas, if anything exists objectively and is identified within the basis of designation, then that is, in fact, equivalent to saying that it exists autonomously, that it has an independent nature and exists in its own right...." > > k: I do not agreed with them because this would meant all dammas exist independent as they exists objectively. Unpleasant feelings exist objectively as we cannot mix it up with pleasant feelings. > > > Cheers > Ken I #97342 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:17 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Nina (and Sarah), Regarding: N: But pain being concealed by postures may give rise to misunderstandings: Maybe Sarah can help here. We had discussions with Kh sujin: when there is mindfulness, there is no posture only different rupas that arise and fall away. I think that is the oppression?" Scott: The Paa.li is: ...Dukkhalakkha.na.m abhi.nhasampa.tipii.lanassa amanasikaaraa appa.tivedhaa, iriyaapathehi pa.ticchannattaa, na upa.t.thaati. Scott: 'Oppression' is 'pii.la.' I had wondered if it was related in meaning to 'ruppati' ('to be vexed, oppressed, hurt, molested'). Sincerely, Scott. #97343 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:19 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Well it's just that there are some distinct similarities between views expressed and points made by you and those of certain other members, and which I understood had originated in the writings of certain modern commentators. > > I'm sure everyone who is active on internet discussion groups has been exposed to these views and comments at some stage. > > And I see no problem whatsoever with repeating things one has picked up because they have appeal (I certainly was not suggesting you were wrongly appropriating another's views as your own). Well, I never said I didn't appropriate the views of other list members. Those are up for grabs! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97344 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > As regards the words of the fourth tetrad, "(XIII) I shall breathe in > breathe out contemplating impermanence", the Visuddhimagga (VIII, > 234) states: > > ` Impermanence is the rise and fall and change in those same > khandhas, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning > is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary > dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. Contemplation > of impermanence is contemplation of materiality, etc., as > "impermanent" in virtue of that impermanence...' This is great. I hope you don't mind if my conversation with Jon "leaks" into this thread. You have provided us with a very helpful quote! Above, the Vissuddhimagga seems to verify my view of anicca as a comparative change between the kandhas in one moment and in another, "through their momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode." I made a point to Jon that this nature of anicca shows the type of characteristic of dhammas that it is: not something that can mark an individual dhamma, but one that has to do with the nature of the way they change from one moment to another. In other words, anicca is about the nature of how dhammas change, not about how they exist in a single moment. Am I seeing this incorrectly? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97345 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:34 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." > > Scott: Cool, eh? Yes, very cool. Thanks for sharing that! Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #97346 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:38 am Subject: Re: The Nature of "Source Code"? epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > Remember the sound that you think comes from the bell or those bells that whores seem to have on their toes to announce their presence and have people look at them. I'm not actually familiar with that... Are we debating shunyatta? Please tell me where I stand in the debate, and I will defend my view! Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #97347 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:20 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio Dear friends, I've prepared this comparision to you. Could we go throught Satipatthana Sutta together? ------- 9. Mahaasatipa.t.thaanasutta.m 372. Eva.m me suta.m eka.m samaya.m bhagavaa kuruusu viharati kammaasadhamma.m naama kuruuna.m nigamo. Tatra kho bhagavaa bhikkhuu aamantesi bhikkhavoti. Bhaddanteti [bhadanteti (sii. syaa. pii.)] te bhikkhuu bhagavato paccassosu.m. Bhagavaa etadavoca Uddeso 373. Ekaayano aya.m, bhikkhave, maggo sattaana.m visuddhiyaa, sokaparidevaana.m samatikkamaaya dukkhadomanassaana.m attha"ngamaaya ~naayassa adhigamaaya nibbaanassa sacchikiriyaaya, yadida.m cattaaro satipa.t.thaanaa. Katame cattaaro? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaaye kaayaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m, vedanaasu vedanaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa, vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m, citte cittaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m, dhammesu dhammaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa.m. Uddeso ni.t.thito. ------------------------ Thanissaro Bhikkhu: The Great frames of reference I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in the Kuru country. Now there is a town of the Kurus called Kammasadhamma. There the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Monks." "Lord," the monks replied. The Blessed One said this: "This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding in other words, the four frames of reference. Which four? "There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself ardent, alert, & mindful putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves ardent, alert, & mindful putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. --- Soma Thera: Thus have I heard. At one time the Blessed One was living in the Kurus, at Kammasadamma, a market-town of the Kuru people. Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus as follows: "This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." The Four Arousings of Mindfulness "What are the four? "Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending (it) and mindful (of it), having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating the feelings in the feelings, ardent, clearly comprehending (them) and mindful (of them), having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating consciousness in consciousness, ardent, clearly comprehending (it) and mindful (of it), having overcome in this world covetousness and grief; he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects, ardent, clearly comprehending (them) and mindful (of them), having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief." --- Goenka: The Great Discourse on the Establishing of Awareness. Thus have I heard: At one time the Enlightened One was staying among the Kurus at Kammaasadhamma, a market town of the Kuru people. There the Enlightened One addressed the monks thus:"Monks," and they replied, "Venerable Sir!"Then the Enlightened One spoke as follows: 1. Introduction This is the one and only one way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the extinguishing of suffering and grief, for walking on the path of truth, for realisation of nibbaana: that is to say, the fourfold establishing of awareness. Which four? Here, monks, a monk dwells ardent with awareness and constant thorought understanding of impermanence, observing body in body, having removed craving and aversion towards the world[of mind and matter]; he dwells ardent with awareness and constant thorough understanding of impermanence, observing sensations in sensations, having removed craving and aversion towards the world[of mind and matter]; he dwells ardent with awareness and constant thorough understanding of impermanence, observing mind in mind, having removed craving and aversion towards the world[of mind and matter]; he dwells ardent with awareness and constant thorough understanding of impermanence, observing mental contents in mental contents, having removed craving and aversion towards the world[of mind and matter]. ******************** Commentary: Evam me sutam = "Thus have I heard" the Discourse on the Arousing of Mindfulness [Satipatthana Sutta]. "I" refers to the Elder Ananda, cousin of the Buddha. At the first Buddhist Council held in the Sattapanna Cave at Rajagaha under the presidentship of the Great Disciple of the Buddha, the Elder Maha Kassapa, the Collection of the Discourses [Sutta Pitaka] was recited by the Elder Ananda. Ekam samayam bhagava Kurusu viharati = "At one time the Blessed One was living in the (country of the) Kurus." Although the territory of the Kuru Princes, their homeland, was a single contiguous domain, by taking into consideration its many villages and market-towns, it was commonly referred to by the use of the plural form "Kurus". In the time of the legendary king Mandhatu, say the commentators, inhabitants of the three continents, Pubba Videha, Apara Goyana, and Uttara Kuru, having heard that Jambudipa,[1] the birthplace of Sammasambuddhas,[2] Paccekabuddhas,[3] the Great Disciples of the Buddhas, Universal Monarchs and other beings of mighty virtue, was an exceedingly pleasant, excellent continent, came to Jambudipa with the Universal Monarch Mandhatu who was making a tour of all the continents, in due order, preceded by his Wheel Treasure. And at last when Mandhatu bodily translated himself by means of his psychic virtue to the Tavatimsa devaloka, the heaven of the Thirty-three, the people of the three continents who accompanied him to Jambudipa begged of his son for territory to live in, as they said they had come carried by the great power of Mandhatu, and were now unable by themselves to return to their own continents. Their prayer was heard and lands were granted to each of the groups of people of the three continents. The places in which these people settled got the names of the original continents from which they had emigrated. The settlement of people from Pubba Videha came to be known as Videha, of those from Apara Goyana, as Aparanta, and of those from Uttara Kuru as Kururattha. Kammasadammam nama Kurunam nigamo = "At Kammasadamma, a market-town of the Kuru people." Some explain the word Kammasadamma,here, spelling it with a "dh" instead of a "d". Since Kammasa was tamed here it was called Kammasadamma, the place of the taming of Kammasa. Kammasa refers to the cannibal of Kammasapada, the one with the speckled, black and white or grey coloured foot. It is said that a wound on his foot, caused by a stake, healed, having become like a piece of wood with lines of fibre of a complex pattern [cittadaru sadiso hutva]. Therefore, he became well-known as Kammasapada, Speckled Foot. By whom was Speckled Foot tamed? By the Great Being, the Bodhisatta. In which Birth-story [Jataka] is it stated? Certain commentators say: "In the Sutasoma Birth-story". But the elders of the Great Minister at Anuradhapura, the Maha Vihara, say that it is stated in the Jayaddisa Birth-story. Kammasapada was tamed, weaned of his cannibalism, by the Great Being, in the circumstances mentioned in the Jayaddisa Birth- story. The following statement occurs in that story: To free my sire did I renounce my life, When born as very son of the king, Jayaddisa, Pancala's sovran chief, And make even Speckled Foot have faith in me.[4] Some [keci] however explain spelling the word thus: Kammasadhamma. It is said that the traditional Kuru virtuous practice [Kuruvattadhamma] became (black or diversified or) stained [kammaso jato] in that place. Therefore, it was called Kammasadhamma. The market-town established there, too, got the same name. Why was it not said Kammasadamme Kurunam nigame using the locative? Because, it is said, there was no monastery (or dwelling place) at which the Blessed One could stay, in that market-town. Away from the market-town, however, there was a huge dense jungle in a delightful region, watered well. In that jungle, the Blessed One lived, making the market-town his place for gathering alms. ----------------------- Please be patient it could take me some time to prepared another post on satipatthana. For now I want to post all commentaries on udesso and then go to the kaayaanupassana. Commentaries are available here: http://abhidhamma.org/SomaTheraTheCommentary.htm My best wishes Lukas P.s I would appreciate some info on this commentaries translated by Soma Thera #97348 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:12 am Subject: adhipati paccaya szmicio Dear friends If citta arises with only one hetu and is accompanied by chanda, vimamsa or viriya, is it possible that this citta is conditioned by way of adhipati-paccaya? Deoes chanda/vimamsa/viriya has a strenght to condition citta accompanied by just hetu? Best wishes Lukas #97349 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:09 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 11. nilovg Dear friends, It is extremely difficult to develop jhna and we should not think that it will be easier to develop insight if one tries to develop jhna first. In the following sutta we read about canker- destruction depending on jhna. It is clearly explained in what sense we should understand this. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Nines, Chapter VI, 5, Musing): Verily, monks, I say canker-destruction depends on the first jhna (musing)And wherefore is this said? Consider the monk who, aloof from sense-desiresenters and abides in the first jhna: whatever occurs there of rpa, feeling, perception, activities (sakhra) or consciousness, he sees wholly as impermanent phenomena, as ill, as a disease, a boil, a sting, a hurt, an affliction, as something alien, gimcrack, empty, not the self. He turns his mind away from such phenomena and, having done so, brings the mind towards the deathless element with the thought: This is the peace, this the summit, just this: the stilling of all mind-activity, the renouncing of all (rebirth) basis, the destroying of craving, passionlessness, ending, the cool. And steadfast therein he wins to canker-destruction; if notjust by reason of that Dhamma zest, that Dhamma sweetness, he snaps the five lower fetters and is born spontaneously and, being not subject to return from that world, becomes completely cool there. The same is said with regard to the other stages of jhna. There can be no canker-destruction, even for those who develop jhna, unless the five khandhas, the conditioned nmas and rpas, are known as they are. Are there not five khandhas now, no matter what kind of citta arises, be it kusala citta or akusala citta? When something hard impinges on the bodysense, are there not five khandhas? Do we know already the difference between hardness and the nma which experiences hardness? Hardness could not appear if there were no nma which experiences it. It is not self who experiences it. Do we know the characteristic of painful feeling when it appears and the characteristic of aversion towards the pain? Different realities appear one at a time and when there is mindfulness they can be known as they are. Later on they can be realized as impermanent and not self. We should not forget that each moment of right understanding now eventually leads to the destroying of craving, passionlessness, ending, the cool. It leads to canker-destruction. ******** Nina. #97350 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:23 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 14-apr-2009, om 5:29 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Impermanence is the rise and fall and change in those same > > khandhas, or it is their non-existence after having been; the > meaning > > is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary > > dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. Contemplation > > of impermanence is contemplation of materiality, etc., as > > "impermanent" in virtue of that impermanence...' > > Above, the Vissuddhimagga seems to verify my view of anicca as a > comparative change between the kandhas in one moment and in > another, "through their momentary dissolution since they do not > remain in the same mode." > > I made a point to Jon that this nature of anicca shows the type of > characteristic of dhammas that it is: not something that can mark > an individual dhamma, but one that has to do with the nature of the > way they change from one moment to another. In other words, anicca > is about the nature of how dhammas change, not about how they exist > in a single moment. > > Am I seeing this incorrectly? ------- N: Still, each individual dhamma falls away never to come back. The word change could be misunderstood. Not remaining in the same mode: let us think of an example. At the moment of seeing five khandhas have arisen: eyesense is rupa-khandha, seeing is citta, and it is accompanied by seven cetasikas which are the other three nama-khandhas. They all fall away and then receiving- consciousness arises. This is accompanied by more than seven cetasikas, namely vitakka and vicara (applied thinking and sustained thinking), thus there is already a combination different from the moment of seeing. All the cittas of the eye-door process fall away and then bhavagacitta arises. Then the rupakhandha is the heartbase, the vipaakacitta is different, accompanied by different cetasikas. The khandhas do not remain in the same mode. How could they, they fall away immediately. Nina. #97351 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] adhipati paccaya nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 14-apr-2009, om 10:12 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > If citta arises with only one hetu and is accompanied by chanda, > vimamsa or viriya, is it possible that this citta is conditioned by > way of adhipati-paccaya? Deoes chanda/vimamsa/viriya has a strenght > to condition citta accompanied by just hetu? ------- N: Citta with only one hetu: moha-muulacitta. Here the predominance- condition does not operate. This citta is weak, no pa~n~naa, no chanda. Viriya can accompany it, but it cannot be predominance condition. Nina. #97352 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:22 am Subject: Alert or Agitated? bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What to Train when the Mind is High and Alert? The Blessed Buddha once explained: On any occasion, Bhikkhus, when mind is excited and high, then it is time for training the Tranquillity Link to Awakening, the Concentration Link to Awakening, and the Equanimity Link to Awakening. Why is it so? Because when the mind is excited and high, Bhikkhus, then it is easy to calm it down with exactly those mental states... Imagine, Bhikkhus, a man wants to extinguish a great fire. If he throws wet grass, wet cow-dung, wet timber into it, sprays it with water, and scatters soil over it, would he be able to extinguish that great bonfire? Yes, Venerable Sir. Even so here, Bhikkhus, on any occasion when the mind is excited and high, then it is convenient to train & develop the Tranquillity Link to Awakening, the Concentration Link to Awakening, & the Equanimity Link to Awakening. Why is it so? Because when the mind is excited and high, Bhikkhus, then it is easy to calm it down & still it with the qualities of exactly those states! Awareness , however, Bhikkhus, I tell you, is always useful & good to train! <...> Sources (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 114-5] 46: Links. 53: Fire.... Have a nicely composed day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Alert or Agitated? #97353 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott, Op 14-apr-2009, om 3:17 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: The Paa.li is: > > ...Dukkhalakkha.na.m abhi.nhasampa.tipii.lanassa amanasikaaraa > appa.tivedhaa, iriyaapathehi pa.ticchannattaa, na upa.t.thaati. > > Scott: 'Oppression' is 'pii.la.' I had wondered if it was related > in meaning to 'ruppati' ('to be vexed, oppressed, hurt, molested'). ------- N: That is interesting. I am just studying the subco to Sangiitisutta 5: he studies the dukkha of vedanaa: dukkhato manasi karototi aniccattaa eva vedanaa udayabbayapa.tipiilitataaya... he gives wise attention to dukkha, because of impermanence, feeling is thus oppressed by rise and fall. One may change posture in order not to have pain, but the very fact of clinging to postures hides the truth. Ruppati: this pertains just to ruupa: afflicted by cold and heat, etc. It shows the disadvantage of ruupa. Nina. #97354 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries nilovg Dear Lukas and Larry, Years ago Larry posted the whole book of Ven Soma: the Way of Mindfulness, the Co in English, but not in Pali. Perhaps Larry can help you to get these postings and all reactions and remarks about them in dsg? They may be stored somewhere. Nina. Op 14-apr-2009, om 8:20 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Could we go throught Satipatthana Sutta together? #97355 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 13-apr-2009, om 20:42 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > N: In several suttas the Buddha speaks about mindfulness of death and > > this reminds us not to be neglecful. > > L: Not to be neglectful of what is kusala? Or not to be neglectful > of nama-ruupa? Sati arise with each kusala and still there can be > neglectful of what is nama and ruupa. sati which arise with each > kusala performs different function then sati in vipassana , isnt it? ------ N: Neglectful as to the development of understanding of nama and rupa. This was his unique teaching. Sati has many levels as you know, and when it is not of the level of satipatthaana, it is not neglecful of daana or siila, or samatha. But the Buddha reminded people especially not to be neglectful as to the development of understanding of nama and rupa. ------- > > L: Death as interruption of life faculty is really good reminder to > vipassana. But being reminded of performing dana, siila and another > kusala can be also a condition to vipassana, even if there is no > speaking about paramattha dhammas? ------ N: Daana, siila and all kusala can be perfections if they are developed with right understanding and with the right goal in mind: eradication of defilements, detachment. We do not need the words vipassanaa or paramattha dhammas, but vipassanaa is developed by wisely attending to the characteristics of realities that appear at this very moment. No need to name them. If we think: I perform a lot of kusala and that is a condition for vipassanaa we may be quite wrong. We may cling to a self who does it all, or clinging to an idea of vipassanaa. ***** Nina. #97356 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:16 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] szmicio Dear Nina Can you say more about realities now? Does all akusala realities can be know? Each of them can be object to understanding? I know answer, but still has a lot of doubts and regrets about it. a lot of dosa. So many years I thought about Lukas that is doing this or that. I really need your support Nina. My best wishes Lukas > > L: Not to be neglectful of what is kusala? Or not to be neglectful > > of nama-ruupa? Sati arise with each kusala and still there can be > > neglectful of what is nama and ruupa. sati which arise with each > > kusala performs different function then sati in vipassana , isnt it? > ------ > N: Neglectful as to the development of understanding of nama and > rupa. This was his unique teaching. Sati has many levels as you know, > and when it is not of the level of satipatthaana, it is not neglecful > of daana or siila, or samatha. But the Buddha reminded people > especially not to be neglectful as to the development of > understanding of nama and rupa. > ------- > > > > L: Death as interruption of life faculty is really good reminder to > > vipassana. But being reminded of performing dana, siila and another > > kusala can be also a condition to vipassana, even if there is no > > speaking about paramattha dhammas? > ------ > N: Daana, siila and all kusala can be perfections if they are > developed with right understanding and with the right goal in mind: > eradication of defilements, detachment. > We do not need the words vipassanaa or paramattha dhammas, but > vipassanaa is developed by wisely attending to the characteristics of > realities that appear at this very moment. No need to name them. > If we think: I perform a lot of kusala and that is a condition for > vipassanaa we may be quite wrong. We may cling to a self who does it > all, or clinging to an idea of vipassanaa. #97357 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:56 pm Subject: A Book Recommendation/RobK (and all) - upasaka_howard Hi, all - It has happened to me numerous times that a book or a teaching that has meant little to me at one time subsequently becomes quite the opposite. A case in point is a book I bought a year or so ago, that I started to read, that disappointed me, and that I simply put away. A few days ago I remembered it and thought "Hey! Why not give it another try?" So, I did, and so far I am loving it. (I'm only about a third of the way into the book at this point.) I think that many of you might love it as well, provided you put aside possible objections to terminology. Robert, it occurs to me that you, in particular, might find this work somewhat to your liking. (If not, nothing lost. :-) The book is THE UNBORN: The Life and Teachings of Zen Master Bankei, 1622 - 1693. The ISBN for the soft cover version I have is 0-86547-595-4. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97358 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: "That is interesting. I am just studying the subco to Sangiitisutta 5: he studies the dukkha of vedanaa: dukkhato manasi karototi aniccattaa eva vedanaa udayabbayapa.tipiilitataaya...he gives wise attention to dukkha, because of impermanence, feeling is thus oppressed by rise and fall. One may change posture in order not to have pain, but the very fact of clinging to postures hides the truth. Ruppati: this pertains just to ruupa: afflicted by cold and heat, etc. It shows the disadvantage of ruupa." Scott: I'm just thinking out loud, Nina - nothing of much consequence. Yes, ruppati is a characteristic of ruupa. Postures, I'm thinking, are akin to mind-produced ruupa (citta-ja citta- samutthaana-ruupa). I don't know if it is correct to see them in this fashion. The experience of bodily pain is naama, I am thinking. The ruupas of the body would also have the characteristic of ruppati. Is there a link between the 'molestation' of the ruupas of the body and the experience of bodily pain? Maintaining a given posture always leads to a change in posture, due to discomfort. A given posture is not likely to be vi~n~natti since a posture is not necessarily meant to make anything known. Yet changing posture, let's say conditioned by aversion and the experience of bodily pain and unpleasant feeling, serves to hide or remove the experience, at least temporarily. The body is made to move, even if the movements are 'directed' from outside of awareness. These movements, some merely subtle adjustments, some gross displacements, are made all the waking day and mostly without much wise attention at all. Sincerely, Scott. #97359 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:11 am Subject: Re: chanda and cetana glenjohnann Dear Sarah and Lukas Thank you, Sarah, for filling this out - putting it into the "this moment" mode. So true that only developed panna can know the characteristics of the various mental factors. We so easily identify with an impression in our minds, rather than knowing each moment. Ann > In fact, only developed panna can know precisely what the characteristic is of any mental factor when it occurs. Most of the time, there's just an impression and it's impossible to distinguish precisely 'this is lobha', 'this is chanda', 'this is cetana'. > > I'll look forward to anymore good daily life examples/anecdotes. Chris, good to see you joining in and adding the helpful quote from the dict. > > Metta, > > Sarah > =========== > #97360 From: "colette" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:19 pm Subject: Re: The Nature of "Source Code"? ksheri3 Good Morning Robert, What can anyone tell ya? You are the one that has to decide; you are the one that has to commit; you are the one that has to make the decision as to what is and is not atta and/or anatta; etc. BUT I'LL PLAY. Yes, we are, in part, discussing Shunyata. From the Dharma-Dharmat-Vibhagga: "The appearance of duality and according to language [means:] the appearance of duality and the appearance according to language. In this case, the existanced of the object and subject of cognition (grahya-grahaka), such as material form and the eye, etc, is the appearance of duality. [And] that which depends on that [duality] is the appearance according to language. [This] is unreal mental construction, which is the real basis (Lsraya) for the designations (prajnapti) of own-nature (svarupa) and distinctive marks." Does that fit in your square or round holes? ;) Now maybe you can inform me that you have a "presence" in the debate/discusion and you can now take a position based upon the position that I have just issued but actually, was issued to me where I filtered it and translated it to fit my capabilities to issue to you. I know that you are nothing more than a computer generated argument without any substance whatsoever other than that substance that a microchip or a mainframe generates but I still play and maintain my position as nothing more than a ghost, a dead body, a visus in the machine that confounds people that are worthy of money to live, and baubles and trinkets which help them reach enjoyment, kusala, yet I have no need for these things since I do not live n or breath, nor eat, nor feel pain, nor feel happiness, and on and on and on, BECAUSE I AM DEAD, I AM NOTHING MORE THAN A GHOST, etc. ------------------------------------------------------- My, aren't I the crafty one! In closing I recall the day, I went to a restaurant on Geneva Rd in Wheaton IL after leaving the Olcott Library at the Theosophical Society's building (Main St. Wheaton turns into Geneva Rd. at North Ave so I was only like a block away from the building/grounds, it's a rather large plot of land and in the back they give refuge to honey bees that make a suculent nectar) I was sitting there drinking my coffee and pondering what I had just experienced at the Library when in walks this lovely girl with some "bikers" where I was confounded by her presence with those people. This caused me to write a poem: you'll have to wait since I suddenly am at the most vacant loss of that poem that I treasured for all these decades. I even made a caligraphy of that poem. VEry odd that I somehow cannot recall it. I'll get back to ya on that one. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > Remember the sound that you think comes from the bell or those bells that whores seem to have on their toes to announce their presence and have people look at them. > > I'm not actually familiar with that... > > Are we debating shunyatta? Please tell me where I stand in the debate, and I will defend my view! > > Best, > Robert E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #97361 From: "colette" Date: Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:32 pm Subject: "Isn't it ironic" singer/songwriter's name forgotten temporarily ksheri3 Hi Robert, Told ya I'd remember the poem I wrote that day in Wheaton: "The tables all spin round and round There's not a word or small sound. Try watching to just get dizzy Then tell me why you're so busy. Will you stay or to go The game will be the same I know You'll stand there in line because the tell you you're fine And you'll still end up drinking that wine" I've forgotten the puncuation marks, sorry, my memory isn't that good since I wrote that in 1984 or 85. The irony is that I was standing in line at the soup kitchen on North Ave. here in Chicago, San Lucas church, when I remembered the full poem. Sorry, but I'm not hailing a taxi cab. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > Remember the sound that you think comes from the bell or those bells that whores seem to have on their toes to announce their presence and have people look at them. > > I'm not actually familiar with that... > > Are we debating shunyatta? Please tell me where I stand in the debate, and I will defend my view! > > Best, > Robert E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #97362 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 5:30 am Subject: The One & Only Way! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What is the One & Only Way to Purification of Being? Just after enlightenment the Blessed Buddha stayed under a great Banyan tree at Uruvela on the bank of the river Neranjara. There he reflected: There is this single, one and only direct way for the purification of beings, for the relief from all sorrow & grief, for the fading away of all pain and frustration, for achieving the right method, for the realization of Nibb?na, that is, these Four Foundations of Awareness. What four? When a Bhikkhu lives & dwells, aware & clearly comprehending, while always contemplating & reflecting upon: 1: The Body merely as a disgusting & fragile accumulation.. 2: The Feelings just as instantly passing conditioned reactions.. 3: The Mind only as a set of recurring, banal & habituated Moods.. 4: Phenomena only as mentally manifested artificial Appearances.. The 4 Great Frames of Reference... He thereby removes any lust, urge, envy & frustration rooted in this world.. This is indeed verily the one & only direct way for the purification of beings, for the relief from all sorrow & grief, for the fading away of all pain and frustration, for achieving the right method, for the realization of Nibb?na, that is, these Four Foundations of Awareness... Then the Brahma Samapatti, knowing this, instantly appeared before the Blessed One & having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder, he raised his joined palms towards the Blessed One, and said to him: So is it! Blessed One. So be it! Well-Gone One. Venerable sir, this is the one & only direct way for purification of beings... The Great Seer of the Silencing of all Becoming, Compassionate, understands this unique 1 Way: By which they all in the past crossed the flood, By which they all cross now in the present, and By which they all will cross ever in any future... Comment: The 'Flood' (Ogha) here means: The Flood of sense-desire (k?m?-ogha) The Flood of wanting to become (bhav?-ogha) The Flood of wrong views (ditth?-ogha) The Flood of ignorance (avijj?-ogha) <..> Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 167-8] 47 The Foundations of Awareness: 18 Brahma... Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The One & Only Way! #97363 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:29 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio commentaries on uddeso continues: Ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo = "This is the only way, O bhikkhus. "Why did the Blessed One teach this Discourse? Because of the ability of the people of the Kurus to take in deep doctrine. The inhabitants of the Kuru country -- bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, upasakas, upasikas -- by reason of their country being blessed with a perfect climate, and through their enjoyment of other comfortable conditions, were always healthy in body and in mind. They, happy with healthy minds and bodies, and having the power of knowledge, were capable of receiving deep teachings. Therefore, the Blessed One, perceiving their ability to appreciate this profound instruction, proclaimed to them this Discourse on the Arousing of Mindfulness, which is deep in meaning, having set up the subject of meditation, in Arahantship, in twenty-one places. For even as a man, having got a golden basket should fill it with divers flowers, or indeed having got a golden casket should fill it with precious jewels of the seven kinds, the Blessed One, having got a following of the Kuru-land people, dispensed, it is said, deep doctrine. Likewise, on that very account, there, in the Kurus, the Blessed One, taught other deep teachings: the Maha Nidana Sutta, Maha Satipatthana Sutta, Saropama Sutta, Rukkhupama Sutta, Ratthapala Sutta, Magandiya Sutta, and the Anenjasappaya Sutta. Further, in that territory of the Kuru people,[5] the four classes -- bhikkhu, bhikkhuni, upasaka, upasika -- generally by nature were earnest in the application of the Arousing of Mindfulness to their daily life. At the very lowest, even servants, usually, spoke with mindfulness. At wells or in spinning halls useless talk was not heard. If some woman asked of another woman, "Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?" and got the reply, "None at all," then that woman who replied so was reproached thus: "Your life is shameful; though you live you are as if dead," and was taught one of the kinds of Mindfulness-arousing. But on being questioned if she said that she was practising such and such an Arousing of Mindfulness, then she was praised thus: "Well done, well done! Your life is blessed; you are really one who has attained to the human state; for you the Sammasambuddhas have come to be." With a perfect climate ..... comfortable conditions. This includes such items as wholesome food and drink essential for maintaining mind and body unimpaired. "The only way" = The one way [Ekayanoti ekamaggo]. There are many words for "way". The word used for "way" here is "ayana" ("going" or road). Therefore, "This is the only way, O bhikkhus [ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo]" means here: "A single way ("going" or road), O bhikkhus, is this way; it is not of the nature of a double way [ekamaggo ayam bhikkhave maggo na dvedhapathabhuto]". Or it is "the only way" because it has to be trodden by oneself only [ekeneva ayitabbo]. That is without a companion. The state of being companionless is twofold: without a comrade, after abandoning contact with the crowd, and in the sense of being withdrawn (or secluded) from craving, through tranquillity of mind. Or it is called "ekayana" because it is the way of the one [ekassa ayana]. "Of the one" = of the best; of all beings the Blessed One is best. Therefore, it is called the Blessed One's Way. Although others too go along that way, it is the Buddha's because he creates it. Accordingly it is said: "He, the Blessed One, is the creator of the uncreated path, O Brahmin." It proceeds (or exists) only in this Doctrine-and-discipline and not in any other. Accordingly the Master declared: "Subhadda, only in this Doctrine-and-discipline is the Eightfold Way to be found." And further, "ekayana" means: It goes to the one [ekam ayati] -- that is, it (the way) goes solely to Nibbana. Although in the earlier stages this method of meditation proceeds on different lines, in the latter, it goes to just the one Nibbana. And that is why Brahma Sahampati said: Whose mind perceiving life's last dying out Vibrates with love, he knows the only way That led in ancient times, is leading now, And in the future will lead past the flood.[6] As Nibbana is without a second, that is, without craving as accompanying quality, it is called the one. Hence it is said: "Truth is one; it is without a second." Why is the Arousing of Mindfulness intended by the word "way"? Are there not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union with mindfulness. Knowledge, energy and the like are mentioned in the analytically expository portion [niddese]. In the synopsis [uddese], however, the consideration should be regarded as that of mindfulness alone, by way of the mental disposition of those capable of being trained. Some [keci], however, construing according to the stanza beginning with the words, "They do not go twice to the further shore [na param digunam yanti]"[7] say, "One goes to Nibbana once, therefore it is ekayana." This explanation is not proper. Because in this instruction the earlier part of the Path is intended to be presented, the preliminary part of the Way of Mindfulness proceeding in the four objects of contemplation is meant here, and not the supramundane Way of Mindfulness. And that preliminary part of the Path proceeds (for the aspirant) many times; or it may be said that there is many a going on it, by way of repetition of practice. In what sense is it a "way"? In the sense of the path going towards Nibbana, and in the sense of the path which is the one that should be (or is fit to be) traversed by those who wish to reach Nibbana. Regarding "the only way" there is the following account of a discussion that took place long ago. The Elder Tipitaka Culla Naga said: "The Way of Mindfulness-arousing (as expounded in our Discourse) is the (mundane) preliminary part (of the Eightfold Way)." His teacher the Elder Culla Summa said: "The Way is a mixed one (a way that is both mundane and supramundane)." The pupil: "Reverend Sir, it is the preliminary part." The teacher: "Friend, it is the mixed Way." As the teacher was insistent, the pupil became silent. They went away without coming to a decision. On the way to the bathing place the teacher considered the matter. He recited the Discourse. When he came to the part where it is said: "O bhikkhus, should any person maintain the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for seven years," he concluded that after producing the consciousness of the Supramundane Path there was no possibility of continuing in that state of mind for seven years, and that his pupil, Culla Naga, was right. On that very day, which happened to be the eighth of the lunar fortnight, it was the elder Culla Naga's turn to expound the Dhamma. When the exposition was about to begin, the Elder Culla Summa went to the Hall of Preaching and stood behind the pulpit. After the pupil had recited the preliminary stanzas the teacher spoke to the pupil in the hearing of others, saying, "Friend, Culla Naga." The pupil heard the voice of his teacher and replied: "What is it, Reverend Sir?" The teacher said this: "To say, as I did, that the Way is a mixed one is not right. You are right in calling it the preliminary part of the Way of Mindfulness-arousing." Thus the Elders of old were not envious and did not go about holding up only what they liked as though it were a bundle of sugar-cane. They took up what was rational; they gave up what was not. Thereupon, the pupil, realising that on a point on which experts of the Dhamma like his learned teacher had floundered, fellows of the holy life in the future were more likely to be unsure, thought: "With the authority of a citation from the Discourse-collection, I will settle this question." Therefore, he brought out and placed before his hearers the following statement from the Patisambhida Magga: "The preliminary part of the Way of Mindfulness-arousing is called the only way."[8] And, in order to elaborate just that and to show of which path or way the instruction in our Discourse is the preliminary part, he further quoted the following also from the Patisambhida Magga: "The Excellent Way is the Eightfold way; four are truths; dispassion is the best of things belonging to the wise; besides that Way there is no other for the purifying of vision. Walk along that Way so that you may confound Death, and put an end to suffering."[9] #97364 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35:235 "grasp the sign" need to understand sarahprocter... Dear Antony, Following on from Nina's comments to you on this: --- On Thu, 9/4/09, Antony Woods wrote: >"And what, bhikkhus, is the Dhamma exposition on the theme of burning? It would be better, bhikkhus, for the eye-faculty to be lacerated by a red-hot iron pin burning, blazing, and glowing, than for one to grasp the sign through the features in a form cognizable by the eye. For if consciousness should stand tied to gratification in the sign or in the features, and if one should die on that occasion, it is possible that one will go to one of two destinations: hell or the animal realm. Having seen this danger, I speak thus." From: SN35:235 The Exposition on Burning Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi >Antony: I've never understood what is meant by "grasp the sign". On Yahoo Answers someone used a topless photo as their avatar. My reaction was: "mammary glands". Am I on the right path? ... S: The 'Right Path' would be the understanding of visible object as just visible object or seeing consciousness as just seeing consciousness at this or any other time. It's just like the sound of the siren we discussed; usually as soon as there is the hearing of sound or the seeing of visible object there is clinging (with or without wrong view) to what has been experienced without any understanding. The Buddha helped us to understand the reality which is being experienced now for what it is - a transient dhamma which is anatta, not worth clinging to for an instant. You suggested the 'disciple doesn't know what he/she is seeing'. On the contrary, it is the ignorant worldling that doesn't know what is seen. The wise disciple understands that only visible object is seen and that all ideas about the sign and features are merely different kinds of thinking about various concepts on account of that visible object. Remember in the Muulapariyaaya Sutta we read that the disciple in higher training (sekha, the ariyan disciple, not yet the arahat), "directly knows earth as earth [S:visible object etc.]. Having directly known earth as earth, he should not conceive (himself as) earth, he should not conceive (himself in) earth, he should not conceive (himself apart) from earth, he should not conceive earth to be 'mine,' he should not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may fully understand it, I say." S: While the sekha above no longer conceives visible object or other realities with self-view and understands such dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta, attachment and conceit remain, of course, until finally eradicated. So there is still unwholesome conceiving about what is seen and experienced with lobha and moha and dosa for those not anagamis. The arahat, fully knows realities as they are. While there is still thinking about what is seen and heard -- the Buddha knew whom he was addressing, for example -- their is no conceiving with any attachment or ignorance of any kind. Like Nina, I'd like to hear your further comments and reflections on this topic. Thanks for the good questions. Metta, Sarah ======= #97365 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:59 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 12. nilovg Dear friends, Letter 7. The difference between the development of calm and the development of insight. Tokyo, May 25, 1971 Dear Mr. G., In my previous letter I quoted the sutta on Mindfulness of Breathing in the Kindred Sayings (V) and the word commentary of the Visuddhimagga, I will now continue with this subject. In the Discourse on Mindfulness of Breathing in the Middle Length Sayings (III, 118) we read that mindfulness of breathing, when developed, brings to fulfilment the four applications of mindfulness. The four applications of mindfulness are mindfulness of the body, of feelings, of cittas and of dhammas. We read: And how, monks, when mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing is developed, how when it is made much of, does it bring the four applications of mindfulness to fulfilment? At the time, monks, when a monk breathing inbreathing out a long breatha short breath comprehends, I am breathing inbreathing out a long breatha short breath; when he trains himself, thinking, I will breathe inbreathe out experiencing the whole bodytranquillizing the activity of the body, at that time, monks, the monk is faring along contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly conscious (of it), mindful (of it) so as to control the covetousness and dejection in the worldthe monk trains himself, thinking, I will breathe in experiencing rapture (pti)I will breathe out experiencing raptureI will breathe inbreathe out experiencing joy (sukha)I will breathe inbreathe out experiencing the activity of thoughtI will breathe inbreathe out tranquillizing the activity of thought; at that time, monks, the monk is faring along contemplating the feelings in the feelings, ardent, clearly conscious (of them), mindful (of them) so as to control the covetousness and dejection in the world... We then read that the monk, when he is developing mindfulness of breathing, contemplates citta in citta and dhamma in dhamma. Further on we read that the four applications of mindfulness bring the seven enlightenment factors to fulfilment. The seven enlightenment factors bring to fulfilment freedom through knowledge. ****** Nina. #97366 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Scott, I'm enjoying your discussions and elaboration on the Pali terms. --- On Tue, 14/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ------- >N: But pain being concealed by postures may give rise to misunderstandings: >Maybe Sarah can help here. We had discussions with Kh sujin: when there is mindfulness, there is no posture only different rupas that arise and fall away. I think that is the oppression? ... S: We think in terms of postures and conventional ideas of pain and impermanence. So we think that when there is a lot of discomfort in one posture, by changing position, the pain is relieved. Of course, this is all true on a conventional level - our knee or hip hurts and we change position and it feels better. However, in reality, there are no postures, there are merely changing dhammas, transient elements which are all dukkha because of such transience. Therefore it is said, as I understand, that the (ultimate) characteristic of dukkha of conditioned dhammas, is 'concealed by postures (iriyaapatha)'. The 'continuous oppression' of all that is conditioned is not seen for what it is because we have the illusion of being able to avoid pain. Metta, Sarah ======== #97367 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:21 am Subject: Re: Singular Occupancy - dukkha jati punappuna.m szmicio Dear Han, The whole second stanza from Vajira Sutta: ‘‘Ki.m nu sattoti paccesi, maara di.t.thigata.m nu te; Suddhasa"nkhaarapu~njoya.m, nayidha sattupalabbhati. Can we translate Suddhasa"nkhaarapu~njoya.m as "It's just a pile of old accumulations"?? My best wishes Lukas > Han: > [a heap of sheer constructions] [suddhasa"nkhaarapu~njo] > suddhasa"nkhaarapu~njo = suddha + sa"nkhaara + pu~nja > > suddha = clean, pure, mere, nothing but > here, please take [mere] or [nothing but]. > > sa"nkhaara has many meanings. In the context of this sutta, taking the most appropriate one among many meanings given in PTS dictionary, it means aggregate of the conditions or essential properties for a given process or result; or, the essentials or elements of anything. Here, the Translator simply used the word [constructions] which I think is a good translation. > > pu~nja = a heap, pile, mass. > > Taking all together, [suddhasa"nkhaarapu~njo] means nothing but a heap of constructions. #97368 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Tue, 14/4/09, szmicio wrote: P.s I would appreciate some info on this commentaries translated by Soma Thera ... S: I can't tell you about the Pali commentary, but just wished to mention that, as we found before, Ven Soma's translation is not complete. Some important passages were missed out. You may have come across them. Also, for anyone's reference, the Pali commentary can be found in the DSG files (put there by Jim), for easy reference. I'll look forward to your further discussion - maybe short passages at a time would be best. Metta, Sarah ===== #97369 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sarahprocter... Dear Alberto (& Lukas), I thought your detailed comments on the good section Lukas provided were really excellent. Thank you! --- On Mon, 13/4/09, sprlrt wrote: ><<196. Therein what is (physical) pain? That which is bodily uneasiness, bodily pain, uneasy painful experiences born of bodily contact, uneasy painful feeling born of bodily contact. That is called pain.>> A: This is akusala kayavinnana, body consciousness, a vipaka citta, the >result of past akusala kamma, and is the only (akusala) vipaka citta to arise with unpleasant feeling. ><<197. Tattha katama.m domanassa.m? Ya.m cetasika.m asaata.m cetasika.m dukkha.m cetosamphassaja. m asaata.m dukkha.m vedayita.m cetosamphassajaa asaataa dukkhaa vedanaa ida.m vuccati domanassa.m. >> <> >A: These are dosamula akusala citta, rooted in aversion, the only (two) citta that arise along with mental unpleasant feeling, but they are not the direct and unavoidable result of any past kamma, they arise mainly because of pakatupanissaya paccaya, habits accumulated during all the aeons we've been spending in samsara. They arise in series of seven, accumulating as kilesa first, and then as kamma, which will result in future akusala vipaka, causing the contact with unpleasant object through the 5 sense doors at some point in the future (and also rebirth consciousness and kammaja rupa such as eye-sense). .... S: This is a similar same point and distinction I was trying to convey in my discussion with Suan (in that case with regard to the accumulation of sati and pa~n~naa). If we don't appreciate the clear distinction between kamma, vipaka and tendencies accumulated, we continue to be confused and muddled about the real causes of pleasantness, unpleasantness, wisdom and all else in life. ... >When some past (done a second or less ago or an aeon or more ago, we don't know) akusala kamma conditions an akusala sotavinnana, ear consciousness, to arise just for the shortest of the istants, experiencing, just for the shortest of the istants, upleasant sound object, atitta sadda arammana, it does so accompanied with neutral feeling, upekkha vedana, i.e. no dukkha, yet; but countless cittas rooted in dosa of various degrees, which can only be accompanied by domanassa vedana of various degrees, are most likely to follow immediately, just the same as in the case of body consciousness arising with dukkha vedana. >And only panna can start breaking the habits accumulated in an uncountable number of lifetimes, by beginning to see sankhara dhammas as such, dhammas conditioned to arise & fall one after the other, in continuation, non-stop; instead then as unpleasant/pleasant sights, sounds, tastes, odours, body contacts or thoughts punishing/rewarding one's self. .... S: Beautifully said and this also is the answer to Lukas's and all our questions about dosa - aversion, regret and so on. Panna sees sankhara dhammas for what they are, as you say, rather than as punishments and rewards for one's important self! ... >In the 1st ariya sacca all the three vatta/rounds that make up samsara are already in place: vipaka, kilesa and kamma, all three akusala in this case. ... S: Yes, exactly. Lukas, I heard a friend on a tape mentioning the same point you have before about strong dosa when listening to/reading the Dhamma at times or when hearing friends talking about various conditioned dhammas as anatta so confidently. K.Sujin's response was interesting - she said at such times the reality of doubt can be known for what it is. If it doesn't arise, it can't be known. It may seem that the problem is the dosa, but it is dosa on account of doubting, not understanding, the realities at such a time. Metta, Sarah ====== #97370 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:16 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sprlrt Hi Sarah, Lukas & all, The 1st NT, pain, sorrow, lamentation, association with what one dislikes, dissociation from one what likes etc.is dukkha, is summed up as pancupadanakhandha dukkha, moving away from conventional truth, pannatti, to absolute conditioned realities, the 5 khandhas, which can be the objects of satipatthana, the 4 kusala cittas nana sampayutta/associated with panna or, more often, the objects of (the four) upadana, the 8 akusala lobha mula cittas (kamupadana), rooted in attachment, 4 with ditthi, ditthigatasampayutta and four without, ditthigatavippayutta (Dhammasangani, Atthakathakandam, Upadana gocchakam). The 5 khandhas/sankhara dhammas affected by upadana/lobha are dukkha, lobha being (akusala) hetu paccaya, the root cause of dukkha, the 2nd NT, dukkha samudaya. The four lobha mula cittas, rooted in attachment, ditthigata sampayutta, arising with miccha ditthi (ditthupadana, silabbatupadana, attavadupadana), preclude the development of panna at all level, starting from pariyatti. In order to be abandoned these conditioned dhammas have to known by panna as they actually are, as anatta, arising because of conditions instead than under one's control; as anicca, falling away immediately, instead than as lasting beings and things; and as dukkha, just not worth clinging. Alberto #97371 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:49 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours, 4, 5 and commentary, Part 1. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 4:Walshe DN 33.1.11(4) 'Four jhaanas: Here a monk, detached from all sense- desires, detached from unwholesome mental states, enters and remains in the first jhaana... the second jhaana...the third jhaana...the fourth jhaana which is beyond pleasure and pain, and purified by equanimity and mindfulness. ------------------ N: The Co only refers to the Visuddhimagga for the detailed explanation on the stages of jhaana. Also before the Buddhas time jhaana was developed and one may wonder why the stages of jhaana are mentioned in this sutta. Those who had already accumulated the inclination and skill for jhaana and who saw the danger of sense pleasures developed jhaana. However they learnt from the Buddhas teaching that they should be aware also of jhaanacitta so that this could be seen as a conditioned reality that is non-self. --------------- sutta 5: Walshe DN 33.1.11(5) 'Four concentrative meditations (samaadhi-bhaavanaa). This meditation, when developed and expanded, leads to (a) happiness here and now (di.t.thadhamma-sukha), (b) gaining knowledge-and-vision (~naa.na-dassana-pa.tilaabhi), (c) mindfulness and clear awareness (sati-sampaja~n~na), and (d) the destruction of the corruptions (aasavaanam khaya). ------- N: Following is the explanation of these four kinds of samaadhi- bhaavanaa. ---------- Text sutta: This meditation, when developed and expanded, leads to (a) happiness here and now (di.t.thadhamma-sukha)... (a) How does this practice lead to happiness here and now? Here, a monk practises the four jhaanas. ----- N: The Co states that he experiences happiness in this life. The Co explains that here is meant the fruition attainment (phala- samaapatti) of the arahat. Those who have developed both jhaana and vipassanaa and attained enlightenment can experience nibbaana also after the lokuttara cittas that arose at the moment of enlightenment have fallen away, even many times during their life. They can experience nibbaana with phalacittas, lokuttara vipaakacittas. The subco states about the arahat who has fruition attainment, that he experiences unworldly happiness (niraamisa sukha) which is not bound up with defilements, after he has eradicated the intoxicants (aasavas) and generated ruupajhaana and aruupajhaana. N: Thus the first samaadhi bhaavana pertains to someone who has developed both samatha and vipassanaa. --------- Sutta: (b) gaining knowledge-and-vision (~naa.na-dassana-pa.tilaabhi)... (b) How does it lead to the gaining of knowledge-and-vision? Here, a monk attends to the perception of light (aalokasa~n~na'm manasikaroti), he fixes his mind to the perception of day, by night as by day, by day as by night. In this way, with a mind clear and unclouded, he develops a state of mind that is full of brightness (sappabhaasa'm citta'm). ---------- N: Co: he gives attention to the light of the sun, a lamp, a jewel. This is the knowledge of the divine eye of the arahat. subco: he has learnt the light kasina.In this way sloth and torpor (thina-middha) disappear. N: We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Sevens, CH VI, 8, Nodding) that the Buddha gave advice to Mogallana who was nodding. He explained several ways by which sleepiness could be overcome such as pondering on Dhamma or repeating Dhamma in detail, applying the mind to the thought of light, fixing his thought on the alley-walk. -------- Sloth and torpor are hindrances, they destruct energy for kusala. They can eventually be eradicated when they are clearly seen as conditioned dhammas. Only the arahat has eradicated them completely. -------- (to be continued) Nina. #97372 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:57 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio Dear Sarah > P.s I would appreciate some info on this commentaries translated by Soma Thera > ... > S: I can't tell you about the Pali commentary, but just wished to mention that, as we found before, Ven Soma's translation is not complete. Some important passages were missed out. You may have come across them. L: Is there any pali name for this commentaries? > I'll look forward to your further discussion - maybe short passages at a time would be best. L: Yes, so I'll stop quote commentaries. I've given a link now so everybody can check it. I'll concentrate on Mahasatipatthana Sutta and its translations. Best wishes Lukas #97373 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh szmicio Dear Sarah What is the characteristic of doubt? > Lukas, I heard a friend on a tape mentioning the same point you have before about strong dosa when listening to/reading the Dhamma at times or when hearing friends talking about various conditioned dhammas as anatta so confidently. K.Sujin's response was interesting - she said at such times the reality of doubt can be known for what it is. If it doesn't arise, it can't be known. It may seem that the problem is the dosa, but it is dosa on account of doubting, not understanding, the realities at such a time. #97374 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:15 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh szmicio Hi Alberto > The 5 khandhas/sankhara dhammas affected by upadana/lobha are dukkha, lobha being (akusala) hetu paccaya, the root cause of dukkha, the 2nd NT, dukkha samudaya. L: But kusala citta nana sampayutta is also dukkha, isnt it? My best wishes Lukas #97375 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:57 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: S: "We think in terms of postures and conventional ideas of pain and impermanence. So we think that when there is a lot of discomfort in one posture, by changing position, the pain is relieved. Of course, this is all true on a conventional level - our knee or hip hurts and we change position and it feels better. However, in reality, there are no postures, there are merely changing dhammas, transient elements which are all dukkha because of such transience." Scott: I guess that this is because, in reality, there is no 'body' - and this would include the concepts which describe this ultimately non-existent entity's parts such as 'knee' or 'hip'. And, more to the point I suppose, this includes the presupposition that 'I' can make changes to 'my' position, adopt a new posture, and thereby cause a reduction in pain. This everyday illusory experience confirms the idea that 'I' can control things; this would only serve to strengthen the belief in the efficacy of certain postures. S: "Therefore it is said, as I understand, that the (ultimate) characteristic of dukkha of conditioned dhammas, is 'concealed by postures (iriyaapatha)'. The 'continuous oppression' of all that is conditioned is not seen for what it is because we have the illusion of being able to avoid pain." Scott: What are 'postures' in the ultimate sense? I imagine them to be the temporal/spatial dislocation of the khandhas - arising first here then there and accompanied by an illusory experience of compactness with concomitant ideas about 'my body' and 'my control of my body'. Sincerely, Scott. #97376 From: "Sukinder" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:00 pm Subject: Re: my personal copy of KS's Survey sukinderpal Hi James, > I am feeling better; the medicine worked; so I am returning to this question as promised. S: Good to hear that you are feeling better now. Scott has given a response to the Vism. quote and much better than I can ever hope to do, so I won't go into that. As always, mine is without any reference to any text, but I do try to explain my understandings in detail. You said: > You ask about the three types of panna (understanding) and the relationship between each of them. First, it has to be understood that just because a function of the mind has the Pali word "panna" associated with it, that doesn't mean it is wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. S: Perhaps. But I would also like to express the following. Before the Abhidhamma, when I was following Goenka and meditating, the concept Suttamaya panna > Cintamaya panna> Bhavanamaya panna had a very different meaning. Without reflection and no mind to investigate further, my mind was made up almost instantly that Suttamaya panna meant "theory" and Cintamaya panna was "thinking over" the concepts therein. Bhavanamaya panna being the direct understanding which confirmed the theory was therefore the only "real" thing. And of course there is the meditation instructor who served as the bridge between the Buddha's words and the `practice'. So driven by ignorance, craving and wrong view no thought to study the Texts myself ever arose. What the Texts really meant by "Bhavana" for example, was something that never crossed my mind. Now of course I have a different understanding regarding how the development of wisdom takes place. And while in the past I was to a good extent driven by desire for result which then made `practice' all important and `study' being overlooked, now I'm satisfied just to develop understanding at whatever level that may be conditioned to arise. In the process I believe there has been better recognition of different akusala motives, including wrong view, all which arose however without any idea about `doing'. So James, prior to Abhidhamma I think that I would have gone along with the suggestion that the `panna' in Suttamaya panna was not the same as the one in Bhavanamaya panna. Now however, not only because I have a different understanding about the relationship between the three levels, but also because I believe the Texts are very precise when using any particular concept, I therefore would not quickly come to the kind of conclusion. Without panna the chances are that I'm at the mercy of any number of akusala dhammas, therefore when it comes particularly to reading the Texts, I need to be especially careful. It is easy to give a meaning which is convenient, precisely because that is the nature of tanha and wrong view to do this. The development of understanding I believe, involves on many occasions questioning one's preconceived ideas, and this goes against the tide of tanha. And you can see that this is not a scholarly approach either. What can be got out of the Texts are "understandings" regarding experiences, therefore the precision demanded is so that one does not continue making mistakes when `applying'. The Abhidhamma and commentaries are a great help in this regard. There is actually a lot more that I wanted to say, but suddenly I felt that I will end up only boring you. Therefore I will just stop here. Metta, Sukin #97377 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- On Wed, 15/4/09, Scott wrote: >Scott: I guess that this is because, in reality, there is no 'body' - and this would include the concepts which describe this ultimately non-existent entity's parts such as 'knee' or 'hip'. And, more to the point I suppose, this includes the presupposition that 'I' can make changes to 'my' position, adopt a new posture, and thereby cause a reduction in pain. This everyday illusory experience confirms the idea that 'I' can control things; this would only serve to strengthen the belief in the efficacy of certain postures. ... Sarah: Yes, yes, yes! So it is the illusion of postures (iriyaapatha) that is referred to as concealing the characteristic of dukkha. ... >Scott: What are 'postures' in the ultimate sense? I imagine them to be the temporal/spatial dislocation of the khandhas - arising first here then there and accompanied by an illusory experience of compactness with concomitant ideas about 'my body' and 'my control of my body'. ... Sarah: 'Postures' are concepts - they don't exist in an ultimate sense. Why do we have any concepts? Because of thinking about the various khandhas, usually with ignorance. Why do we take 'postures' or any other concepts to exist? Because of wrong view and not understanding the Noble Truths. Ok, handover time -- that means, I get ready for bed and you take over here whilst getting ready for your day ahead:-). I do hope you and the kids (older and younger ones) all had a great Easter holiday with a little Spring air! Metta, Sarah ========= #97378 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina & Scott) - In a message dated 4/15/2009 3:04:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Dear Nina & Scott, I'm enjoying your discussions and elaboration on the Pali terms. --- On Tue, 14/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ------- >N: But pain being concealed by postures may give rise to misunderstandings: >Maybe Sarah can help here. We had discussions with Kh sujin: when there is mindfulness, there is no posture only different rupas that arise and fall away. I think that is the oppression? ... S: We think in terms of postures and conventional ideas of pain and impermanence. So we think that when there is a lot of discomfort in one posture, by changing position, the pain is relieved. Of course, this is all true on a conventional level - our knee or hip hurts and we change position and it feels better. --------------------------------------------- It IS true that the change in experience due to the conglomerate of activities we call "changing position" relieves the discomfort for a while. But this is a passing respite. Pain recurs and the aversion to it, the real suffering, as well. Moreover, the repeated dodging of discomfort and the repeated lurching towards pleasure is, itself, painful and oppressive - tiring and tiresome, and, eventually, after one has "had enough," corrective developments may arise. Only relinquishment, disengagement, and equanimity resulting from clear seeing leads out of this mess. ----------------------------------------------- However, in reality, there are no postures, there are merely changing dhammas, transient elements which are all dukkha because of such transience. -------------------------------------------------- Not only because of the transience. Often, as regards physical pain, for example, transience provides the temporary relief. The fundamental cause of the dukkha is the tanha, the dissatisfaction with what there is. Even what is pleasant becomes unpleasant when boredom sets in, and then there is the craving for change - for things to be other than they are. Ultimately craving and aversion are two sides of the very same coin. It is always a matter of craving - for presence, for absence, for change, ..., for things being different from how they currently are. ---------------------------------------------------- Therefore it is said, as I understand, that the (ultimate) characteristic of dukkha of conditioned dhammas, is 'concealed by postures (iriyaapatha)'. The 'continuous oppression' of all that is conditioned is not seen for what it is because we have the illusion of being able to avoid pain. ------------------------------------------------------ Yes, with the side-stepping of pain, our greed for peace enables our repeated forgetting of dukkha and the illusion that "there is no problem." And even if we do see and remember that there is a problem of pain and dissatisfaction, we dream that the solution lies, as you say, in replacing some dhammas by others. The only solution lies in wisdom and relinquishment. ------------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================= With metta, Howard /"For a monk practicing the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma, what accords with the Dhamma is this: that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to form, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to feeling, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to perception, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to fabrications, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to consciousness. As he keeps cultivating disenchantment with regard to form... feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness, he comprehends form... feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness. As he comprehends form... feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness, he is totally released from form... feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness. He is totally released from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is totally released, I tell you, from suffering & stress."/ (From the Anudhamma Sutta) #97379 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Wed, 15/4/09, szmicio wrote: >What is the characteristic of doubt? ... S: Uncertainty about dhammas, arising with moha-muula-cittas (cittas rooted in ignorance). Its proximate cause is ayoniso manasikaara (unwise attention). Now, is there any doubt that what is seen is visible object and what is touched is tangible object? Is there any doubt that the various namas and rupas appearing are anatta - dhammas not belonging to any self? At moments of kusala - whether it be dana, sila or bhavana - no doubt at all. Anyway, just another conditioned nama to be known for what it is when it appears... I'll leave you to provide the quotes and your own useful, further reflections, Lukas! Metta, Sarah ====== #97380 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:36 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > ----------------------- > So please explain to me how it is possible that an absence of self, such as is represented by "anicca" can be a definite *attribute of* a dhamma? > ----------------------- I've not seen "anatta" described in the texts as referring to an "absence of self". "Self" after all is only a concept, so it can neither be present nor absent in a dhamma. I think you are extrapolating from the literal meaning of anatta. But anatta is simply the label given to a particular characteristic (just like "effort" is the label given to a particular cetasika). We need to consider what is said about the characteristic, rather than taking the label and developing an idea based on that. > ----------------------- Does it wear a wristband that says anatta on it? I am not trying to be sarcastic but just highlight the fact that if you are going to say that it is a positive attribute of a dhamma according to the teachings then to achieve pariyatti level understanding about it you have to have some idea how this is possible. > ----------------------- The "possible/impossible" question arises only because of your particular interpretation of the term "anatta" in this context. > ----------------------- How does it appear to panna? What does it look like? I may not have seen Heaven, but those who have supposedly seen it can at least describe it. So how can anatta be an attribute that one perceives, rather than an understanding that something is not there that was previously thought to be there, ie, a being or entity? > ----------------------- You are taking the "self" of "wrong view of self" and applying it to the "self" of "characteristic of not-self". That kind of analysis is not appropriate here. > ----------------------- > Is there an actual teaching about *what kind* of characteristic of a dhamma this is? Or is it just said in sutta, and understood by those who have insight, that dhammas are *not self* which is what I think it is. > ----------------------- Yes, dhammas are indeed *not self*. But besides that, they also exhibit the characteristic of *not-self*. I think the passage quoted by Scott brings out this distinction very well. > ----------------------- > Buddha himself says the same thing over and over again: "Dhammas are not self; if they were self, you would be able to do x with them; they would give satisfaction, etc... Since they are not controllable and do not give satisfaction, etc., they are *not self.*" > > That is Buddha's argument about anatta. He never says that anatta is something you can perceive in its own right. So please explain to me what the teaching is about how it can appear as part of a dhamma - not in general that "this is seen by one with panna," but specifically how is it possible? > ----------------------- Two different things: dhammas being not self, and dhammas having the characteristic of not-self. Jon #97381 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Howard > In the end, all views expressed are to be tested against the texts > themselves; there is no other standard. > ============================= > As regards the matter of "there is no other standard" of truth and > deciding among conflicting claims except for testing against "the texts," by > which you mean the Tipitaka and Theravadin commentaries, I note that this > already presupposes a chosen opinion of where the truth lies, and I will > quote, ironically, from a sutta (LOL!) for rebuttal: I don't think the passage from the Kalama Sutta rebuts my assertion that any view expressed is to be tested against the texts themselves. In the notes to his translation of this sutta, BB refers to the 10 factors mentioned as the ten "inadequate criteria of truth". He says they can be grouped into 3 categories (and I presume this is why the sutta appears in the 3's section of AN): 1. Propositions based on tradition (the first 4 criteria), namely: (a) oral tradition (anussava), i.e., the Vedic tradition, said to have originated with the Primal Deity and to have been handed down orally thorough successive generations; (b) lineage (paramparaa), i.e., tradition in general, an unbroken succession of teachings or teachers; (c) hearsay/report (itikiraa), i.e., popular opinion or general consensus (d) a collection of scriptures (pitaka-samapadaa), i.e., any collection of religious texts regarded as infallible. 2. Four types of reasoning recognized by thinkers in the Buddha's age (the next 4 criteria). 3. Two types of personal authority (the last 2 criteria), namely: (a) the personal charisma of the speaker (b) the authority stemming from the speaker's relationship to oneself, i.e., that he is one's own personal teacher (guru). (See Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, n.46 at p.286) As you will observe, none of the above contradict the assertion that what is in the teachings is the ultimate standard against which a view expressed by another should be judged. Jon > "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When > there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, > don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical > conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, > by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When > you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these > qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these > qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' " then you > should abandon them." #97382 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:41 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E > ----------------------- > An "element" as you say, has no sense of personal self, while an "entity" does. > ----------------------- I don't understand this statement (and I still thing the whole "entity" thing is a red herring!). > ----------------------- What makes something have the illusory sense of selfhood, rather than just being an "objective event?" > ----------------------- I am puzzled by this reference to *something having a sense of selfhood*. This has nothing to do with the Theravada teachings, as far as I can tell. > ----------------------- When something is subjective, when it has personal experience, it develops the sense of being an entity or self. > ----------------------- Likewise this! > ----------------------- When it is merely part of the mechanical nature of what is taking place, it is just an "element." When you assign awareness or consciousness to namas, you get closer to the possibility of assigning them self-hood. What are the requirements for a self? That it has experience and that it is conscious of that experience. The illusion of self is created by assigning events in "consciousness" to elements that don't really "own" it....such as the namas...? The fact that namas arise and fall in a brief period of time does not protect them from the false assignation of entity. > ----------------------- As I see it, this is a different track to anything that's been discussed to date. It does not correlate to anything I've ever read about in the texts. No-one is assigning consciousness to namas; again, that is being (wrongly) imputed. > ----------------------- > You haven't addressed the point. Dhammas are momentary, the characteristic of anicca only displays over time. So how can that characteristic exist in a single moment? > ----------------------- Again, as with anattaa, there is the fact that dhammas are impermanent, and there is the characteristic that is given the label "impermanence". These are two separate (but related) aspects of the teachings. > ----------------------- If you fall back on doctrine that merely says this is the case, then you are neither affirming or refuting the point. My point relies on the nature of anicca - impermanence - not on doctrine for or against. Can you refute my logic? If you only state that it *is* a characteristic of a dhamma, you are not explaining how such is possible. And you increase the possibility that "anicca" is seen as a "thingy" that is somehow attached or displayed somewhere in the dhamma, than the real attribute of anicca. > ----------------------- There are 2 points here, (1) that impermanence cannot be a characteristic because it can only be perceived over time, and (2) that calling anicca a characteristic means that I am likely to be developing wrong view. I have already addressed the first of these. The second is just your own way of seeing things, I believe ;-))! Jon #97383 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:45 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 14-apr-2009, om 17:16 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Dear Nina > Can you say more about realities now? > Does all akusala realities can be know? Each of them can be object > to understanding? I know answer, but still has a lot of doubts and > regrets about it. a lot of dosa. So many years I thought about > Lukas that is doing this or that. > > I really need your support Nina. ------- N: Whenever you ask something I always look for a clue in what you have written yourself, and yes, here it is: Very common to all of us, not only many years, but many aeons of ignorance and wrong view. But thanks to the Dhamma a little of the mass of ignorance can be eliminated. All akusala realities, yes all that is in the teachings 'can' be known, since the Buddha taught it. This does not mean that they can be immediately known by everybody. Lobha and dosa arise and then they fall away, they are past, but, as I said before, we continue thinking about what is past and then their characteristics cannot be known, only their names. Whatever arises has to be known as just a dhamma, a conditioned dhamma, we often hear from Kh Sujin. We think with regret and we are discouraged. Being discouraged shows our clinging to self. We want the self to be so good. If we really see that regret is not helpful we shall be less disturbed. Actually at the moment akusala arises we may not realize that it is akusala, it arises and falls away so fast, it is immediately gone and we think about it with regret, and we take it for self. The idea of self will keep on popping up until we are a sotaapanna. But for now, we are beginners! You may keep on thinking about akusala, but do not forget that also seeing and visible object have to be known. On account of what we see or hear akusala arises, so, understanding also of seeing, hearing and all the sense impressions has to be developed. They are all conditioned dhammas. They arise at this moment. Seeing only sees what appears through the eyesense, nothing else. When we notice people and things it is not seeing, but you know all this. So, you should be your own refuge, not being dependent on others. Nobody else can really support you. ******* Nina. #97384 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/15/2009 9:40:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard > In the end, all views expressed are to be tested against the texts > themselves; there is no other standard. > ============================= > As regards the matter of "there is no other standard" of truth and > deciding among conflicting claims except for testing against "the texts," by > which you mean the Tipitaka and Theravadin commentaries, I note that this > already presupposes a chosen opinion of where the truth lies, and I will > quote, ironically, from a sutta (LOL!) for rebuttal: I don't think the passage from the Kalama Sutta rebuts my assertion that any view expressed is to be tested against the texts themselves. -------------------------------------- I do. -------------------------------------- In the notes to his translation of this sutta, BB refers to the 10 factors mentioned as the ten "inadequate criteria of truth". He says they can be grouped into 3 categories (and I presume this is why the sutta appears in the 3's section of AN): 1. Propositions based on tradition (the first 4 criteria), namely: (a) oral tradition (anussava), i.e., the Vedic tradition, said to have originated with the Primal Deity and to have been handed down orally thorough successive generations; (b) lineage (paramparaa), i.e., tradition in general, an unbroken succession of teachings or teachers; (c) hearsay/report (itikiraa), i.e., popular opinion or general consensus (d) a collection of scriptures (pitaka-samapadaa), i.e., any collection of religious texts regarded as infallible. 2. Four types of reasoning recognized by thinkers in the Buddha's age (the next 4 criteria). 3. Two types of personal authority (the last 2 criteria), namely: (a) the personal charisma of the speaker (b) the authority stemming from the speaker's relationship to oneself, i.e., that he is one's own personal teacher (guru). (See Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, n.46 at p.286) As you will observe, none of the above contradict the assertion that what is in the teachings is the ultimate standard against which a view expressed by another should be judged. ------------------------------------------------ What is in the teachings is the ultimate standard of what the Buddha taught. It is not an objective standard of whether it is true or not. To take it as such is only to affirm one's belief that it is truth, a belief I share, but still only belief. The Buddha himself said, as I reported but you omitted from your post, "... don't go ... by traditions, by scripture, ..., by agreement through pondering views, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' WHEN YOU KNOW FOR YOURSELVES [emphasis mine] that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them." For me, this is straightforward and clear. ============================= With metta, Howard P. S. Jon, I would find it helpful if, when replying to a post of mine, you would indicate the date of my post, to facilitate my finding my original post. /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97385 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:33 pm Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sprlrt Hi Lukas, > L: But kusala citta nana sampayutta is also dukkha, isnt it? Yes, because it's still a sankhara dhamma, anatta and anicca, therefore dukkha, even when it is somanassasahagata, accompanied by pleasant feeling. Alberto #97386 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:43 pm Subject: Re: effort. scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Jon, Regarding: H: "What is in the teachings is the ultimate standard of what the Buddha taught. It is not an objective standard of whether it is true or not. To take it as such is only to affirm one's belief that it is truth, a belief I share, but still only belief..." Scott: I've never considered this sort of take on the sutta to have much merit, personally. It's like suggesting that the Buddha took a relativist stance vis-a-vis his own teaching - which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Did he not achieve enlightenment after incalculable aeons of labour? Did this not occur according to conditions and only a specific set of conditions? Did he not teach these conditions? Surely the Buddha taught truth. No, I'm afraid I don't accept this relativistic approach. I don't expect to discuss this, really, just to offer a small counter-argument. Sincerely, Scott. #97387 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Jon) - In a message dated 4/15/2009 11:44:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard and Jon, Regarding: H: "What is in the teachings is the ultimate standard of what the Buddha taught. It is not an objective standard of whether it is true or not. To take it as such is only to affirm one's belief that it is truth, a belief I share, but still only belief..." Scott: I've never considered this sort of take on the sutta to have much merit, personally. It's like suggesting that the Buddha took a relativist stance vis-a-vis his own teaching - which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. ------------------------------------------- No it's not a suggesting that the Buddha took a relativist stance. The Buddha's statements weren't expressions of a relativist stance. They were stated as fact, and I don't claim that they were stated any other way. I also happen to believe in them. But belief and knowing as truth are not one and the same. ------------------------------------------- Did he not achieve enlightenment after incalculable aeons of labour? Did this not occur according to conditions and only a specific set of conditions? --------------------------------------------- I certainly believe so. Do you KNOW so? -------------------------------------------- Did he not teach these conditions? Surely the Buddha taught truth. -------------------------------------------- We both believe so. My belief is very strong, probably unshakable, though that has not been tested. You seem to claim to *know*. If so, my hat is off to you! ----------------------------------------- No, I'm afraid I don't accept this relativistic approach. ------------------------------------------- I'm not clear on what this means. I've heard Jews, Muslims, and Christians say the same. Relativism is the view that truth is a matter of belief. I do not hold with that. Truth is truth! But WHAT is true needs to be discovered, and it is precisely NOT a matter of mere belief, no matter how strong. Knowing the truth is a matter of ehipassiko. -------------------------------------------- I don't expect to discuss this, really, just to offer a small counter-argument. -------------------------------------------- I'm not clear on what your argument is. -------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott ============================ With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97388 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi again, Scott and Jon - With regard to truth and belief, I should have closed my previous post with the signature line that I wil use here. With metta, Howard Safeguarding the Truth /There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked... truly an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn't proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless." "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth." "If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth."/ (Selected from the Canki Sutta, MN 95) #97389 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 15-apr-2009, om 12:57 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > L: Yes, so I'll stop quote commentaries. I've given a link now so > everybody can check it. ------ N: Do not stop, commentary is very important, and we did not discuss it enough before. Only I think a small part each time, otherwise it is too much to read. A link is not so good, people may not have time to use links. Nina. #97390 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] posture pain. was: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta ( nilovg Dear Sarah and Scott, very useful remarks, Sarah, because there is such an amount of misunderstandings. Op 15-apr-2009, om 13:57 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: I guess that this is because, in reality, there is no 'body' > - and this would include the concepts which describe this > ultimately non-existent entity's parts such as 'knee' or 'hip'. > And, more to the point I suppose, this includes the presupposition > that 'I' can make changes to 'my' position, adopt a new posture, > and thereby cause a reduction in pain. This everyday illusory > experience confirms the idea that 'I' can control things; this > would only serve to strengthen the belief in the efficacy of > certain postures. > > S: "Therefore it is said, as I understand, that the (ultimate) > characteristic of dukkha of conditioned dhammas, is 'concealed by > postures (iriyaapatha)'. The 'continuous oppression' of all that is > conditioned is not seen for what it is because we have the illusion > of being able to avoid pain." > > Scott: What are 'postures' in the ultimate sense? I imagine them to > be the temporal/spatial dislocation of the khandhas - arising first > here then there and accompanied by an illusory experience of > compactness with concomitant ideas about 'my body' and 'my control > of my body'. ------ N: I remember in Thailand some people talked about the sitting rupa and Kh Sujin said: where in the list of twentyeight rupas is a sitting rupa? Posture is only a conventional idea: I am sitting, standing. Nina. #97391 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. scottduncan2 Dear Howard Regarding: H: "...Do you KNOW so?...You seem to claim to *know*. If so, my hat is off to you!..." Scott: No worries, Howard. I'm just disagreeing with you. Sincerely, Scott. #97392 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:39 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 13. nilovg Dear friends, From the quotations of the Visuddhimagga in my previous letter we have seen that those who first develop samatha to the degree of jhna and then develop insight, still have to be aware, after they emerge from jhna, of the realities which appear. They should, for example, realize the rapture and joy experienced in jhna, as only nmas which are impermanent and not self. If one develops insight based on jhna, one should have the fivefold mastery (Visuddhimagga IV, 131), one should be able to attain jhna and emerge from it at any time and in any place. Then the jhnacitta is for such a person a reality which naturally appears in his daily life. Only thus can it be object of mindfulness. The Buddha encouraged people to be mindful while walking, eating, talking, in short, while doing all the things they would normally do. He did not say that samatha is a necessary requirement for the development of vipassan. To those who had accumulated great wisdom and skill and who were inclined to the development of mindfulness of breathing, he explained how the development of this subject could bear great fruit, how it could bring the four applications of mindfulness to fulfilment. In being aware of nma and rpa one will learn to see the body in the body, feelings in the feelings, citta in citta and dhamma in dhamma. One will realize nma and rpa as not self. Then the four applications of mindfulness will be brought to fulfilment. ******** Nina. #97393 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:35 am Subject: Re: A Book Recommendation/RobK (and all) - rjkjp1 -thanks howard Could you tell us why you like it and why I might like it? best robert-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > The book is THE UNBORN: The Life and Teachings of Zen Master Bankei, > 1622 - 1693. The ISBN for the soft cover version I have is 0-86547-595-4. > #97394 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (20) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 20: The Secluded Place: Motivated by Desire? "One goes, motivated by desire, stays there with desire, hoping all the time....." ***** Ven Dhammadharo: You remember, you said earlier about spending 10 years practising satipa.t.thaana in a secluded place? Not so long ago, somebody came to me and told me this - that you had indeed done this - and the comment was: 'So therefore, if she hadn't done this, she wouldn't have the understanding she has now - it's because she spent those 10 years developing satipa.t.thaana in a secluded place, that now, it doesn't matter where she goes, she can be aware'... Sujin: But listen to my talk because I said that the pa~n~naa was limited in the secluded place. Pa~n~naa is limited, pa~n~naa does not see realities as they are, like when I am in the movie theatre, watching T.V. or reading. Ven D(?):..... [there can be] satipa.t.thaana in a secluded place.... Sujin: But it's not powerful if one stays only in a secluded place and hopes and wishes to get lots of pa~n~naa. Ven D: Why did you stay in a secluded place? Sujin: Because at first, I thought like the others, that 'it should be favourable for sure, better than not in the secluded place, because I spent all my time there with a pure purpose of developing it', something like that. Ven D: And what was your wrong understanding in that connection? Sujin: That it's limited, that is my right understanding, [that I got] from that place - to know and realise that it's limited, not enough to be powerful. Ven D: Wasn't it desire for results that was the motivating factor? Sujin: Certainly, of course - very subtle. One goes, motivated by desire, stays there with desire, hoping all the time. Ven D: Because one could be born in a secluded place and live in that secluded place all one's life and hear about satipa.t.thaana in and around that secluded place and develop it very, very happily and not be negligent, I think - if that's one's natural life and if one is not wishing and hoping. Sujin: That's why by practising satipa.t.thaana one sees one's own accumulation perfectly, so one understands - I understand - that my life is not in a secluded place, so how can I get pa~n~naa in the secluded place? It's not pa~n~naa, it's not the powerful pa~n~naa at all, because it cannot see my real life when I'm not there. Pa~n~naa can see realities as they are, no matter where. Ven D: So could we say, I don't know about your background, that maybe you didn't spend 10 years without a break there.. Sujin: No, once a year.... Ven D: Yes. So you'd come out and find not very much pa~n~naa maybe, so you'd rush back to get some more? Sujin: No, no, [even though] I always thought that I spent a very short time there - first only a month, not enough, so next year I would spend more time, maybe longer, or some years, shorter than that, according to how many days I could spend - even so I tried my best. (When one knows that I tried 'my best', one may understand what I mean by ' my best' - with siila , with samaadhi and with sati, more natural, more natural. Because I know, that if it's not natural it cannot be the real pa~n~naa because pa~n~naa should be very keen.) Even though I tried to be more natural - I didn't follow the meditation centre's rules, but nobody knew, who knows about my sati and my practise - so I finally saw that if I still went on in a secluded place, I couldn't sharpen my pa~n~naa to the degree of being powerful. ***** Metta, Sarah ====== #97395 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:10 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: Sarah: "'Postures' are concepts - they don't exist in an ultimate sense. Why do we have any concepts? Because of thinking about the various khandhas, usually with ignorance. Why do we take 'postures' or any other concepts to exist? Because of wrong view and not understanding the Noble Truths." Scott: I like this. Postures don't exist in an ultimate sense. And this doesn't mean that they exist for awhile to be made use of, like the proverbial and misunderstood raft, to be let go of on the other side or whatever. They don't exist. Like the non-existing self. Postures can't be used for anything. When I was referring to khandhas, I was trying to refer to these in their ultimate sense as well - too ephemeral to ever amount to a posture. I think I listened to the session wherein the famous 'sitting ruupa' was mentioned. Such a concept is a classic example of misunderstanding. S: "I do hope you and the kids (older and younger ones) all had a great Easter holiday with a little Spring air!" Scott: Yes, thank you, we enjoyed a little break, although, due to emotional maturation and diabetes, the 'easter bunny' with all that chocolate somehow bypassed the house, may he rest in peace (plus it snowed on us one day - a huge soggy dump of it, all gone now). Sincerely, Scott. #97396 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 21: Sharpening Pa~n~naa "....one can see one's own accumulations perfectly, otherwise it's suppressed." ***** Philip (?): You said you stayed a short time each year [in the secluded place].....do you think that that should be enough to be able to generalise by such a short experience? Sujin: Certainly, by my own experience. P: It seems rather short to me really. Sujin: But you can compare and you can see why pa~n~naa cannot grow when you understand. I know that the practice there in the meditation centre was wrong. No sammaa sati of the eightfold path in daily life, because living there is not daily life - no reading, no giving. In some places they don't allow you to 'wai phra'. Ven Dhammadharo: To prostrate or to show respect to monks. Also, in some places 'pindapaat' for monks is forbidden. Sujin: ..cannot listen to the radio... P: Perhaps the place you were in had wrong practice, but that doesn't apply to all places, all countries. Sujin: But you see, I developed sammaa sati as naturally as I could even in the secluded place, even when I found out the practice was wrong. I practised my own way and tried to be more natural, but even so it was still limited. Ven D: But I think the important point is not to forget that the real limitation is the wrong understanding and the desire for results. The wrong understanding is the real limitation isn't it, because it's the wrong understanding and the desire for results that makes one want to go to this place, that makes one want to do this practice? Sujin: But you see that even if there's right understanding, [there is] the desire to have more advanced [understanding] by [being in the] favourable place. Ven D: So it's still desire for results. Sujin: Because one thinks that one can spend energy there and can do one's best, so that one can get the best result, but it's still limited. You will know by yourself that that is not enough. [Even] if you spend your time there [for] 20 years and you have more understanding of satipa.t.thaana, you'll understand that that is not enough for pa~n~naa to grow. P: For some people...I was thinking of cases of people who were at these centres, still developing understanding... Sujin: Almost everyone, because everyone has to spend not only 100,000 lives....Because they[those with understanding of satipa.t.thaana] can see that only practising in the secluded place is not the way to sharpen pa~n~naa. The more one develops naturally, one sharpens pa~n~naa and pa~n~naa can see realities no matter here or there, because it's sharpened all the time with different objects and one can see ones own accumulations perfectly. Otherwise it's suppressed . ***** Metta, Sarah ======= #97397 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Book Recommendation/RobK (and all) - upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/16/2009 4:35:48 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: -thanks howard Could you tell us why you like it and why I might like it? best robert-- ========================== Well, as I said, I'm only a bit into the book. As for why I like it (so far), and why I think you and some others here may as well: It emphasizes a sort of "non-doing doing" or wu-wei. I think of it as a kind of a direct pointing to the mind described in the Pabhassara Sutta that I copy at the end of this post. It also seems to describe that "unborn" as neither internal nor external, and it seems to me to be expressive of at least an aspect of nibbana. A bit more as to why I thought it might hold some appeal for you is that you had some Zen background, and this sort of Zen isn't the "big self" Zen that I consider barely Buddhist, but is more of a sort that would harmonize with the "natural," non-self and non-doing flavor that I detect in some of the writings of Khun Sujin. With metta, Howard In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > It has happened to me numerous times that a book or a teaching that > has meant little to me at one time subsequently becomes quite the opposite. A > case in point is a book I bought a year or so ago, that I started to read, > that disappointed me, and that I simply put away. A few days ago I > remembered it and thought "Hey! Why not give it another try?" So, I did, and so > far I am loving it. (I'm only about a third of the way into the book at this > point.) I think that many of you might love it as well, provided you put > aside possible objections to terminology. Robert, it occurs to me that you, > in particular, might find this work somewhat to your liking. (If not, > nothing lost. :-) > The book is THE UNBORN: The Life and Teachings of Zen Master Banke i, > 1622 - 1693. The ISBN for the soft cover version I have is 0-86547-595-4. > > With metta, > Howard > > > /A change in anything is a change in everything/ > > (Anonymous) =========================== With metta, Howard _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AN 1.49-52 Pabhassara Sutta Luminous Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: A i 10 (I,v,9-10; I,vi,1-2) ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1995 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1995 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ "Luminous, monks, is the mind._1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.049.than.html#n-1) And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2} #97398 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:39 pm Subject: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya szmicio dear Nina, What's the difference between conascence-condition and mutuality-condition? Best wishes Lukas #97399 From: "colette" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:08 pm Subject: "Call Me By My Real Names" by Thich Nhat Hanh ksheri3 Hi Scott, Postures can't be used for anything. > colette: How Wrong View of you. Postures most certainly can be used for something. When you plant a seed for your own personal gratification of taking a meal from the plant's excess that eventually will grow THEN you certainly are dealing with a Karma producing event, which means that the event is used for something. Taking a posture is the same way i.e. applying Wrong VIEW OR WRONG ACTION OR ..., or akusala as the MEANS to reach the end of NIRVANA. If you plant HEMLOCK so shall you receive and so shall you be forced into nurishing your body from the HEMLOCK you showed the world, your peers, that you intend on living from HEMLOCK as your food. That is nothing than mocking your own ignornat EGO. After nourishing your ego on Hemlock once, I bet, won't allow you to live very long and reap the gratification that you thought your propoganda would bestow upon you. -------------------- > Sarah: "'Postures' are concepts - they don't exist in an ultimate sense. Why do we have any concepts? Because of thinking about the various khandhas, usually with ignorance. Why do we take 'postures' or any other concepts to exist? Because of wrong view and not understanding the Noble Truths." > > Scott: I like this. Postures don't exist in an ultimate sense. And this doesn't mean that they exist for awhile to be made use of, like the proverbial and misunderstood raft, to be let go of on the other side or whatever. They don't exist. Like the non-existing self. Postures can't be used for anything. > > When I was referring to khandhas, I was trying to refer to these in their ultimate sense as well - too ephemeral to ever amount to a posture. I think I listened to the session wherein the famous 'sitting ruupa' was mentioned. Such a concept is a classic example of misunderstanding. > colette: again, a classic example of misunderstanding MISUNDERSTANDING or the Emptiness of Shunyata or THE SHUNYATA OF SHUNYATA. Aren't you trying to reach for the word KLESAS here in terms of KHANDHAS? Sorry, I haven't heard nor listened to any of the lectures that the devotees of KS have followed. ---------------------- > S: "I do hope you and the kids (older and younger ones) all had a great Easter holiday with a little Spring air!" > > Scott: Yes, thank you, we enjoyed a little break, although, due to emotional maturation and diabetes, the 'easter bunny' with all that chocolate somehow bypassed the house, may he rest in peace (plus it snowed on us one day - a huge soggy dump of it, all gone now). > colette: I'm glad Sarah added "a little Spring air!" since that is the aspect of Spring which, I think, most nourishes the thoughts of Spring, in the mind. I mean that fresh air, the sun light, and the anticipation of the next few months to come. Scott, oooooooooh, diabetes, such an unfortunate malidy to be delt with but that is the world in which we pollute, in which we destroy, and laugh at as if nothing would hurt us since we are Stratos dwellers and don't have to suffer like those trogledikes doing our labor in the caves, etc. (you'd have to have seen and understood that particular version of Gene Rodenberry's imagination called Star Trek since it all relates to the Parasite-Host relationship). When my mom died I found out that she had diabetes but she was an alcoholic which also contributed to her demise. You speak as if the Easter Bunny is dead in your house simply because your children or members of the house, have diabetes and cannot process sugar? So, the New York Times was correct, and Elton John was telling the truth: "God Is DEAD". Snow, you say! One of my main standards, here in Chicago, during the months of March and April is that "It always snows on Easter or soon after, so don't get your hopes up." You place yourself, here in the USA, since it didn't snow in that many places this year. <....> good to hear from you both, Sarah and Scott. toodles, colette